Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 05 Feb 2015 (Thursday) 07:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

OFFICIAL : 5DS and 5DS R Announced

 
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 396
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Feb 16, 2015 19:54 |  #556

tagnal wrote in post #17434986 (external link)
I can't seem to figure out how to search for the number of photos uploaded to flickr are of ISO 100-400 vs number of photos of over ISO 400.

Regardless, just because the majority of my photos may be shot in the lower ISO's, I still count on my camera to do well the rest of the time as well. It was one of the major reasons why I and many others move to FF in the first place, for better low-light capabilities.

Just going by my flickr account, you could say the majority of my shots are in the low ISO's. However, what you don't see on my flicker are the close to 100k shots I have taken using high ISO's. I don't post to my flickr the thousands of shots I take at my friends weddings, birthdays, events, retreats, family, everyday life, etc. Flickr isn't really the place for me to share those images.

Just click on a hundred random shots (say, the first 100 that come up) and look at the EXIF.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 396
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Feb 16, 2015 20:00 |  #557

tagnal wrote in post #17434995 (external link)
What would be interesting would be to get that kind of data from a non photography focused site. Maybe something like facebook.

Does it particularly matter how the general public shoot? SLRs and other interchangeable-lens systems are tools for professionals and enthusiasts, not random Facebookers, and the tools need to be designed around such high-end use, not around taking random (poor) shots at parties.

The average member of the public only cares that they're in the photo, in focus and look decent and either don't know or don't care about DR, ISO or other technical matters, and probably don't run into the limits anyway.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,241 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 464
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 16, 2015 20:12 |  #558

Shadowblade wrote in post #17435081 (external link)
Does it particularly matter how the general public shoot? SLRs and other interchangeable-lens systems are tools for professionals and enthusiasts, not random Facebookers, and the tools need to be designed around such high-end use, not around taking random (poor) shots at parties.

The average member of the public only cares that they're in the photo, in focus and look decent and either don't know or don't care about DR, ISO or other technical matters, and probably don't run into the limits anyway.

In my experience, lots of the general public run into issues because of things like shooting with the sun directly behind their subject, or into deep shadow.


Vice President of the No-Talent Gear Head club
SL1 | 24 STM | 18-135 IS STM | 55-250 IS STM
5D3 | 35/2 IS | 40 STM | Σ50A | 50 STM | 100L | 24-70L 2.8 II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS II | 70-300L | 100-400L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aswald
Goldmember
1,162 posts
Likes: 105
Joined Oct 2013
Location: London, Paris, NY
     
Feb 16, 2015 20:35 |  #559

apersson850 wrote in post #17433929 (external link)
I would assume that the fact that Canon's sensors have remained at about the same DR for several years now has one of two reasons:
  • They've maxed out what can be done in their current production equipment.
  • They've maxed out what can be done with their current sensor design. The R&D they've spent on sensors the last few years were in getting dual-pixel AF to work.

Maybe even a combination of both reasons. If that's a correct assumption, it implies that the fact that Canon hasn't made incremental steps in getting better DR still doesn't prevent them from taking a larger step, if they either build a new production site or focus on new sensor design, aimed at better DR. Or both.

It's a question about money and ambitions.

I concur.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ETS
Senior Member
Avatar
740 posts
Gallery: 27 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 550
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Cocoa, Florida
     
Feb 16, 2015 21:05 |  #560

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17435111 (external link)
In my experience, lots of the general public run into issues because of things like shooting with the sun directly behind their subject, or into deep shadow.

Yes, but they are unlikely to buy a $4,000 camera to fix it.


Fuji X-T2,5D MKII,Rebel XTi
17-40L, 70-200 F4L, 400mm F5.6L, 100mm F2.8L, Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art
580 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark0159
I say stupid things all the time
Avatar
12,863 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 238
Joined Mar 2003
Location: Hamilton, New Zealand
     
Feb 16, 2015 22:48 |  #561

tagnal wrote in post #17434995 (external link)
What would be interesting would be to get that kind of data from a non photography focused site. Maybe something like facebook.

Flicker would be better to get this kinda of information. Facebook would be mostly phones and if you notice on your phone that you can't change the ISO and if you can the highest you can go to is 400. Even then the noise is quite bad.


