Canon Eos sensor vs Sony DR

Hi folks,
I read and look a lot. While looking and reading, I see that the newer Sony sensors have some great dynamic range and colors and pictures in general that really pop. I know Canon sensors are not as up to date or current as the Sony, but is it possible to squeeze this kind of dr and color pop out of a canon?

Frodge wrote in post #17442088
Hi folks,
I read and look a lot. While looking and reading, I see that the newer Sony sensors have some great dynamic range and colors and pictures in general that really pop. I know Canon sensors are not as up to date or current as the Sony, but is it possible to squeeze this kind of dr and color pop out of a canon?

yes, maybe even a better "squeeze pop" !


color pop with an old Canon 60D

Try using lightroom or photoshop what you can't do in there ain't worth knowing

watt100 wrote in post #17442104
yes, maybe even a better "squeeze pop" !

color pop with an old Canon 60D

The older Canons (1Ds3, 5D2, etc.) seen to have better colour definition than many of the new bodies.

I think they've weakened the Bayer colour filters in order to increase the amount of light reaching the sensor and get an edge in high-ISO performance, which has resulted in poorer colour definition in the newer models.

Also, their auto WB is far too warm.

Frodge wrote in post #17442088
Hi folks,
I read and look a lot. While looking and reading, I see that the newer Sony sensors have some great dynamic range and colors and pictures in general that really pop. I know Canon sensors are not as up to date or current as the Sony, but is it possible to squeeze this kind of dr and color pop out of a canon?

IMO colour pop is generally something that can be achieved in post. Some cameras may look better than others out of the box, but you can make most of them look pretty similar with some tweaking.

DR on the other hand is more of an issue. The sony sensors just give you lots more flexibility, especially when it comes to recovering shadow detail. When you pull up the pull up the exposure on the canons I've got (5DII & 1DII, not from the current gen so things may have improved) a) there's not much detail in there and b) you get lots of colour noise and a tartan like pattern. On the sony you get more detail, the noise is more random/natural looking and doesn't have random colour in it.

Whether or not this is an issue depends a lot on what you shoot, for studio work it's likely to be irrelevant, but for low light or landscape work I think it's great to have.

Frodge wrote in post #17442088
Hi folks,
I read and look a lot. While looking and reading, I see that the newer Sony sensors have some great dynamic range and colors and pictures in general that really pop. I know Canon sensors are not as up to date or current as the Sony, but is it possible to squeeze this kind of dr and color pop out of a canon?

Heya,

Depends on your settings really. All that really matters is the end result. If a Sony sensor & a Canon sensor produce an image, and they are processed, even differently, and the result is an image that pops, then which is superior? Some do more in camera. Some stay less processed and leave that to you in post more.

If you set your style in the camera to have ++ contrast and +++ saturation, and do not underexpose (go ahead and force ETTR by a stop or so) and compare that image.

Personally I like being able to just shoot a neutral profile, and then do what I want in post. That way I can get drab, retro looking images. Or I can get images that are crisp and pop.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17443136
Heya,

Depends on your settings really. All that really matters is the end result. If a Sony sensor & a Canon sensor produce an image, and they are processed, even differently, and the result is an image that pops, then which is superior? Some do more in camera. Some stay less processed and leave that to you in post more.

If you set your style in the camera to have ++ contrast and +++ saturation, and do not underexpose (go ahead and force ETTR by a stop or so) and compare that image.

Personally I like being able to just shoot a neutral profile, and then do what I want in post. That way I can get drab, retro looking images. Or I can get images that are crisp and pop.

Very best,

If you shoot RAW, it doesn't matter what profile you shoot in, because none of that applies during RAW conversion anyway.

I just wish I could set a custom profile, with the 'black' point being the noise floor and the 'white' point being where the RAW file blows out, to get a true visualisation of the scene's exposure, in order to be able to make optimal use of the sensor's dynamic range.

watt100 wrote in post #17442104
yes, maybe even a better "squeeze pop" !

color pop with an old Canon 60D

I dont think this image has The real "pop" of say a D810 or A7R file. This is just a rather grainy, slightly OOF picture, of a girl in a bright yellow and light blue jump suit.

I don't mean to seem harsh, but IMO it is a mile away from the type of image, with real POP.
And IMO I have seen a few 1DX images, that are almost there but not quite.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17443702
If you shoot RAW, it doesn't matter what profile you shoot in, because none of that applies during RAW conversion anyway.

I just wish I could set a custom profile, with the 'black' point being the noise floor and the 'white' point being where the RAW file blows out, to get a true visualisation of the scene's exposure, in order to be able to make optimal use of the sensor's dynamic range.

It's a shame that the only way to assess individual channel blow out is with Uni WB or Magic Lantern. Seems like it would be nice for Canon to implement a raw-based live histogram...

What a lot of people completely overlook is that the Sony sensor has better dynamic range at low ISO values. At higher ISO, it is comparable or worse, depending on the specific camera. Do you shoot all the time at ISO 100 or 200? I can't, because I shoot many events with fast-moving objects/people and can't always set up strobes. I find myself often at ISO 3200-6400 or above, where the Canon sensor is just fine.

Regardless, "pop" is a rather vague term that applies more to color contrast, saturation and sometimes bokeh. I agree with those recommending to shoot Raw and understand what you want out of the finished image. Don't depend on the camera's hardware and software to give you a result which in the end will be less under your control.

GregDunn wrote in post #17444382
What a lot of people completely overlook is that the Sony sensor has better dynamic range at low ISO values. At higher ISO, it is comparable or worse, depending on the specific camera.

What you may be overlooking is that there's not much reason to shoot a Sony sensor at a higher ISO because the quantity and quality of noise of a pushed low-ISO image is equal to a nominally higher ISO image but with much more dynamic range.

Please click on the second link in my signature. It will teach you a lot.

Thanks for all the responses. I wasn't really talking about shooting in raw vs JPEG. I always shoot in both. I process in Lightroom. From the photos I've seen, it seems to me as if the Sony sensors basically destroy the Canon sensors in DR. Mclaren777, I appreciate that link. This review basically confirmed my assumptions about the different sensors. Makes me wonder if I should eventually switch over when the time comes. Those pushed images vs the higher iso images really tell the whole story about the noise factor.

Frodge wrote in post #17444670
Thanks for all the responses. I wasn't really talking about shooting in raw vs JPEG. I always shoot in both. I process in Lightroom. From the photos I've seen, it seems to me as if the Sony sensors basically destroy the Canon sensors in DR. Mclaren777, I appreciate that link. This review basically confirmed my assumptions about the different sensors. Makes me wonder if I should eventually switch over when the time comes. Those pushed images vs the higher iso images really tell the whole story about the noise factor.

Heya,

If you really care about DR, just stop looking at 35mm in general, and start saving for a decent entry medium format (like a 645z ).

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17444882
Heya,

If you really care about DR, just stop looking at 35mm in general, and start saving for a decent entry medium format (like a 645z ).

Very best,

MF has no more DR than Exmor sensors, and much poorer lens selection and other features.