6D vs 5D Mk 4 (Dynamic Range)

Practically, does the extra 2 stops or so of dynamic range with the 5D Mk 4 make much difference? Am I likely to get blue skies instead of white, for example?

I mostly shoot portraits.

are your portraits outside? are you shooting at 800 or less for ISO? Then you might see a difference.

If we are talking studio portraits, then no, shouldn't see a difference.

ksbal wrote in post #18766992
are your portraits outside? are you shooting at 800 or less for ISO? Then you might see a difference.

If we are talking studio portraits, then no, shouldn't see a difference.

Outdoors (I mentioned blue sky) @ 100.
Might? So, not likely / not much / not significant?

at 100iso, yes that will be significant, depending on how you expose, and what you want to do with it.

5D4 vs 6D


The problem you have, is there can be more than 14 stop of dynamic range, so it's hard to bring up the shadows enough - no matter what camera you have.

Personally, that is when I grab an AD200 strobe and overpower the sun, but its all in what you like:

Bare flash

Photo from ksbal's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (928298)

Photo from ksbal's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (936362)

There may still be situations where you need to HDR, but I've found the DR to be a good improvement with the 5D4 vs 5D3 (my previous camera). Extra resolution also helps. As to whether you'll see a significant difference: with the 5D4, you can side with slight underexposure to get detail in highlights and then bring up shadows in post. If you contend with noise with your current process, then the extra DR will be noticeable. If you're shooting portrait outside, you can also save time with post if you have adequate lighting on your model.

For example, here are a couple, with the sun directly behind the boys, even with highlights down and shadows up, it is hard to get this to match up. (no strobes, all natural)

Now with the sun not directly behind them, its better. Some could process these much better, and the 70-200 does flare a bit and loose contrast when pointed at the sun, so there is all that going on here too. In the first picture, the white clouds behind the boys are blown out, can't get them back. Polarizer might help.

Some folks think 'dynamic range' is the measure of the range of exposure brightnesses that can be captured...for example, 13EV range from the darkest lit areas to the brightest lit areas. The 5DIII vs. the 5DIV is not that difference. In fact, dpreview tests generally have no longer included such a measure after days of the the Canon 50D (9 years ago)

Rather, the characteristic of 'exposure latitude' is where the 5DIV is markedly better than the 5DIII, in which the detail in the darker zones of exposure of a scene, when 'pushed' to bring up and make more visible the details in the shadow areas there is less visible 'banding' and other 'noise' amplified into greater visibility.

This test illustrates the benefit...
https://www.dpreview.c​om …s/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/10

Wilt wrote in post #18767150
Some folks think 'dynamic range' is the measure of the range of exposure brightnesses that can be captured...for example, 13EV range from the darkest lit areas to the brightest lit areas. The 5DIII vs. the 5DIV is not that difference. In fact, dpreview tests generally have no longer included such a measure after days of the the Canon 50D (9 years ago)

Rather, the characteristic of 'exposure latitude' is where the 5DIV is markedly better than the 5DIII, in which the detail in the darker zones of exposure of a scene, when 'pushed' to bring up and make more visible the details in the shadow areas there is less visible 'banding' and other 'noise' amplified into greater visibility.

This test illustrates the benefit...
https://www.dpreview.c​om …s/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/10

So then, where do I find a measurement comparing the former? And how does the 6D compare to the 5d mk iv?

Also, is there a way to make use of exposure latitude, to do pretty much the same thing?

DXOMark does some measurements, and says dynamic range of the
5DIV is measured as 13.6EV at ISO 100 to 6.2EV at ISO 102400.
Unfortunately a graph is presented for the 5DIII but not explicit numerical values. Guestimating the graph at 11.8EV around ISO 100, and 5.5EV just under ISO 102400.

Dynamic Range is the range from one fixed point to a variable point. The fixed point (same for every camera) is the point at which the senor wells are filled to saturation - more intense light (more photon input) will have no effect on that photo site, will not cause greater electron output. When the voltage value of a saturated sensel (pixel) is digitized it will always be 255 in 8 bit language or 16,383 in 14 bit. The actual number of photons required to fill the well may differ, but the constant will be that there is always a saturation point and it is always represented by 16,383. Let that many or more sky photons reach the sensor (exposure) and the sky will be white, period. That is the top of the DR.

