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 01 Feb 2016 (Monday) 01:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Official specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II

 
this thread is locked
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Mar 19, 2016 16:47 |  #1216

John Sheehy wrote in post #17941027 (external link)
Maybe I said that wrong. What I meant was that the pre-gain read noise from the 1DxII is lower than that from the 80D, and with lower post-gain noise, that difference will show better.

Understood. What I was wondering was why the pre-gain read noise on the 1DxII is lower (and how do you know)?


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bps
Cream of the Crop
7,607 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Mar 2007
Location: California
     
Mar 19, 2016 18:59 |  #1217

If you're heavy-handed on the shutter release at 14 fps, here's a deal for you!

http://www.canonpricew​atch.com …-529-roberts-camera-ebay/ (external link)

Cheers,
Bryan


My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,695 posts
Likes: 346
Joined Jan 2010
     
Mar 19, 2016 19:48 |  #1218

sploo wrote in post #17941039 (external link)
Understood. What I was wondering was why the pre-gain read noise on the 1DxII is lower (and how do you know)?

The pre-gain read noise is what the bulk of noise is at very high ISOs, and we know that it is lower for bigger pixels.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Mar 20, 2016 06:08 |  #1219

John Sheehy wrote in post #17941190 (external link)
The pre-gain read noise is what the bulk of noise is at very high ISOs, and we know that it is lower for bigger pixels.

Got it. Hence the advantage of bigger pixels in a camera intended for high ISO work?

From posts you made about the 5Ds I understand that you can get more total DR with more (obviously smaller for the same sensor size) pixels. So would that likely be a negative for the 1Dx II then in terms of low ISO DR? (vs the same sensor size and tech, but with more pixels)


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,695 posts
Likes: 346
Joined Jan 2010
     
Mar 20, 2016 12:26 |  #1220

sploo wrote in post #17941524 (external link)
Got it. Hence the advantage of bigger pixels in a camera intended for high ISO work?

No. I was talking about pixel-level DR and noise. There is no generic "bigger pixel" benefit per se, as we are also talking "bigger sensor" at the same time.

From posts you made about the 5Ds I understand that you can get more total DR with more (obviously smaller for the same sensor size) pixels. So would that likely be a negative for the 1Dx II then in terms of low ISO DR? (vs the same sensor size and tech, but with more pixels)

We don't know he actual pixel-level base-ISO DR of the 1DxII yet (at least I don't). The potential is there for it to be the same or a little better than the 5Ds at the image level. Of course, 50 million 80D pixels would likely be better yet.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frankchn
Senior Member
459 posts
Likes: 158
Joined Jun 2009
     
Mar 21, 2016 02:15 |  #1221

http://www.photonstoph​otos.net …20X,Nikon%20D4,​Nikon%20D5 (external link) (found in Dpreview: http://www.dpreview.co​m/forums/thread/398154​7 (external link))

Here is someone's analysis of the D5's DR curve against the D4 and the 1DX. It seems like the D5 has 2/3 stop better high ISO DR from ISO 2500 on, while low ISO DR *has retreated* by almost one stop? I guess Nikon decided at low ISO DR is not that important in this class of cameras :p

It would be quite funny if there were a role reversal with the 1DX2 having better low-ISO DR while the D5 gets better high ISO performance.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GyRob
Cream of the Crop
10,002 posts
Likes: 542
Joined Feb 2005
Location: N.E.LINCOLNSHIRE UK.
     
Mar 21, 2016 03:58 |  #1222

I hope this isn't a daft question

I know Low iso is 50 or 100 but were does low become high iso and what is it based on .

Rob


"The LensMaster Gimbal"
http://www.lensmaster.​co.uk/rh1.htm (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Mar 21, 2016 07:40 |  #1223

frankchn wrote in post #17942752 (external link)
http://www.photonstoph​otos.net …20X,Nikon%20D4,​Nikon%20D5 (external link) (found in Dpreview: http://www.dpreview.co​m/forums/thread/398154​7 (external link))

Here is someone's analysis of the D5's DR curve against the D4 and the 1DX. It seems like the D5 has 2/3 stop better high ISO DR from ISO 2500 on, while low ISO DR *has retreated* by almost one stop? I guess Nikon decided at low ISO DR is not that important in this class of cameras :p

It would be quite funny if there were a role reversal with the 1DX2 having better low-ISO DR while the D5 gets better high ISO performance.

If it's correct I am surprised it drops off at lower ISOs, but yes, I suspect many (most?) shooters of that type of body would take improvements at higher ISOs, even combined with a loss at low ISO.

GyRob wrote in post #17942778 (external link)
I hope this isn't a daft question

I know Low iso is 50 or 100 but were does low become high iso and what is it based on .

