Upload & Sell: On
| p.4 #6 · Dynamic Range vs. Tonal Range |
Nope, you didn't drag it off topic ... you took it where I was trying to discern the diff's eventually anyway. Excellent stuff guys. +1 @ "specialty uses" vs. routine stuff, etc.
This is actually a part of my reason for the OP to begin with. In routine images, it isn't much of an issue even shooting on my antiquated sensors. The world would have you believe you "must have" the latest & greatest. Not to say there aren't gains to be realized, but I just would like to better know how/where those gains will actually benefit vs. be inconsequential in practical application.
Thanks to this thread, I can now see where my most likely gains would be in "read noise" by upgrading to more efficient technologies, but shot noise isn't going to be a significant gain with regard to pixel size @ well exposed/base ISO.
I've yet to go down the BF road (on my list to do), but I'd been wondering at the real world impact it'll have. I've been trying to shoot with my SLR/C (ISO 6 capable) at extended times with "long time exposure NR" and just haven't gotten the kind of results I'd like to achieve yet. Part of me thinks I should pack my camera in dry ice first.
I figure I'm the weak link in things, at least trying to discern where those limits of gear vs. operator exist a bit. Again, very helpful stuff. If you've got any specific insight into the SLR/C @ sub-base ISO usage, I'd love to hear about that as well. Chasing K25 in digital form , but just not getting there yet. I thought the broader discussion @ DR vs. TR, SNR,CS would be more helpful to others as well, but as long as we've gone into specialty ... I'm still listening.