The variable in figuring DR is the bottom. Noise caused by environmental factors (mostly by the camera itself) is always present. but as long as the image data signal coming from the sensor is strong the noise is only an insignificant component. As the light intensity falls the signal weakens and the read noise becomes more bothersome. The point where the noise becomes intolerable is the bottom of the DR. Obviously this is a function of both the strength of the image signal (big pixels gather more photons, output a stronger signal) and the amount of noise there is (the success of the camera's design in suppressing noise).

A bigger DR won't change the exposure that you need to use to keep the sky blue, be it will indicate how deep into the shadows you can capture a good image when you can't increase exposure because that will blow the sky.

It is a problem that definitions of how much noise is "intolerable" tend to differ. Engineers like a neat formula, S/N = 1 or S/N = 10, but photographers tend to say, "It's when the image makes me say yich." I like the definitions used on this site: Photons To Photons http://www.photonstoph​otos.net …ark%20IV,Canon%​20EOS%206D

Amazing post.
Why don't we go above 14 bits, then?

Also, when it comes to editing - say I expose 0.9 low to retain more highlights. Do I then increase exposure by 0.9 in lightroom? That would turn it back into pure white? So, I also do minus highlights?

One of the main limiting factors for camera systems being 14 bit is the analog to digital converter (ADC) is 14 bit. There aren't that many sensors that go to 16 stops of light to warrant a 16bit system. A cinema camera: RED, actually has a sensor that gets close to 16 stops and has an ADC that's 16bits (and is the highest scorer at DxO).

As for processing in Lightroom: everyone has their own preference. Usually I try to expose to have all my values go throughout the histogram. If there's clipping at the 0 mark, I'll raise the black slider. If there is at the farthest right, I'll lower the white slider. Raising shadows will distribute contrast in the shadows and bring out more detail. Lowering highlights will get more detail in areas that might be slightly blown. Raising shadows and not seeing noise is the main difference I see with 5D4 vs 5D3.

icor1031 wrote in post #18767014
Outdoors (I mentioned blue sky) @ 100.
Might? So, not likely / not much / not significant?

You seem to be asking about headroom; not DR per se. DR does not specify how much of it is headroom and how much is footroom (IQ-limiting shadow noise). I wonder if your issue isn't metering, rather than DR.

The 5D4 does have 1.48 stops more DR (a la DxO) than the 6D at base ISO. By default, 0.33 stops of that is headroom, automatically, and 1.15 stops of that is "footroom".

So, you could enable HTP on the 5D4 and shoot at ISO 200 with a stop more headroom (and a stop less footroom), but you may be able to get way with that with the 6D, too. I have the 6D, and I do not find the noise in the shadows of ISO 200 with HTP to be all that bad, as long as no pushing of the shadows is needed. The 6D has little in the way of the annoying banding noise that other cameras often have (5D2, 5D3, R, 6D2).

I don't remember the details, but if you use HTP, you may have to play with the picture styles to make sure that the extra highlights maintained in the RAW data make it into the OOC JPEG, if that is important to you.

icor1031 wrote in post #18767236
Amazing post.
Why don't we go above 14 bits, then?

Also, when it comes to editing - say I expose 0.9 low to retain more highlights. Do I then increase exposure by 0.9 in lightroom? That would turn it back into pure white? So, I also do minus highlights?

The bits aren't the base-ISO DR problem with the majority of cameras. The problem is the analog "hiss" (random noise) and "hum" (banding noise) in the circuits that bring the readout signals from the readout amplifiers to the ADC. The 5D4 and 1DxII have 14 bits at ISO 100, but neither benefit from having 14 instead of 13. The only benefit of 14 is that when the firmware scales the RAW data, it has more precision to work with. At very high ISOs, 14 bits is actually absurd, and many cameras would suffer nothing from using only 4 or 5 bits at their highest ISOs.

icor1031 wrote in post #18766980
Practically, does the extra 2 stops or so of dynamic range with the 5D Mk 4 make much difference? Am I likely to get blue skies instead of white, for example?

I mostly shoot portraits.

As a fellow portrait shooter, DR is near the bottom of the list for us as far as importance goes. You want to look at the color depth which is far more important. However, DXO charts mean pretty much nothing when it comes to real world usage. All those little things some people obsess over in those tests in a lab have zero relevance in the real world because photos dont exist in a vacuum the way those tests are conducted. Many other variables come into play in the real world outside of a lab. You also want fast lenses, especially if you are shooting in lower light obviously. The 6D was my main camera the last 4 years before switching to Sony over the summer. I never once sat there wishing I had more DR, ever. Its a workhorse camera and its cheap.