p.5 #1 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
+1
This is a fine forum, and I (mostly) enjoy participating, but it is true that the stuff that people become so impassioned about here (brand versus brand, lens versus lens, model versus model, how much noise can fit on the head of a pin...) is rarely a topic of discussion among people as they make photographs. (Occasionally such topics are the subject of eye-rolls or a bit of derision, but that's about it.)
I'm not a technophobe, nor do I hold that one shouldn't care about technique and various technical matters. My feeling is similar to how I feel about music. You can discuss pianos all you want, and you can even count who makes the most/fewest wrong notes... but none of that is really the point of producing music nor, in the end, all that relevant to the result aside from really gross differences.
It is fine, important even, to understand certain technical matters about photography. But it is not the point of photography.
Dan
Access wrote:
Yeah this. I'm in local photography clubs that can gather 50+ people at a meet and 90% of what's on our mind is where/what/when/how to photograph next, or just usual chit-chat. If anyone even mentions reviews, brands, or what-not, it's often in a jesting manner, joking around or making light of it all before quickly moving on. About the most technical we get is talking about lenses or postprocessing technique. Most photographers I know chose brand based on what they liked at the time, what their friends were using, how it feels 'in your hand', and so on.
To me, this is one of the better forum sites out there, but still seems distanced from the real world in the seriousness with which people discuss gear or their pet statistic....Show more →
p.5 #2 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
Wow! I used the other 3 pictures to play around and spread the midrange tonality (or whatever it is called from 0.10 to 10. Result: the most ugly pics I ever saw. But no banding neither any color noise. Based on the horrible jpegs!
Depending on those millions of guys for whome top DR seems to be the most impotant thing in a cameras sensor, I am pretty sure 6D will become the biggest sales success since digital SLRs came out! And they did not tell us one word! This must be some marketing trick.
I already can hear gear fanatics talking in the streets: "It has GPS. And WIFI! And it made Sonys EXMOR really the "ex more" sensor now!"
p.5 #4 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
chez wrote:
And for someone who doesn't care about it...you seem to spend just as much time and energy fighting it.
Only when I'm work avoiding :P
Seriously though, I've said it many times... I have maybe 10 photos a year out of 30 weddings (0.1%) which would benefit from significantly increased DR and those are at best of minor benefit since I can add some local NR and it looks fine. When it comes, it comes. It's irrelevant to my business and my work on the whole. In occasional beauty / fashion work I would have liked more DR, but again it was occasional. It would matter more if I was a landscape / architecture photographer I suspect as I'd not need to use HDR.
What I do get slightly "frustrated" at is that people are unnecessarily down on the 5d3 *just because it's not the camera for them* and then seem to do everything they can to bash it presumably in the hope that Canon read the forums and take note of what they want.
Canon know! They're aware of this! The 5d3 is NOT going to change overnight no matter how many times this issue is brought up! Give it a rest lol!
I do also wonder how many of the people who are knocking the 5d3 have actually used it in anger. I have and it's amazing and worth every single penny I paid for it. However, that's for my use.
You guys will get your camera eventually, but it won't be the 5d3.
p.5 #5 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
mmurph wrote:
You guys do realize that Canon has a sensor on the C100 at $6,500 that has a base ISO of 850, and a true 12 stops DR all of eth way up to 20,000?
Because it is limited by it's 8 bit output, it uses 54 dB, although the sensor itself has 73 dB.
Canon does have new sensors that are amazing at high ISO, and that have improved DR. Obviously they use them first in the C300/C500/C100, cameras from $15K up.
The Sony EXMOR sensors have 14 stops of dynamic range at base ISO 100.
p.5 #6 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
gdanmitchell wrote:
+1
I'm not a technophobe, nor do I hold that one shouldn't care about technique and various technical matters.
It is fine, important even, to understand certain technical matters about photography. But it is not the point of photography.
Dan
Indeed. The best photographers are both technical and creative.
I listen and learn about the technical side because I can make my photography better by understanding more than the next guy, but that's not the only way to improve.
p.5 #7 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
This constant whinge about the fact we don't need to worry about the tried and tested techniques because the camera will get me out of trouble make me nauseous, it's an excuse for poor workmanship (not you, the guy who pasted the examples)
Woah!
