Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              16       17       end
  

Archive 2013 · Dynamic Range
  
 
saneproduction
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Dynamic Range


We always hear about the d800 sensor is amazing for shadow recovery, but can anyone post some images that show the real world use and why the 5dIII is not good enough? Here is a random high contrast shot that I adjusted the raw on (note that I am on my surface pro and have not calibrated the display yet). How much more range do I really need? Would it really improve things?






  Canon EOS 5D Mark III    EF24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens    24mm    f/5.6    1/3200s    160 ISO    0.0 EV  







un-corrected

  Canon EOS 5D Mark III    EF24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens    24mm    f/5.6    1/3200s    160 ISO    0.0 EV  




Feb 20, 2013 at 07:10 AM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Dynamic Range


Not me.

Edited on Mar 04, 2013 at 07:31 AM · View previous versions



Feb 20, 2013 at 07:35 AM
saneproduction
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Dynamic Range


For me I don't see a need really. For what I shoot, the 5DIII is fine. I am not disputing what others need or do not. Of course I would like more in the next release, but I am not changing systems to get it.

Edited on Feb 20, 2013 at 04:23 PM · View previous versions



Feb 20, 2013 at 07:46 AM
PhilDrinkwater
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Dynamic Range


I do this all the time. I suspect you would have needed some NR in the shadows. That will lose sharpness. So if you needed to do large prints from that and sell them, then yes I think you'd need more dr.

However personally that's not me. I just know some other people are in that situation. And some other people need it too. And some just lust after it because its something Nikon people can do that they can't...



Feb 20, 2013 at 07:57 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Dynamic Range


Didn't Fred do this in his comparison of the 5D3 and D800 last year?




Feb 20, 2013 at 08:17 AM
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Dynamic Range


Well with MY D800 I can make out solar flares - so yes, you do need more dynamic range and a better camera like the D800. The D800 can make out sunspots. The D800 is a Nikon. Nikon makes the D800. You definitely want solar flares visible in all your prints. I photographed a ladybug and I could still make out the solar flares because the D800 is a Nikon and Nikon makes the best sensors. Better than Canon, better than Sony, better than Tokina.


Feb 20, 2013 at 08:29 AM
justruss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Dynamic Range


More DR wouldn't hurt, would it?

I mean, nobody is saying you need to go out and sell all your Canon gear-- so you can reinvest in Nikon.

But it'd sure be nice to have the ability to bring up more sky without losing more area growing to totally blown around the sun. In this particularly case it may not be necessary. But that doesn't mean it's never helpful to have.

I definitely run into scenes I'd like to shoot one way but have to shoot another because of DR limitations. I'm not sure the D800 is enough-- and I surely don't think it's worth upgrading. But better DR is one thing I almost always look forward to with each upgrade.

Hasn't digital photography been around long enough to learn that this type of thread always ends up looking silly 5 to 10 years down the road: "XY is more than enough Z-- why would anyone need more?" Fill in the blank with: resolution, FPS, DR, AF points, EV sensitivity....



Feb 20, 2013 at 08:45 AM
Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Dynamic Range


Others may need whatever they need. I do not. Do I wish more? No. What for? I wish usable ISO 12.800 to 25K and no banding.


Feb 20, 2013 at 09:03 AM
Access
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Dynamic Range


Until the camera has the same dynamic range of the human eye, there will always be times I wish I had more.

If I can see it, I should be able to shoot it, that is really all I ask of a camera.



Feb 20, 2013 at 09:21 AM
WebDog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Dynamic Range


Of course it would improve things! If one is to choose from a camera with 11 or 13 steps of dynamic range, and not having to let other things go, I am confident that all would choose 13 steps.

When you do have less noise in the shadows, the colour information preserved better. I.e. lifting the shadows till give better colours and less noise.

The problem is that what is acceptable or even good for some are not accepted quality by others. So the debate goes on, do I need this or not For some the dynamic range is THE most important thing, and they move over to Nikon, others need other features, and keep their current system.

So do you "need" a Mac or Windoze? Android or Apple phone?? Merc or Yugo... life is full of compromizes



Feb 20, 2013 at 09:50 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



dhphoto
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Dynamic Range


I have said before, to me, who comes from transparency film, we have enough DR already.

I have asked before and nobody could point me to a photograph that simply *had* to have been taken on a Nikon or a camera with supposed extra DR. IMO the differences between the IQ of a Canon and Nikon are more technical than real.

Certainly there may be occasions where it is convenient to rely on pushing the shadows instead of using a fill light of some kind, but with skillful use (and of course RAW) what we have already does the job brilliantly well.

I would also comment that those who crave this nirvana of dynamic range might just find their shots all look like HDR images. It is contrast that defines an images' tones, the more you have the flatter it will be.



Feb 20, 2013 at 09:52 AM
WebDog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Dynamic Range


I guess one could use the extra stops of DR to make the pic look more film-like, not clipping hard, under expose and use a gentle s-curve to restore... Still this is lke the the pixel wars of past years. No-one could have any use of 16 Mpixels... 8 was more than enough. Today, we get 36 Mpixels and they are quite handy when needed. Throw them away if you do not need them all. I guess in a few years we will have the same situation, you get the 14-15 stops of DR and it is up to the photographer to use it if he/she wants to.


Feb 20, 2013 at 10:03 AM
MayaTlab
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Dynamic Range


With this picture, increased DR could have helped you gather even more information in the area where the sun is while minimising noise in the shadows. But since it's a somewhat static scene, HDR could have done the trick as well.


