I've switched to Sony twice. Hated it. Now I'm thinking about doing it a third time.

Mbell1975 wrote in post #18687764
True but DR is pretty much meaningless to most shooters. Dynamic resolution has become an even more overused and overhyped catchphrase than megapixels, most dont even really understand what it is let alone if they really need it. If the vast majority of shooters needed a lot of DR, you wouldn't see Canon cameras dominating every sports event and all the other places you see Canon cameras in abundance. i'll take the superior resolution over DR any day of the week. I think the 5Ds is fantastic for my uses and produces an almost 3D look in solid lighting. Very sharp and clear.

You'd take an extra 8 mpixels over a two stop DR gain. What exactly would those extra megapickles buy you? I know exactly what extra DR buys me...but for your photography...what would 50 mpix buy you over 42 mpix. Nada.

Hogloff wrote in post #18687772
You'd take an extra 8 mpixels over a two stop DR gain. What exactly would those extra megapickles buy you? I know exactly what extra DR buys me...but for your photography...what would 50 mpix buy you over 42 mpix. Nada.

What Canon camera has 42MP? My 6D has 20MP. I have zero interest in owning a Sony camera, Ive shot enough of them to know that.

Mbell1975 wrote in post #18687764
True but DR is pretty much meaningless to most shooters. Dynamic resolution has become an even more overused and overhyped catchphrase than megapixels, most dont even really understand what it is let alone if they really need it. If the vast majority of shooters needed a lot of DR, you wouldn't see Canon cameras dominating every sports event and all the other places you see Canon cameras in abundance. i'll take the superior resolution over DR any day of the week. I think the 5Ds is fantastic for my uses and produces an almost 3D look in solid lighting. Very sharp and clear.

Sports and wildlife is an area where DR is less relevant since they're shooting at such compressed FOV's and there is less contrast to contend with in the frame.

But sports and wildlife is a small subset of photography as a whole.

There are very many other types of photography that do benefit from more DR though.....which is why its such a topic of discussion these days.

mystik610 wrote in post #18687785
Sports and wildlife is an area where DR is less relevant since they're shooting at such compressed FOV's and there is less contrast to contend with in the frame.

But sports and wildlife is a small subset of photography as a whole.

There are very many other types of photography that do benefit from more DR though.....which is why its such a topic of discussion these days.

Even sports and wildlife at times have deep shadows or bright highlights where extended DR comes in handy.

Hogloff wrote in post #18687791
Even sports and wildlife at times have deep shadows or bright highlights where extended DR comes in handy.

I guess all the pros shooting every major sporting event and all the National Geographic photographers shooting Canon dont agree or they would have switched systems years ago DR is massively overrated.

Mbell1975 wrote in post #18687806
I guess all the pros shooting every major sporting event and all the National Geographic photographers shooting Canon dont agree or they would have switched systems years ago DR is massively overrated.

Says the guy who shoots under controlled lighting with posed models. There are many situations where you cannot control the lighting and in these conditions, it's really nice to know you have extended DR.

Funny that so many Cannon shooters were very pleased with the extra DR in the 5d4 camera...guess they were all disillusioned about DR...who needs it...a set of lights with a soft box fixes everything.

Hogloff wrote in post #18687814
Says the guy who shoots under controlled lighting with posed models. There are many situations where you cannot control the lighting and in these conditions, it's really nice to know you have extended DR.

Funny that so many Cannon shooters were very pleased with the extra DR in the 5d4 camera...guess they were all disillusioned about DR...who needs it...a set of lights with a soft box fixes everything.

We have been over this. I shoot natural light outdoors probably 35-40% of the time and Im well aware there are conditions one can't control. As I said, DR is massively overrated. I just think if it were that big of a factor, Canon cameras wouldn't dominate every genre of photography. Can you name a genre of photography Canon does not dominate? I can't.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18687043
What year are you living in? I've had a 4k TV for over 2 years now... it's actually getting hard to buy 1080p TV's, 4K is the new standard. Even my 13" laptop has nearly a 4k screen...

But you still only get 1920×1080i programming on cable or satellite. The proposal for the planned additions in ATSC 3.0 is support for HD video in up to 4K resolution. Not yet adopted. Your 'fell for it'...like lots of folks bought 3D TV. The difference is, if you wait long enough, you just might be able to get broadcast programming to suit your TV's capacilities. And while 4K streaming sources are available, these streaming services only offer a tiny portion of their vast libraries in 4K.

aladyforty wrote in post #18687222
when did the art of photography become so much about the gear, Im seeing amazing work coming out of cameras that are over five years old and some real crap from the latest gear. That said, bring on the camera wars, I will be happy to pick up cheap a DSLR that I cant afford today because so many will be selling thinking their images will be so much better from the latest gear

...when chimping and shooting 5 fps for every shot became the norm!

Wilt wrote in post #18687867
And you still only get 1920×1080i programming on cable or satellite. The proposal for the planned additions in ATSC 3.0 is support for HD video in up to 4K resolution. Not yet adopted.

I cut cable years ago. Most of my friends have too. Maybe it's just the younger demographic (I'm 30), but I suspect cable will die out eventually. Most of what I watch is on YouTube or Amazon Video, both have lots of 4K content.

Wilt wrote in post #18687867
And you still only get 1920×1080i programming on cable or satellite. The proposal for the planned additions in ATSC 3.0 is support for HD video in up to 4K resolution. Not yet adopted.

Cable and satellite is dying out as people are cutting the cord at pretty rapid rates.

Streaming is not only the future, but the present, and 4K HDR streaming is very much a reality via netflix and amazon prime even now.

mystik610 wrote in post #18687883
Cable and satellite is dying out as people are cutting the cord at pretty rapid rates.

Streaming is not only the future, but the present, and 4K HDR streaming is very much a reality via netflix and amazon prime even now.

That may be true, but even 4K streaming sources fail to have much 4K programming to watch...most of what is in their libraries is 2k at best.

Wilt wrote in post #18687887
That may be true, but even 4K streaming sources fail to have much 4K programming to watch...most of what is in their libraries is 2k at best.

Not to mention that there is very little to no 4k broadcasting I am aware of. I got rid of cable awhile back and use SlingTV and YouTube TV. Zero 4k programming, none of these stations film or broadcast it. 4k is far from the standard as some might like to believe.

Its hard to find anything but a 4K TV for sale in Australia.

Bear Dale wrote in post #18687923
Its hard to find anything but a 4K TV for sale in Australia.

Just glanced over the latest Best Buy flyer. Every TV that is larger than 32" was 4K. Seems like you really have to look hard to not get a 4K TV.