I really want to respond, but somehow I'm finding it hard to take you seriously!
I am not defending Canon but believe me, the rendition from a Canon camera is not that bad
Oh, it's not un-doable, it's simply that it's not quite as good as other sensors. You can push shadows further with other cameras. You hit this wall, bit earlier, where color noise starts appearing, and it's hard to clean.
@PhilDrinkWater: I agree that 95% (or even more) people don't care about dynamic range. 95% of the people out there don't own GND's however. There are many people who work very hard with a variety of techniques to control wide dynamic range scenarios and try to get tonality control. We had a discussion about this in the landscape forum, and there I mentioned that given a range of tools to choose from, many of us would prefer the following:
1. Expose for highlights and push shadows, if not, then
2. Expose multiple images and blend, if not, then
3. Use GND's, if not, then
4. Use HDR
So having more dynamic range simply makes #1 more viable in more situations.
Then again, while I think DR is important, I think that it isn't everything. I wouldn't own a Canon camera if I thought they were severely hobbled in some way. I just think that there's a lot of hyperbolic statements about who has better lenses, AF, ergonomics, etc., some true, and some untrue. My personal experience is that for most of these statements, the difference is miniscule. The difference in dynamic range however, is not quite so miniscule, which Fred Miranda himself has confirmed... and I think most people recognize this, but not all people can calmly and rationally accept it (apparently!).
p.5 #8 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
I totally agree. If I was a landscape photographer it would be my number one choice too.
I've never said better dr was a waste. I've never said it wasn't useful. What I am saying is that the 5d3 will never be that camera and I strongly believe wide dr is not the main reason the d800 is selling well (presuming it is - I don't follow such things).
p.5 #9 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
krickett wrote:
Oh, it's not un-doable, it's simply that it's not quite as good as other sensors. You can push shadows further with other cameras. You hit this wall, bit earlier, where color noise starts appearing, and it's hard to clean.
But this is what you stated earlier and you posted two images of the wedding couple. Well, the same image actually but one showing shadow recovery. Both your statement and the images are the reasons for me to post my comparison:
krickett wrote:
I would never do this with my Canon camera. Instead, I resign myself to either blowing highlights or leaving shadows as shadows.
p.5 #10 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
AGeoJO wrote:
But this is what you stated earlier and you posted two images of the couple. Well, the same image but one showing shadow recovery. Both your statement and the images are the reasons for me to post my comparison:
No further comment.......
Clarification: I wouldn't push it that far with a Canon Raw. I moved those sliders quite a bit, obviously xD If I were faced with a high dynamic range situation, I'd leave shadows as shadows, or purposefully blow highlights I didn't care about. I think a previous poster described similar limitations.
EDIT: Or proceed down the priority ladder I mentioned, i.e. multi-shot blend, or GND's, etc.
p.5 #11 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
pompo wrote:
I have to agree with you, I think most people that knows how to properly expose, advanced amateurs and pros, don't care too much about shadow recovery, I'm sure they wouldn't mind the extra DR, yet do not lose sleep over it. On the other hand, low end user can benefit a lot from it in post.
How many times does it have to be said that it's not about exposing properly (although it certainly doesn't hurt if you can rescue a shot that got messed up)
p.5 #12 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
dhphoto wrote:
So you'd already be using a fill flash in this situation then (white dress on bright contrasty day), not relying on the camera to get you out of trouble?
That's what I'd have done and I'm a professional too
This constant whinge about the fact we don't need to worry about the tried and tested techniques because the camera will get me out of trouble make me nauseous, it's an excuse for poor workmanship (not you, the guy who pasted the examples)
p.5 #14 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
n0b0 wrote:
Reading some of the posts here, I get the impression that there haven't been any truly great Landscape photos for the last half decade. How do Landscape shooters survive all these years with only filters and HDR technique?
Speaking of HDR... I find it amusing how some people value the ability to push shadow so highly and yet HDR shooting and tone mapping technique doesn't get much love at all simply because of the cliched over saturated output.
