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: 397
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Apr 10, 2015 08:08 |  #1111

mystik610 wrote in post #17511737 (external link)
Yup. I have doubt's we'll be seeing this migrate over to high resolution stills any time soon though. Reading a single exposure at two ISO's and blending the images on the fly might be doable on an 8mp sensor with modern processors. Doing so with images from a 50mp sensor is another story.

They're doing it 25-60 times a second with the 9MP sensor (depending on the frame rate).

Surely they can do it 5 times per second with a 50MP sensor.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 10, 2015 08:15 |  #1112

Shadowblade wrote in post #17511719 (external link)
Actually, if it's reading the same frame at two separate ISOs, then there isn't a problem with subject/scene motion. It's a true 15-stop DR output achieved with a single exposure, not a multiple-exposure technique. Basically, it's only exposed once, but read twice.

That would be a superb solution if feasible, but I'm struggling to think how it'd work at a practical level; the signal on the sensor needs to be clocked out through an amplifier before going into an A2D. As far as I understood, you wouldn't then be able to read exactly the same frame from the sensor again (with a different amplifier setting). If you could then surely that would be a relatively easy way to get huge DR from a sensor. I'm a software (not hardware) guy though, so it may well be possible; I just thought the process of reading from the sensor was destructive.

(A quick bit of Googling hints that my understanding dates from my days of messing around with CCD sensors, and that modern CMOS sensors may well have non-destructive read-outs; thus it could work)


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,533 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 324
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Apr 10, 2015 08:17 |  #1113

Perhaps that Dual Pixel technology may come into play... Read one side at ISO 100 and the other at ISO 800. They do it right now for a different purpose...


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 397
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Apr 10, 2015 08:26 |  #1114

MakisM1 wrote in post #17511781 (external link)
Perhaps that Dual Pixel technology may come into play... Read one side at ISO 100 and the other at ISO 800. They do it right now for a different purpose...

That would only give you half as many photons collected per 'exposure', then. Which would mean you'd have to set the base ISO at 200 and have even better underlying noise performance in order to extract 15 stops of DR out of it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 397
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Apr 10, 2015 08:29 |  #1115

sploo wrote in post #17511778 (external link)
That would be a superb solution if feasible, but I'm struggling to think how it'd work at a practical level; the signal on the sensor needs to be clocked out through an amplifier before going into an A2D. As far as I understood, you wouldn't then be able to read exactly the same frame from the sensor again (with a different amplifier setting). If you could then surely that would be a relatively easy way to get huge DR from a sensor. I'm a software (not hardware) guy though, so it may well be possible; I just thought the process of reading from the sensor was destructive.

(A quick bit of Googling hints that my understanding dates from my days of messing around with CCD sensors, and that modern CMOS sensors may well have non-destructive read-outs; thus it could work)

It also depends where they do the readout.

If they have off-sensor destructive readout, then they wouldn't gain anything.

But if the readout was destructive but on-sensor (i.e. with minimal introduced read noise), it would be possible to duplicate the signal - one unamplified and one amplified to 800 ISO - to two separate off-sensor A/D converters (assuming Canon sticks with the off-sensor technology) and later combine them.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Neilyb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,189 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 438
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Munich
     
Apr 10, 2015 08:59 |  #1116

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17509248 (external link)
[LOL]video cameras don't need DR[/LOL]

i'm convinced resolution (pixel density, whatever you want to call it) is the determining factor, and that the next round of FF cameras will give all the DR junkies what they want, even if it means keeping them under 30MP.

i even started a thread in the rumors section about it: https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=17509117

Were that true the the NX1 would be lagging behind the 7DII in DR, but this DPreview sample comparison shows, it isn't the case http://www.dpreview.co​m/reviews/samsung-nx1/10 (external link) although not a true DR reading it shows the leeway available to pull shadows in post. I think the BSI design makes more of a difference than simply saying megapixels = DR loss.


http://natureimmortal.​blogspot.com (external link)

http://www.natureimmor​tal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 397
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Apr 10, 2015 09:59 |  #1117

http://www.canonrumors​.com …0-mark-ii-technology-cr2/ (external link)

Apparently the 5D4 will use similar dual-channel technology to increase DR too.

So, what's with the 5Ds? If the C300 Mk II, 5D4 and future Canon bodies have it, I can see the 5Ds having a very short life cycle, to be replaced next year by the 5Ds2 (which would be good for landscapes and architecture as well, not just studio work with controlled lighting).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aswald
Goldmember
1,162 posts
Likes: 105
Joined Oct 2013
Location: London, Paris, NY
Post edited over 4 years ago by Aswald.
     
Apr 10, 2015 11:02 |  #1118

5D4, 40mpix, 14+ev DR.....6.5fps. 4k video 24fps.