Mark
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/52782633@N04 (external link)
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 17-40mm f/4L USM, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 Di VC USD | Canon Speedlite 550EX -|- Film | Canon EOS 3 | Olympus OM2 | Zuiko 35mm f2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tagnal
Goldmember
1,255 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Feb 17, 2015 00:08 |  #562

Shadowblade wrote in post #17435081 (external link)
Does it particularly matter how the general public shoot? SLRs and other interchangeable-lens systems are tools for professionals and enthusiasts, not random Facebookers, and the tools need to be designed around such high-end use, not around taking random (poor) shots at parties.

The average member of the public only cares that they're in the photo, in focus and look decent and either don't know or don't care about DR, ISO or other technical matters, and probably don't run into the limits anyway.

I would argue that the reason why people get into DSLR's in the first place are because they aren't happy with the performance their phones and p&s cameras were giving them. Probably one of the biggest reasons was because in poor light, their pictures came out poor. Next I would say is probably the speed in which they can take the photos and not end up with blurry shots. So, while they do not know the terms or technical matters, they do know they need some kind of improvement, which would translate to ISO, AF and shutter speed. All those rebels and xxD models they sell aren't only to pros and enthusiasts. How many of them really own more than maybe 1 lens beyond their kit lenses?

Of all the people I know that own a DSLR (that I have not met specifically through a photography capacity or means), I only know 3 people who might be considered enthusiasts, although to even a much lesser extent than I am. The other hundred or more people, just want to take nice pictures when they want a picture of something. This all goes back to what I was saying before that Canon believes that for the majority of their customers, the DR aspect just isn't as important and is why they haven't focused on it.


5D3 / M3 / S100 / Σ 35 Art / 50 1.8 / 135 L / 17-40 L / 24-70 L / 70-200 f/4 IS L / m 22 2.0 / 580ex II
Toy List | flickr (external link) | FAA (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tagnal
Goldmember
1,255 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by tagnal.
     
Feb 17, 2015 00:11 |  #563

Mark0159 wrote in post #17435320 (external link)
Flicker would be better to get this kinda of information. Facebook would be mostly phones and if you notice on your phone that you can't change the ISO and if you can the highest you can go to is 400. Even then the noise is quite bad.

Actually, thinking on this a bit more, I agree. Flickr would be better. But, we would also need a way to analyze all the photos taken between iso 100 - 400 and determine the number of images which really required more than 12 stops of DR. Then compare it against the number of higher ISO shots.


5D3 / M3 / S100 / Σ 35 Art / 50 1.8 / 135 L / 17-40 L / 24-70 L / 70-200 f/4 IS L / m 22 2.0 / 580ex II
Toy List | flickr (external link) | FAA (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
Avatar
3,357 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1033
Joined May 2013
Post edited over 4 years ago by davidfarina.
     
Feb 17, 2015 04:24 |  #564

tagnal wrote in post #17434995 (external link)
What would be interesting would be to get that kind of data from a non photography focused site. Maybe something like facebook.

why? it only counts what photographers do. No one will buy a 3k camera when he/she is not seriously interested in photography. And also parsing out the ISOs from facebook images wont tell much, as 98% are shot with auto mode on whatever type of phone...


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Two ­ Hot ­ Shoes
Goldmember
Avatar
2,924 posts
Gallery: 319 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 2948
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Ireland
     
Feb 17, 2015 09:16 |  #565

The meta data in Facebook photos is stripped out on import so it would be of no use. The only important thing is how you use the camera, my I'm often in high iso situations. Really the canon sensor has fine DR. Not as much as Sony but near enough - for me.


Fuji: X-PRO2, X-T3. 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 90/2, 16-55/2.8, 50-140/2.8.
Pelican, Ona, ThinkTank, Matthews Grip, Elinchrom

Gear & Discounts (external link)Instagram (external link)Blog (external link)
Coffee & Fujis (external link)YouTube (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
1,714 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 201
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by Xyclopx. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 17, 2015 09:35 |  #566

tagnal wrote in post #17434986 (external link)
Just going by my flickr account, you could say the majority of my shots are in the low ISO's. However, what you don't see on my flicker are the close to 100k shots I have taken using high ISO's. I don't post to my flickr the thousands of shots I take at my friends weddings, birthdays, events, retreats, family, everyday life, etc. Flickr isn't really the place for me to share those images.

this is most probably the most correct interpretation of what you see on flickr.

i would say < 5% of the ~60-80k pictures i've taken are < 200iso, but those make up a large portion of what i post on the internet.

i think better noise/dr at high iso benefits typical users far more than low iso performance, if you're just looking at what iso people usually use. that said, if one takes 100,000 photos @ 3200iso, but only takes 200 at 100iso, and it's those 200 that one sells for $$$, well, then that is more debatable what is truly more valuable.

