In what universe does the 5D III low light performance trail the D800/D600 so badly. I understand and accept the DR inferiority, but 2293 vs 2980 (D600) for low light ISO, which is saying the D600 (D800) all can go to a much higher ISO to maintain a SNR of 30dB. Seems rather like a load of BS.
chez wrote:
I find it interesting that just a few years ago we use to gloat about our 5d2 sensor with its great image quality and large number of pixels compared to Nikon's measily sensor in their d700. Now that the tables are turned, the sensor really doesn't matter and it's only about glass. What are we going to say when Nikon catches up with their glass?
The fanboys will continue to deny, trying to make everyone who is not in line with Canon silent. In this forum is no objectivity unfortunately - the only thing we can do is to ignore the fanboys.
Personally, I call a spade a spade and really admire and drawl over their latest sensors, wishing they were available for Canon cameras. I have too much money into Canon to even look at switching, but I do give credit where credit is due and the latest sensors from Nikon are due their credit.
Correct.
Saying I don't need the extra dynamic range is like taking your ball and going home. I am sure if this dynamic range were available in a Canon camera, different tunes would be sung.
Well don't worry once Canon comes up with what some genius called 5D III replacement a behemoth 49MPs all bandings will be gone... DR skyrocket off the DxO chart .
retrofocus wrote:
The fanboys will continue to deny, trying to make everyone who is not in line with Canon silent. In this forum is no objectivity unfortunately - the only thing we can do is to ignore the fanboys.
Correct.
This is for sure.
What is wrong with being content with your current equipment? If you don't plan to change systems, what is the point of whining about what some other company has available? The fact that a sony sensor has a better DR has no impact on my life. If Canon makes a new camera with higher DR and other features/price that appeals to me, I'll likely get it and be happy with the change.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
In what universe does the 5D III low light performance trail the D800/D600 so badly. I understand and accept the DR inferiority, but 2293 vs 2980 (D600) for low light ISO, which is saying the D600 (D800) all can go to a much higher ISO to maintain a SNR of 30dB. Seems rather like a load of BS.
Curious to know if anyone has ever lost money due to the low DR and generally 'poor' sensors in Canon cameras? Obviously this is specific to pro photogs (I'm not one of those, hence the question). Would a client choose a different photographer because they are using a D800 vs a 5DIII? Would you make a pitch to a potential client saying that you use Nikon and show them the DXO scores to prove superiority? Would a client look at an image and say 'wow that shadow looks terrible, they should have used a D800 and then I would've bought the photo'?
I can see for the amateurs it opens up doors to do less PP or complex filters/blending if you have higher DR. That is the only area I could see making a difference to a pro, a little less time in PP or setting up each shot.
chez wrote:
I find it interesting that just a few years ago we use to gloat about our 5d2 sensor with its great image quality and large number of pixels compared to Nikon's measily sensor in their d700. Now that the tables are turned, the sensor really doesn't matter and it's only about glass. What are we going to say when Nikon catches up with their glass?
Personally, I call a spade a spade and really admire and drawl over their latest sensors, wishing they were available for Canon cameras. I have too much money into Canon to even look at switching, but I do give credit where credit is due and the latest sensors from Nikon are due their credit.
Saying I don't need the extra dynamic range is like taking your ball and going home. I am sure if this dynamic range were available in a Canon camera, different tunes would be sung. ...Show more →
You nailed it Chez. The 5D2 era was all about the glorious sensor...fast forward, Nikon leapfrogs Canon and all of the sudden the sensor doesn't matter anymore?? So classic!
Can someone explain to me what DXO means by "Colour Depth"? I saw the D600 received 25.1 bits. Is that per channel or per pixel? And as far as I know, there's no such thing as 0.1 bit.
retrofocus wrote:
The fanboys will continue to deny, trying to make everyone who is not in line with Canon silent. In this forum is no objectivity unfortunately - the only thing we can do is to ignore the fanboys.
Correct.
This is for sure.
The day when I see that all photos from Nikon Shooters are much better then the craps coming from Canon Shooters, I'll switch to Nikon.
jctriguy wrote:
Curious to know if anyone has ever lost money due to the low DR and generally 'poor' sensors in Canon cameras? Obviously this is specific to pro photogs (I'm not one of those, hence the question). Would a client choose a different photographer because they are using a D800 vs a 5DIII? Would you make a pitch to a potential client saying that you use Nikon and show them the DXO scores to prove superiority? Would a client look at an image and say 'wow that shadow looks terrible, they should have used a D800 and then I would've bought the photo'?
I can see for the amateurs it opens up doors to do less PP or complex filters/blending if you have higher DR. That is the only area I could see making a difference to a pro, a little less time in PP or setting up each shot....Show more →
If you are asking about DR you probably just haven't discovered how it can improve your photography yet. This argument is very similar to all the 5DII users who used to defend it's crippled AF system and ask why do you need/want more? Well, many of them now know....
With all modern cameras being so close in performance AF/fps/etc, the sensor technology where we look for improvements and Canon has not come very far in recent years and they are getting obliterated by Sony/Nikon. So let's hope they have some new technology up their sleeve to remain competitive. No one is whining, they are just calling a spade a spade as Chez mentioned.
artsupreme wrote:
If you are asking about DR you probably just haven't discovered how it can improve your photography yet. This argument is very similar to all the 5DII users who used to defend it's crippled AF system and ask why do you need/want more? Well, many of them now know....