I'm still banking on it! :lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 10, 2015 11:39 |  #1119

Shadowblade wrote in post #17511789 (external link)
But if the readout was destructive but on-sensor (i.e. with minimal introduced read noise), it would be possible to duplicate the signal - one unamplified and one amplified to 800 ISO - to two separate off-sensor A/D converters (assuming Canon sticks with the off-sensor technology) and later combine them.

Yea, that's a good point.

It occurs to me though that, whilst the Exmor sensors are often spoken about as "ISO-less", you could probably still get some improvements by doing the same thing; thus pulling back a little further ahead. That said, if Canon could even just reduce the (large) current gap it would be very welcome.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17511856 (external link)
http://www.canonrumors​.com …0-mark-ii-technology-cr2/ (external link)

Apparently the 5D4 will use similar dual-channel technology to increase DR too.

So, what's with the 5Ds? If the C300 Mk II, 5D4 and future Canon bodies have it, I can see the 5Ds having a very short life cycle, to be replaced next year by the 5Ds2 (which would be good for landscapes and architecture as well, not just studio work with controlled lighting).

It might, as mentioned in a recent post, explain some of the oddity that the new 5Ds is slumming it in what's essentially a 5D3 body and perhaps has been in gestation for a long time. Thus a 5D4 might be more like the 7DII in terms of extra controls, and have C300 II sensor technology. Given that I'd admit I don't really need huge MP for what I shoot these days, it'd be a very welcome camera for me. Kinda leaves the landscape shooters in the lurch again though.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 397
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Post edited over 4 years ago by Shadowblade.
     
Apr 10, 2015 11:51 |  #1120

sploo wrote in post #17511967 (external link)
Yea, that's a good point.

It occurs to me though that, whilst the Exmor sensors are often spoken about as "ISO-less", you could probably still get some improvements by doing the same thing; thus pulling back a little further ahead. That said, if Canon could even just reduce the (large) current gap it would be very welcome.

It might, as mentioned in a recent post, explain some of the oddity that the new 5Ds is slumming it in what's essentially a 5D3 body and perhaps has been in gestation for a long time. Thus a 5D4 might be more like the 7DII in terms of extra controls, and have C300 II sensor technology. Given that I'd admit I don't really need huge MP for what I shoot these days, it'd be a very welcome camera for me. Kinda leaves the landscape shooters in the lurch again though.

5D3 shooters (who will presumably be looking to migrate to the 5D4) don't often seem to shoot at base ISO, though, so any low-ISO DR improvements would be lost on them.

It's the landscape and architecture high-MP photographers who really need it. And most of us are not going to buy a <36MP (by next year, probably <50MP) camera for professional landscape work, regardless of the DR.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 10, 2015 16:46 |  #1121

Shadowblade wrote in post #17511989 (external link)
5D3 shooters (who will presumably be looking to migrate to the 5D4) don't often seem to shoot at base ISO, though, so any low-ISO DR improvements would be lost on them.

It's the landscape and architecture high-MP photographers who really need it. And most of us are not going to buy a <36MP (by next year, probably <50MP) camera for professional landscape work, regardless of the DR.

I agree with your second point; but your first is a bit of a sweeping generalisation. Let me play Devil's Advocate - you often make the point that claims should be substantiated with evidence; is there supporting evidence that most 5D3 shots are not at base ISO?

I don't want to say "I personally would benefit from it", as that's a sample size of one, and not necessarily representative. Instead I'd say that I'd think of the 5D3 as a bit of an all-rounder, so would probably be as likely to be shot at base ISO as any other. Also, as the Exmor sensors pull ahead from around ISO 800 (and lower), a similar DR performance by Canon would benefit more than just base ISO shooters.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,586 posts
Likes: 326
Joined Jan 2010
     
Apr 10, 2015 16:56 |  #1122

sploo wrote in post #17512356 (external link)
I agree with your second point; but your first is a bit of a sweeping generalisation. Let me play Devil's Advocate - you often make the point that claims should be substantiated with evidence; is there supporting evidence that most 5D3 shots are not at base ISO?

I don't want to say "I personally would benefit from it", as that's a sample size of one, and not necessarily representative. Instead I'd say that I'd think of the 5D3 as a bit of an all-rounder, so would probably be as likely to be shot at base ISO as any other. Also, as the Exmor sensors pull ahead from around ISO 800 (and lower), a similar DR performance by Canon would benefit more than just base ISO shooters.

There is also the fact that if you have ISO 100 shadows with ISO 800 analog gain, you don't have to shoot at the ISO 800 setting; you can just "under-expose" at ISO 100.

This is something that seems to be lost on camera manufacturers in general. A camera that gives you the same SNR in the shadows of ISO 100 and at ISO 800 3 stops higher in the RAW histogram doesn't even need to be set to ISO 800 at all. RAW files could be much smaller and/or have more highlight headroom of ISO 100 was used under the hood, and the camera simply took that into account when setting the whitepoint in the review JPEG or in the RAW metadata.

