Upload & Sell: Off
So what is the conclusion for shooting the 1D x at ISO100, is it better or worse than the 5D II? I am confused how the camera can excel at ISO 25600 but be poor at 100?
Better than the 5D2 (and 5D3) at ISO100. It may not measure much any better for DR on DxO, when they get around to it, but there are thing that their test doesn't get into, such as banding and character of the noise, the 1DX has much less ugly deep shadow noise at low ISO, so similar random noise plus much less pattern noise = better than 5D2 and 5D3 at ISO100.
It's not poor at ISO100 other than the shadows so you can't get as much DR as the Nikons.
If your scene doesn't need a lot of DR it should perform very well at ISO100, incredibly little noise for all the upper low, mid and bright tones, 18MP is decent enough (although 36MP obv whomps it for reach and total detail), we don't know the color filters yet and how color-blind or not vs other cams it is (5D3 is pretty color-blind).
It's INCREDIBLY beyond belief at capturing photons so it nabs whatever little there is when light is so low that you need to set high gains and readout noise on the stage that matters for high iso is likely solid enough so it does AMAZINGLY well at high iso, say your ISO 25,600.
But a stage of read noise that only shows up at lower ISOs, high iso lifts the signal beyond where this noise will do damage, is still not so hot (although they did reduce banding a fair amount compared to most of their releases of the last 3 years) so it is noisy near black at lower ISOs compared to the best cameras and you get a few stops worse dynamic range (although the SNR at say middle gray will still be exceptionally, record-breaking clean).
Edited on Jul 01, 2012 at 05:49 AM · View previous versions