This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
p.12 #1So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Id like more DR. Id like more mexapixels as well. But this is just 11 pages of complaining, even when workarounds are found.
Jun 04, 2013 at 04:56 PM
p.12 #2So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
If private corporations shares technology for free, then you may have a sony sensor in a Canon body. But that is not the case, so one needs to learn to live with the fact, that each camera system has advantages and disadvantages over the other.
In regards to +2 stop shadow noise, it is not a big deal for me. I just push back the blacks in LR till it looks fine. The "dark grey can remain at +2 stops. Or brush some noise reduction and reduce saturatation over the shadows. Not too big a deal. Same with CA. Not a big deal anymore.
In regards to +2 stop shadow noise, it is not a big deal for me. I just push back the blacks in LR till it looks fine. The "dark grey can remain at +2 stops. Or brush some noise reduction and reduce saturatation over the shadows. Not too big a deal. Same with CA. Not a big deal anymore.
Jun 04, 2013 at 05:17 PM
p.12 #3So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
skibum5 wrote:
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it up
Canon doesn't give a rat's *** what is said on this forum.
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it up
Canon doesn't give a rat's *** what is said on this forum.
Jun 04, 2013 at 05:25 PM
p.12 #4So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Out of curiosity I googled the number of times the term "dynamic range" occurs on Canon's sites and came up with 2,900 hits:
"Dynamic Range" search on canon sites
"Dynamic Range" search on canon sites
Jun 04, 2013 at 05:33 PM
p.12 #5So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
D. Diggler wrote:
Canon doesn't give a rat's *** what is said on this forum.
Neither does form…
skibum5 wrote
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it upNeither does form…
Jun 04, 2013 at 05:35 PM
p.12 #6So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
snapsy wrote:
Out of curiosity I googled the number of times the term "dynamic range" occurs on Canon's sites and came up with 2,900 hits:
"Dynamic Range" search on canon sites
So
? Histogram and exposure show up 2-3x as often. Maybe Canon thinks the way to take pictures is with a solid understanding of your histogram and exposure settings.
Out of curiosity I googled the number of times the term "dynamic range" occurs on Canon's sites and came up with 2,900 hits:
"Dynamic Range" search on canon sites
So
? Histogram and exposure show up 2-3x as often. Maybe Canon thinks the way to take pictures is with a solid understanding of your histogram and exposure settings.Jun 04, 2013 at 05:48 PM
p.12 #7So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
I'd hate to be the Canon executive that based a developmental plan for better sensors on a google search. 
or a couple of DxO graphs.
Edited on Jun 04, 2013 at 07:14 PM · View previous versions
or a couple of DxO graphs.
Edited on Jun 04, 2013 at 07:14 PM · View previous versions
Jun 04, 2013 at 06:52 PM
p.12 #8So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
D. Diggler wrote:
Canon doesn't give a rat's *** what is said on this forum.
If stuff comes up enough, like enough that is drives some crazy, it takes hold eventually and catches some attention.
The DxO stuff probably has begun to catch some attention too.
skibum5 wrote
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it upIf stuff comes up enough, like enough that is drives some crazy, it takes hold eventually and catches some attention.
The DxO stuff probably has begun to catch some attention too.
Jun 04, 2013 at 06:57 PM
p.12 #9So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
ggreene wrote:
I'd hate to be the Canon executive that based a developmental plan for better sensors on a google search.
hehe, I use google for everything else in my life
I'd hate to be the Canon executive that based a developmental plan for better sensors on a google search.
hehe, I use google for everything else in my life
Jun 04, 2013 at 07:12 PM
p.12 #10So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
D. Diggler wrote:
Canon doesn't give a rat's *** what is said on this forum.
Do you really think so?
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.
skibum5 wrote
People bringing up DR may be annoying, but I personally find it far more annoying to have 3 stops less DR than the competition and if endless threads and catching attention all over the web finally moves Canon to step it upDo you really think so?
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.
Jun 04, 2013 at 08:05 PM
p.12 #11So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
artd wrote:
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.
Where is consumer sentiment on low ISO DR? The vast majority don't even know what it is.
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.
Where is consumer sentiment on low ISO DR? The vast majority don't even know what it is.
