why is Canon considered to have bad dynamic range?

http://www.anseladams.​com/yosemite-gallery/

AA dodged and burned like a man possessed -- why on earth would you think that he's an appropriate example?

WhyFi wrote in post #17267877
AA dodged and burned like a man possessed -- why on earth would you think that he's an appropriate example?

Yeah, not exactly a post-processing minimalist.

What most people seem to forget is what they really need for each type of shooting. Sports photographer doesnt need DR, he needs hing ISO performance and realiable AF system. If I would shoot only landscapes I would be screaming for Nikon.

I use 1Dx for work (although not my own, why the world is so cruel? ) and I have 6D, I cant say that 6D would be better, however its good enough and thats where it matters. Its not about who got the best bit of kit, its about photography. Gear is part of it but it shouldnt affect your photographs because everything can be done if youre skilled enough.

His whites are white, his blacks are black, and his grays are gray. What more needs to be said?

http://upload.wikimedi​a.org …s_and_the_Snake​_River.jpg

davebreal wrote in post #17267906
His whites are white, his blacks are black, and his grays are gray. What more needs to be said?

That he dodged and burned like a man possessed?

davebreal wrote in post #17267906
His whites are white, his blacks are black, and his grays are gray. What more needs to be said?

http://upload.wikimedi​a.org …s_and_the_Snake​_River.jpg

We get it, you love AA. You like white to be white, black to be black. You like to stay within the box.

But that is not everyone's "vision". People see things differently. Don't have to be dismissive of anything that doesn't conform to your "vision"

davebreal wrote in post #17267798
Ansel Adams rolls over in his grave every time someone processes an HDR with halos and artifacts...

So your "Only amateurs need to use more DR" rant has been railing against crummy HDR processing - and I'm with you on how horribly unreal some of them look. However, that is not the same as the benefits of extra "capture DR" that allow the photographer to create images that "look right" more easily for some scenes. Tone mapping can be executed responsibly or irresponsibly (highlight slider and curves are tonemapping operations that you use) according to taste. The first waterfall image you posted had shadows that I would consider too dark and I would have raised them slightly (I would have used slightly more curve adjustment than you did) - my style vs yours - but it would still "look right".

AA defined the cutting edge of photography, He was the trend setter and pushed everything available to it's utter limits and beyond.
He would be using the best tools available today, none of our DSLR, he'd be working in larger format than that and working RAW files in Capture One, and he'd be a Photoshop genius.

Would he use Sony Exmore? On his point and shoot maybe, but he'd have Hassleblad etc. for his real work.

davebreal wrote in post #17267906
His whites are white, his blacks are black, and his grays are gray. What more needs to be said?

http://upload.wikimedi​a.org …s_and_the_Snake​_River.jpg

..that he wrote an entire book about post processing? Maybe you've heard of it? http://www.amazon.com …=the+negative+a​nsel+adams

davebreal wrote in post #17267906
His whites are white, his blacks are black, and his grays are gray. What more needs to be said?

http://upload.wikimedi​a.org …s_and_the_Snake​_River.jpg

What needs to be said is you need to stand behind your claims and back them up with proof. Or you can backtrack and admit you went to far in claiming that landscape photographers have no need to lift shadows or that doing so is the stuff of "amateurs".

AJSJones wrote in post #17267920
So your "Only amateurs need to use more DR" rant has been railing against crummy HDR processing - and I'm with you on how horribly unreal some of them look. However, that is not the same as the benefits of extra "capture DR" that allow the photographer to create images that "look right" more easily for some scenes. Tone mapping can be executed responsibly or irresponsibly (highlight slider and curves are tonemapping operations that you use) according to taste. The first waterfall image you posted had shadows that I would consider too dark and I would have raised them slightly (I would have used slightly more curve adjustment than you did) - my style vs yours - but it would still "look right".

100% agree, and I'd even venture to add that HDR itself does not HAVE to be piss poor crap. The good HDRs you don't even know it. Just like we can't look at a photo and say "Exmore"

7D, ETTR, no shadows/highlights in ACR, Curve pulled downwards to enrich mid-tones in post.

He can post 'em all day, folks.

davebreal wrote in post #17267953
7D, ETTR, no shadows/highlights in ACR, Curve pulled downwards to enrich mid-tones in post.

Yes, I think we pretty much know you can snap a picture and not do any tonal edits in post. Now can you please provide the documentation that proves all landscape professionals never need to recover shadow details? That only amateurs do that?

You might not believe in highlight and shadow recovery, but you're expert at "dodging" the question.