it does seem quite hard to overcome, that said D4 doesn't use that tech and still does more than a stop better DR than Canon's best
but I do fear doing better than D4-level may be a lonnnng time off from Canon so I do wonder if maybe I do need to start switching to Nikon, D800 video still seems a mess though and they have no 70-200 f/4 IS or 7-300 IS L answer now and swapping to nikon 300 2.8 now would mean quite an extra outlay of cash, i guess i will wait one more round and see where everything is then, 5D3 has nice speed and awesome AF at least it seems and better video
skibum5 wrote:
it does seem quite hard to overcome, that said D4 doesn't use that tech and still does more than a stop better DR than Canon's best
but I do fear doing better than D4-level may be a lonnnng time off from Canon so I do wonder if maybe I do need to start switching to Nikon, D800 video still seems a mess though and they have no 70-200 f/4 IS or 7-300 IS L answer now and swapping to nikon 300 2.8 now would mean quite an extra outlay of cash, i guess i will wait one more round and see where everything is then, 5D3 has nice speed and awesome AF at least it seems and better video ...Show more →
The banding and dynamic range was never really a big problem for me because I could deal with it, and Canon was at the leading edge at least in megapixel count (and it's not like the DR on a 5DII is terrible). But now with Nikon having a higher resolution sensor and with better DR, it just doesn't feel like Canon is pushing the technological limits as much. They still have better lenses in my opinion (at least the lenses that I use) so switching at this point is not something I want to consider. But if Sony keeps pushing the envelope, and Canon plays things too conservatively...well, I guess we just have to wait and see.
artd wrote:
This is exactly the kind of rationalization I don't understand. You are comparing a solo photographer working to get a single photograph to having the resources of an entire film crew?
So if you have a high contrast scene and you want to retain highlights and not have blocked up shadows, you have the following choices:
1. Set up extra lighting gear to balance the lighting of the scene to fall within your sensor's dynamic range.
2. Use no extra gear, but take additional exposures and use exposure blending in post production.
3. Use no extra gear, no extra exposures, take one shot exposed for the highlights and lift the shadows in post.
Isn't it obvious which option is the simplest and most efficient?
Options 1 and 2 are not even feasible a lot of times. If you are working in a studio, or if you have an entire production crew backing you up, sure, bring in all the lighting gear that you want. If you are shooting a static scene on a tripod, blending exposures works great (I do it a lot). But a lot of times we don't have such luxuries.
So again, it seems we are spending a lot of time constructing rationalizations instead of just accepting the facts. Canon's sensors don't have the same latitude as the competition. If you do option 3, your result will be worse if you are using a 5Dx sensor vs an EXMOR sensor. It doesn't matter how you spin it, that's just the reality. If your shooting and processing style never bumps up against the limitations of the Canon sensor, then that's perfectly fine. But some do. ...Show more →
Can't wait for Canon EXMOR sensor type since i almost stick with option # 3 for posible pseudo HDR work if needed.
mttran wrote:
You have jamed most banding & shadow noise reports since the day 5d2 was born. What kind of photographic improvement you are talking about here...from you or Canon Neither of you done any good in term of 2003 IQ
I think Canon has done a little bit of work but I think once the 1DX is in a bunch of people's hands we will see that Canon held back on the 5D3 sensor.
Neither of you done any good in term of 2003 IQ 