Rob

I used to shoot ISO 50 Velvia, so ISO 400 is high ;-)a

I suspect the definition of "high" has probably changed as cameras have improved. The original 1D had a range of 100-1600 (3200 extended), so the idea of a very usable ISO 6400 (common in FF cameras these days) would probably have been seen as ludicrous back then.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thenextguy
Goldmember
Avatar
2,539 posts
Gallery: 95 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 4939
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
     
Mar 21, 2016 09:10 |  #1224

GyRob wrote in post #17942778 (external link)
I hope this isn't a daft question

I know Low iso is 50 or 100 but were does low become high iso and what is it based on .

Rob

On the 1DX II I believe it occurs at 51,200 ISO. And I'm sure someone else will chime in that knows better, but "regular" ISO is done via hardware and "high" (or "low") is done via software in camera. Basically ISO 50 is a shot at ISO 100 and then pushed to ISO 50 via camera software.


Steve -- Website (external link) -- Flickr (external link) -- Tumblr (external link) -- Instagram (external link) -- 500px (external link) (New!)
Canon 5Ds R | 24-70L f/2.8 II | 35 F2 IS | 50mm f/1.4 | 70-200L f/2.8 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,695 posts
Likes: 346
Joined Jan 2010
     
Mar 21, 2016 11:14 |  #1225

GyRob wrote in post #17942778 (external link)
I hope this isn't a daft question

I know Low iso is 50 or 100 but were does low become high iso and what is it based on .

Rob

It's based on who is talking and what year they said it. I would have called 800 high a decade ago; I would reserve that for at least 6400 these days.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,695 posts
Likes: 346
Joined Jan 2010
     
Mar 21, 2016 11:36 |  #1226

thenextguy wrote in post #17942976 (external link)
On the 1DX II I believe it occurs at 51,200 ISO. And I'm sure someone else will chime in that knows better, but "regular" ISO is done via hardware and "high" (or "low") is done via software in camera. Basically ISO 50 is a shot at ISO 100 and then pushed to ISO 50 via camera software.

It doesn't necessarily matter all that much. Analog gain only serves two purposes; to shrink noise that occurs after gain, and to avoid posterization when bit-depth is low. Other than that, it doesn't matter whether gain is math or analog gain. If the read noise at ISO 51,200 in RAW numbers is exactly the same as 2x that of 25,600, there is no point in using analog gain for 51,200, because there is nothing left to gain on.

ISO at the end of the day is nothing more than taking a certain amount of exposure of a gray card or object in a frame, and displaying it at medium gray. Anything else implied by ISO is just an artifact of temporary technological limits.

The fact is, using pure gain for very high ISOs is counter-productive; it tosses highlights unnecessarily, and makes compressed RAW files larger than they need to be. The last couple stops of analog-gain-only ISOs offer little or no noise benefit on most cameras, especially now that the post-gain noise has little banding and blotching compared to older cameras.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,724 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6390
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Mar 21, 2016 11:51 |  #1227

sploo wrote in post #17942897 (external link)
.

I suspect the definition of "high" has probably changed as cameras have improved. ...

Very much so, with digital it keeps evolving.

I'd say even in the film days that 400 was "mid" even while we acknowledged an increase in grain and loss of fidelity.

On the 1D and 1D2 I still considered 800 to be high.

By 2007, around the era of the 1D3 and 5D, ISO 400 became good enough to be base. No noticeable difference in good light between 400 and 100 (or 50).

Today we can leave the house with cameras set to 800 (or really much higher) and never notice.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Mar 21, 2016 11:54 |  #1228

How is ISO 50 on the 5D3 and 5DsR in comparison to ISO 32 and 64 on the D810? Base ISO on the 1DX Mark II is still 100, no?


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,409 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 463
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Mar 21, 2016 12:37 |  #1229

idkdc wrote in post #17943165 (external link)
How is ISO 50 on the 5D3 and 5DsR in comparison to ISO 32 and 64 on the D810? Base ISO on the 1DX Mark II is still 100, no?

As far as I understand, in a "perfect" system, halving the base ISO gives you an extra stop of DR. Thus a base of ISO 64 should give 2/3 of a stop more DR than an identical system with a base ISO of 100 (though unfortunately the 5D3 and 5Ds aren't identical to the D810 - they're much worse in the low ISO DR stakes, regardless of the differences in the base ISO).

Going below the camera's base ISO (32 on the D810, 50 on the 5D) isn't likely to give you any DR benefits. I assume they're just present to allow slow shutter speeds in the same conditions.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robinson ­ Crusoe
Goldmember
Avatar
1,229 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 195
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Turkey
     
Mar 21, 2016 12:52 |  #1230

For sure they'll first post the preorders. When do you guys think the people who order the camera later will get it?

I mean I have a holiday by the end of May but I didn't make any plans yet. I may come to US and buy this camera. If I order in the middle of May when my holiday is decided will there be a problem? How did it happen before, any experiences about waiting for a camera after it's released?


Gear List | Deviantart (external link) | Flickr (external link)

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

279,217 views & 958 likes for this thread
Official specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
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 SaraiukiSama
2447 guests, 311 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.