With all modern cameras being so close in performance AF/fps/etc, the sensor technology where we look for improvements and Canon has not come very far in recent years and they are getting obliterated by Sony/Nikon. So let's hope they have some new technology up their sleeve to remain competitive. No one is whining, they are just calling a spade a spade as Chez mentioned. ...Show more →
You missed my point. Do pro photographers (people making a living as photographers) lost money due to using 'inferior' Canon sensor cameras? Would they make more money if they used Nikon cameras?
I'm not disputing that higher DR would be nice. I would happily take it in my current camera. But is a lower DR range sensor costing people money due to lost jobs or sales?
n0b0 wrote:
Can someone explain to me what DXO means by "Colour Depth"? I saw the D600 received 25.1 bits. Is that per channel or per pixel? And as far as I know, there's no such thing as 0.1 bit.
If I would work in DXO I would remove any other brands out of tests forever, why bother if they are not paying for tests? Who cares about DXO tests and how many people really like their clumsy software first place? I tried it one time and uninstall 10 min after, clumsiest program I ever use. Second place after google's Picasa
jctriguy wrote:
Curious to know if anyone has ever lost money due to the low DR and generally 'poor' sensors in Canon cameras? Obviously this is specific to pro photogs (I'm not one of those, hence the question). Would a client choose a different photographer because they are using a D800 vs a 5DIII? Would you make a pitch to a potential client saying that you use Nikon and show them the DXO scores to prove superiority? Would a client look at an image and say 'wow that shadow looks terrible, they should have used a D800 and then I would've bought the photo'?
I can see for the amateurs it opens up doors to do less PP or complex filters/blending if you have higher DR. That is the only area I could see making a difference to a pro, a little less time in PP or setting up each shot....Show more →
A little less time in PP equates to either more money or more free time. Sometimes it might even equate to getting a shot that might not have been previously possible...which again equates to more money. Having more flexible tools will always make your job easier, which is always a good thing.
I don't think amateurs are in a position to guess what pros like or dislike, what they do or don't. (Hypocrisy warning ): Having said that I feel that they would definitely prefer to shorten their workflow. A high dynamic range picture with a lower dynamic range sensor would require exposing for the highlights, midrange and shadows using 5-7 exposures and then blending them together in PP. We all know or ought to know how much time blending 5-7 images can take. Now compare that to a high DR sensor that would reduce the number of exposures from 5-7 to 2-3 and see how much time you save. Time I believe should be money for a pro, don't you think?
I had to put up with four years of being told how awesome Canon 5d II was because all you needed for awesome photography was an awesome sensor and one AF point right in the center of the frame. Fast forward four years and now it's all about how great 5dIII's AF is and who cares about better IQ. Having used 7d, 1dsII, etc I have no doubt that 5dIII's AF kicks a$$ and it better with a price tag of $3500 but D800 doesn't suck in the AF department. All Nikon sports shooters are using D4 and incidentally D800 and D4 have the same AF. Also, Nikon users don't use pinhole cameras they also have lenses on their side and some are better than Canon's.
jctriguy wrote:
You missed my point. Do pro photographers (people making a living as photographers) lost money due to using 'inferior' Canon sensor cameras? Would they make more money if they used Nikon cameras?
I'm not disputing that higher DR would be nice. I would happily take it in my current camera. But is a lower DR range sensor costing people money due to lost jobs or sales?
n0b0 wrote:
Doesn't explain how they can get a fraction of a bit. Thanks for the link though.
They're measuring noise as a quantity and presenting that value in the number of bits needed to represent the value. So if they say the noise is 25.0 bits, it's a proxy for a value represented by 2^25 (33,554,432). If they say 25.1 bits, it's 2^25.1 (35,962,749.77)
People should realize that in a tech race like this, you will get leapfrogging all the time. So a few years ago, Canon was winning the sensor race. Now Sony are. But in a few years, Canon may well be again. That's just the way these races work.
I should also point out that comparing a d600 sensor to a 5d3's is comparing a brand new one to a year old one.
And you might find that the race is till feeling the effects of the earthquake disruption. There's quite a long lead time between R&D and shop shelves, and it's only 2 years since that quake.
beautox wrote:
People should realize that in a tech race like this, you will get leapfrogging all the time. So a few years ago, Canon was winning the sensor race. Now Sony are. But in a few years, Canon may well be again. That's just the way these races work.
I should also point out that comparing a d600 sensor to a 5d3's is comparing a brand new one to a year old one.
And you might find that the race is till feeling the effects of the earthquake disruption. There's quite a long lead time between R&D and shop shelves, and it's only 2 years since that quake....Show more →
It's not only a tech race that is disturbing, it's also the philosophy between Canon and Nikon. Canon seems to continue arbitrarily remove features or major abilities between cameras whereas Nikon seems more content to have more professional features in the prosumer cameras. That part for me is more concerning than some technical feature.
a behemoth 49MPs all bandings will be gone... DR skyrocket off the DxO chart 
Who cares about DXO tests and how many people really like their clumsy software first place? I tried it one time and uninstall 10 min after, clumsiest program I ever use. Second place after google's Picasa