They take the shots they can take well (which is an almost infinite number) and skip the ones they can't take well (a tremendous number). Thus can there can hundreds of thousands of amazing landscape shots taken and yet people can still frequently wish they had more DR.
p.5 #15 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
Yeah, quite a few people are constantly pushing the limits of their gear. I for one are at the limit quite a few times and have been for many years. Ultimately I try to realize my vision for the scene and weather situation im faced with. I use filters, multiple exposures, processing techniques, you name it.
Today's DSLRs really surpass 35mm film in all aspects and approach medium format film and even surpasses it in some. I know quite a few here never really shot film seriously for years but others have and I know you might think we might be spoiled nowadays but the bottom line is that the images one can produce and the images one sees being produced are amazing. Specially at the bookends of light, dusk and dawn but specially at night. Such clean, colorful and detailed images that really make you say wow. Most were really very tough to make only a decade ago.
Ok, back on topic.
The 6D might just be a very good landscape camera. Cant wait for the RAW files to show up. (and the updates to the software to be able to process them!)
p.5 #16 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
dhphoto wrote:
If you can't see the irony in your comment I really can't help you
Accurate exposure *IS* the essence of photography
But what does that mean? There is never one single proper exposure as the scene is open to interpretation. The system and tools also dictate what a 'proper' exposure would be. I sure as hell am going to expose a scene with a large subject brightness range differently with film than with digital. And that is quite the point of the pushing shadows argument. Digital blows highlights hideously and quite easily. This necessitates 'under-exposure' or multiple exposures. I would argue that to not blow highlights the proper exposure is the one that retains detail in them and allows the user to push the shadows in post.
p.5 #17 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
chez wrote:
Why do people get pumped up so much about the AF on the 5D3. I get the impression that there haven't been any greate in focus photos taken with the 5D2.
n0b0...it is called progress. Sure I can take multiple images and play around on my computer for hours, or I can take one image with an expanded dynamic range and be done. Which would you rather have?
Well, you're right, there haven't been many in focus photos... if people chose the 5D2 to shoot Sports and other action photography.
Your analogy is overgeneralised mate. There are people that don't shoot Sports and couldn't care less about the 5D3 AF. Whereas I'm talking about Landscape shooters who theoretically need the higher DR but somehow manage to shoot beautiful Landscape.
About the HDR thing, of course being able to pull a clean shadow from a single photo is preferable, it's easier after all... But I've seen people totally dismiss HDR as a viable alternative in some situations for no good reason, which I thought is the wrong attitude.
p.5 #18 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
Sneakyracer wrote:
Yeah, quite a few people are constantly pushing the limits of their gear.
Looked at one way, all gear limits us. Looked at another, all gear liberates us. Pick one and get on with it.
Dan
(By the way, I have yet to "skip a shot" on account of my equipment. Instead, I consider how to best use my equipment to make that shot. It virtually always works.)
p.5 #19 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
n0b0 wrote:
Well, you're right, there haven't been many in focus photos... if people chose the 5D2 to shoot Sports and other action photography.
Your analogy is overgeneralised mate. There are people that don't shoot Sports and couldn't care less about the 5D3 AF. Whereas I'm talking about Landscape shooters who theoretically need the higher DR but somehow manage to shoot beautiful Landscape.
About the HDR thing, of course being able to pull a clean shadow from a single photo is preferable, it's easier after all... But I've seen people totally dismiss HDR as a viable alternative in some situations for no good reason, which I thought is the wrong attitude....Show more →
I use HDR, I use layers blending and I use GND filters to get my photos...but I'd rather just take that one image and have that sensor be able to keep from blowing highlights and in the same image, be able to have details in the shadows or dark areas. Like most people, time is limited and the more time I need to sit in post processing, the less time I have for other joys of life. Sure, I can make beautiful landscape photos with my current gear, but like anyone else, I am always looking for ways to make it easier and better.
p.5 #20 · I think Canon solved the shadow recovery issue in their sensors with the 6D sensor!
I looked at a recent typical image i shot, sunrise seascape, and decided I would need about 5 stops more dynamic range than I had at the time to get it right without filters and pushing.
I.e. i used a 3stop hard grad for the sky, exposed the water/sky properly and pushed the rocks 2+ stops.
So without the filter I would have been pushing them 5 stops.
Still think there was a little blown hilites also.