Feb 20, 2013 at 10:22 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Dynamic Range


I shoot landscapes and always deal with dynamic range using tools like GND filters and multiple exposure merging...so yes...give me a camera with more DR so I don't need to resort to these other techniques.

Shooting in controlled lighting or lighting that is not harsh...obviously you don't need it. But there are many situations where the extra DR is very handy and even when shooting under controlled lighting, the extra DR will allow more latitude with exposure, possibly saving a blown shot.




Feb 20, 2013 at 01:55 PM
goosemang
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Dynamic Range


there are, um, three sides to the coin here. which means it's not a coin at all, but whatever.

first, there are the internet trollers who just spit out shit about canon's sensors ad nauseum simply because that's what they do. these folks are usually identified by their photographs of things like brick walls and other things you'd never actually bother printing out and hanging on your wall.

second, there are the actual photographers who need the ability to push shadows like this. this is not 100% of photographers, but certain folks like chez who just posted would definitely take advantage of better DR because they have a real, identifiable application of the technology. folks who are using tripods and iso 100 and would get the most out of the sensor, you know?

third, there are the people who have a low-level anxiety about whether or not this "lack of dynamic range" is actually hindering their photography. i suspect this is the majority of photographers, myself included. do i see instances where i would benefit from being able to push shadows a bit more with clean results? absolutely. would i take the extra DR? absolutely. is it a chronic issue? no.

oh, i guess there are four groups. the fourth group is photographers who are just out there working and couldn't care less.

i think there is also something else that needs to be considered here: let's not forsake the way that light and dark can have an effect on emotion, on positive and negative space, on composition, on balance, on silhouette, on atmosphere, and so on. you know how everybody makes fun of HDR because it looks like shit 99% of the time? well, all the same people laughing at HDR are here begging for a sensor that allows them to basically make HDR shots in camera. push the shadows 300%, NOTHING CAN CLIP TO BLACK !!!!

i'm not saying hdr is crap, or dr is crap, or it's unnecessary. i'm not saying this at all. i'm just saying that you, as an individual photographer with individual needs, need to decide for yourself if you're getting hung up on some technical "limitation" that has been imposed upon you by The Internet, and in this quest for the dynamic holy grail how many photographic/compositional tools are you leaving on the cutting room floor?



Feb 20, 2013 at 02:37 PM
goosemang
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Dynamic Range


in other words, most of us should work on becoming better photographers before worrying about whether or not our $3,500 camera is "good enough".


Feb 20, 2013 at 02:39 PM
alundeb
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Dynamic Range


saneproduction wrote:
We always hear about the d800 sensor is amazing for shadow recovery, but can anyone post some images that show the real world use and why the 5dIII is not good enough? Here is a random high contrast shot that I adjusted the raw on (note that I am on my surface pro and have not calibrated the display yet). How much more range do I really need? Would it really improve things?



Your example is a good one showing that you have to find a balance between highlight clipping and shadow noise.

What I immediately notice in your recovered image, is the color cast towards red / magenta in the recovered shadows. I would spend some extra time in PP trying to correct that, but it is not easy. This is something that EXMOR sensors don't have a problem with. Also, while the image looks good in web size, and the shadow noise won't ruin a print, an image from an EXMOR sensor will both look cleaner and show more real detail in the shadows. While both cameras can be used with successful shadow recovery, the quality with EXMOR will be better in a way that I like. The fact that the 5D III image isn't "ruined" is good, but the slight improvement in quality with clean detailed shadows is sometimes desirable.



Feb 20, 2013 at 02:49 PM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Dynamic Range


I don't need a lot, but I could seriously benefit from 1 to 2 stops of DR. I get by with PP adjustment of around 1 stop for outdoor subjects, but there are telltale signs of correction and minor problems result in the high and low ends. I don't think there is any dispute that improved DR is a plus. Is it essential? No, I get along pretty well with the higher MP 5D2 and 1Ds3. If given a choice, I would vote to leave DR as it is and unveil a 46MP sensor.


Feb 20, 2013 at 02:50 PM
Bruce Sawle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Dynamic Range


The DR difference is real between the two cams. I can already see the noise and banding on the building on the left. The Nikon would not produce that banding or close to that level of noise if shot at a low ISO. Here is an example I did for fun when my strobe did not fire. This was PRE d800 and was done with a d3x. I think you will get the idea. The d800 was even better. DR aside there are many other things that make a great cam. I really like both the MK III and D800 yet I find myself shooting the Canon more.

Before


1original by Bruce Sawle, on Flickr

After


1edit by Bruce Sawle, on Flickr


Edited on Feb 20, 2013 at 03:30 PM · View previous versions



Feb 20, 2013 at 03:05 PM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Dynamic Range


goosemang wrote:
second, there are the actual photographers who need the ability to push shadows like this.


Want, not need.

Some (not all) of the percieved need for extra DR is pure laziness so users can manipulate a file more in PP rather than light it properly, or like Bruce's example to recover a file that was badly exposed (notice that the overall exposure of the 'corrected' version is much brighter, not just the dark areas, bringing up the exposure in processing would have helped the faces a great deal by itself)


Edited on Feb 20, 2013 at 03:26 PM · View previous versions



Feb 20, 2013 at 03:19 PM
1
       2       3              16       17       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              16       17       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password