anyway, you can't gather stats using pics posted online to generalize how the cameras are used. people only post what they want you to see. UNLESS, that is your intent--to maximize the usage that users are proud to show off, vs what they keep to themselves.

another confounding factor is that since the higher the iso the lower the IQ, the lower IQ might have some influence in why those pics do not get posted. in other words, if high iso pics were just the same in iq as low iso pics, you probably will see more high iso pics posted.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dolina
Goldmember
Avatar
4,819 posts
Likes: 229
Joined Mar 2009
Location: 34109
     
Feb 17, 2015 09:41 |  #567

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #17435808 (external link)
Security token failed/expired, please reload the page and try again.

Really wish Facebook would allow the viewing of EXIF like Google+

It gets annoying that ppl keep asking for EXIF.


Visit my Flickr (external link), Facebook (external link) & 500px (external link) and see my photos. :)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tagnal
Goldmember
1,255 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Feb 17, 2015 13:46 |  #568

Xyclopx wrote in post #17435836 (external link)
this is most probably the most correct interpretation of what you see on flickr.

i would say < 5% of the ~60-80k pictures i've taken are < 200iso, but those make up a large portion of what i post on the internet.

i think better noise/dr at high iso benefits typical users far more than low iso performance, if you're just looking at what iso people usually use. that said, if one takes 100,000 photos @ 3200iso, but only takes 200 at 100iso, and it's those 200 that one sells for $$$, well, then that is more debatable what is truly more valuable.

anyway, you can't gather stats using pics posted online to generalize how the cameras are used. people only post what they want you to see. UNLESS, that is your intent--to maximize the usage that users are proud to show off, vs what they keep to themselves.

another confounding factor is that since the higher the iso the lower the IQ, the lower IQ might have some influence in why those pics do not get posted. in other words, if high iso pics were just the same in iq as low iso pics, you probably will see more high iso pics posted.

This is kind of why I initially mentioned FB over flickr. Because it is a platform where people are sharing not just images they are proud of, they are sharing their lives. The things they see, friends they interact with, the funny expression of their cat, pictures of the wedding they went to last night, showing off their kids, etc. It is a bit more of a complete picture of what they use their camera for than what many of us would post on flickr alone. I post a lot of pictures on FB that I would never show to potential clients. Pictures that have meaning to me and my friends/family. Which is the whole point of why I wanted a camera in the first place.


5D3 / M3 / S100 / Σ 35 Art / 50 1.8 / 135 L / 17-40 L / 24-70 L / 70-200 f/4 IS L / m 22 2.0 / 580ex II
Toy List | flickr (external link) | FAA (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,241 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 464
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 17, 2015 14:40 |  #569

tagnal wrote in post #17436098 (external link)
This is kind of why I initially mentioned FB over flickr. Because it is a platform where people are sharing not just images they are proud of, they are sharing their lives. The things they see, friends they interact with, the funny expression of their cat, pictures of the wedding they went to last night, showing off their kids, etc. It is a bit more of a complete picture of what they use their camera for than what many of us would post on flickr alone. I post a lot of pictures on FB that I would never show to potential clients. Pictures that have meaning to me and my friends/family. Which is the whole point of why I wanted a camera in the first place.

As a hobbyist photographer, I'm the opposite - most stuff never gets to FB, but everything I'd keep for myself, for any purpose, is on Flickr too. Seems I'm in the minority.


Vice President of the No-Talent Gear Head club
SL1 | 24 STM | 18-135 IS STM | 55-250 IS STM
5D3 | 35/2 IS | 40 STM | Σ50A | 50 STM | 100L | 24-70L 2.8 II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS II | 70-300L | 100-400L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,241 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 464
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 17, 2015 14:42 |  #570

ETS wrote in post #17435183 (external link)
Yes, but they are unlikely to buy a $4,000 camera to fix it.

True, I was just addressing the claim that most people don't run into the limits of their cameraphones.


Vice President of the No-Talent Gear Head club
SL1 | 24 STM | 18-135 IS STM | 55-250 IS STM
5D3 | 35/2 IS | 40 STM | Σ50A | 50 STM | 100L | 24-70L 2.8 II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS II | 70-300L | 100-400L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

294,463 views & 241 likes for this thread
OFFICIAL : 5DS and 5DS R Announced
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Bokeh42
797 guests, 388 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.