So much file space and bandwidth is wasted on worthless noisy bits in RAW files.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
5,805 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 397
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Apr 10, 2015 19:18 |  #1123

sploo wrote in post #17512356 (external link)
I agree with your second point; but your first is a bit of a sweeping generalisation. Let me play Devil's Advocate - you often make the point that claims should be substantiated with evidence; is there supporting evidence that most 5D3 shots are not at base ISO?

I don't want to say "I personally would benefit from it", as that's a sample size of one, and not necessarily representative. Instead I'd say that I'd think of the 5D3 as a bit of an all-rounder, so would probably be as likely to be shot at base ISO as any other. Also, as the Exmor sensors pull ahead from around ISO 800 (and lower), a similar DR performance by Canon would benefit more than just base ISO shooters.

That's not to say there will be no benefit - at least some shots will benefit (outdoor wedding photos with white dresses, black tuxedos and no flash come to mind). But look at the typical professional users of the 5D3 - by and large, they're action photographers of some sort (events are a form of action). Much of their work is in low-light indoor locations or at night, necessitating either ISOs above 100-400 (where the extra DR won't apply) or flash (where you can control the lighting).

But the 5D4 will exist alongside the 5Ds - unlike the 5D3, it will not exist in isolation, but be a more specialised body. With the 5Ds taking over for non-action photographers who don't need ultra-high ISOs but often need resolution, the 5D4 will naturally lean more heavily towards the action side of things. Yet it is the non-action photographers at low ISO who really need the DR, not those who live at ISO 400 and up.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,402 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Apr 11, 2015 03:26 |  #1124

Shadowblade wrote in post #17512492 (external link)
That's not to say there will be no benefit - at least some shots will benefit (outdoor wedding photos with white dresses, black tuxedos and no flash come to mind). But look at the typical professional users of the 5D3 - by and large, they're action photographers of some sort (events are a form of action). Much of their work is in low-light indoor locations or at night, necessitating either ISOs above 100-400 (where the extra DR won't apply) or flash (where you can control the lighting).

But the 5D4 will exist alongside the 5Ds - unlike the 5D3, it will not exist in isolation, but be a more specialised body. With the 5Ds taking over for non-action photographers who don't need ultra-high ISOs but often need resolution, the 5D4 will naturally lean more heavily towards the action side of things. Yet it is the non-action photographers at low ISO who really need the DR, not those who live at ISO 400 and up.

John Sheehy wrote in post #17512365 (external link)
There is also the fact that if you have ISO 100 shadows with ISO 800 analog gain, you don't have to shoot at the ISO 800 setting; you can just "under-expose" at ISO 100.

This is something that seems to be lost on camera manufacturers in general. A camera that gives you the same SNR in the shadows of ISO 100 and at ISO 800 3 stops higher in the RAW histogram doesn't even need to be set to ISO 800 at all. RAW files could be much smaller and/or have more highlight headroom of ISO 100 was used under the hood, and the camera simply took that into account when setting the whitepoint in the review JPEG or in the RAW metadata.

So much file space and bandwidth is wasted on worthless noisy bits in RAW files.

Two very good posts - thanks.

The highlight advantage was something that came to mind earlier; especially seeing how little difference there is on an Exmor between a medium iso and base pushed by a few stops. As a software guy I certainly agree that camera manufacturers don't really seem to think outside the box when it comes to the processing and storage of raw data.

SB - the outdoor wedding photographer shots was exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of. I agree it'd be odd though for a general purpose body to sit alongside a specialised 5Ds (with the 5Ds having less DR). We probably shouldn't worry though, Canon will probably release a 5D4 with no more DR than the 5D3 ;)


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheInfamousGreedo
Goldmember
1,631 posts
Likes: 4040
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Summit County, Colorado
     
Apr 11, 2015 09:15 |  #1125

So sorry if I'm posting already discussed information, but I spoke with someone the other day who has seen a 5DS and also had their "training" on it.

It sounds like image quality is just a teeny tiny step above the Nikon D800. Quality is leaps and bounds above the 5DMKIII.

It will have WiFi like the new bodies.

Canon claims it's not a forgiving camera meaning due to the resolution; you need to be on point with your shot there's no room to fudge in post-processing.

Noise is more noticeable than that of the 6D due to resolution (question I asked since I like doing night photography).

Other bits are slipping my mind.

Personally, I'm still torn. I like my 6D, but there are thing that always make me want more. I've thought about a 5DMKIII, but I never really felt it was that much more camera to warrant the price difference. The 5DS, however, sounds like it is that much more camera.


TJ Simon (external link)
flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

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

295,634 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 Argonaut70
915 guests, 241 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.