Jun 04, 2013 at 08:30 PM
p.12 #12So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
ggreene wrote:
Where is consumer sentiment on low ISO DR? The vast majority don't even know what it is.
Really? How do you know that?
artd wrote
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.Really? How do you know that?
Jun 04, 2013 at 08:43 PM
p.12 #13So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
artd wrote:
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.
Like Adobe?
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well. And in this day and age, the internet is the most active place where consumer sentiment is expressed.
Like Adobe?
Jun 04, 2013 at 09:58 PM
p.12 #14So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
ggreene wrote:
Where is consumer sentiment on low ISO DR? The vast majority don't even know what it is.
True! And of the small minority who do know about dynamic range, how many will leave Canon over it. Even on this board amongst those who know about Canon's very inferior dynamic range, the vast majority will stay with Canon because they don't want to take the loss in selling all their lenses to convert to Nikon. Or they can't tolerate Nikon ergonomics or don't want to learn a whole new menu system and way of operating a camera. All Canon cares about is dollars.
Where is consumer sentiment on low ISO DR? The vast majority don't even know what it is.
True! And of the small minority who do know about dynamic range, how many will leave Canon over it. Even on this board amongst those who know about Canon's very inferior dynamic range, the vast majority will stay with Canon because they don't want to take the loss in selling all their lenses to convert to Nikon. Or they can't tolerate Nikon ergonomics or don't want to learn a whole new menu system and way of operating a camera. All Canon cares about is dollars.
Jun 04, 2013 at 10:29 PM
p.12 #15So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
Danny Michael wrote:
Like Adobe?
People on internet forums have been complaining for years about Canon re-using the same crop sensor over and over for years yet Canon keeps using it. I personally have given up buying anymore Canon's that use this old sensor but 95% of the new purchasers don't know or care.
artd wrote
They better be paying attention to internet forums. Any company that ignores consumer sentiment typically has not fared very well.People on internet forums have been complaining for years about Canon re-using the same crop sensor over and over for years yet Canon keeps using it. I personally have given up buying anymore Canon's that use this old sensor but 95% of the new purchasers don't know or care.
Jun 04, 2013 at 10:37 PM
p.12 #16So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
D. Diggler wrote:
True! And of the small minority who do know about dynamic range, how many will leave Canon over it. Even on this board amongst those who know about Canon's very inferior dynamic range, the vast majority will stay with Canon because they don't want to take the loss in selling all their lenses to convert to Nikon. Or they can't tolerate Nikon ergonomics or don't want to learn a whole new menu system and way of operating a camera. All Canon cares about is dollars.
Let me ask this again but in a different phrasing:
Why are we assuming that "the vast majority" of people who are prepared to spend over $3000 on a camera body do not understand what dynamic range is?
ggreene wrote
Where is consumer sentiment on low ISO DR? The vast majority don't even know what it is.Let me ask this again but in a different phrasing:
Why are we assuming that "the vast majority" of people who are prepared to spend over $3000 on a camera body do not understand what dynamic range is?
Jun 04, 2013 at 10:39 PM
p.12 #17So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
snapsy wrote:
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.
Very interesting. There are rumours that Sony want more of the pro cake from Canon and Nikon, so maybe Sony has started to jack the sensor prices up for Nikon in order to give them a disadvantage? First step was to get in bed with Nikon to curb Canon's lead, second step is to kick Nikon out of the bed again?
And to add some context into how Canikon might prioritize DR, Nikon actually went backwards in usable DR with the D7100 vs the D7000 when they switched from Sony to Fuji for the sensor. The D7100 has both banding and color shift issues in the shadows which their last two APS-C generations do not.
Very interesting. There are rumours that Sony want more of the pro cake from Canon and Nikon, so maybe Sony has started to jack the sensor prices up for Nikon in order to give them a disadvantage? First step was to get in bed with Nikon to curb Canon's lead, second step is to kick Nikon out of the bed again?
Jun 04, 2013 at 10:49 PM
p.12 #18So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
artd wrote:
Let me ask this again but in a different phrasing:
Why are we assuming that "the vast majority" of people who are prepared to spend over $3000 on a camera body do not understand what dynamic range is?
It isn't a matter of understanding what DR is. It is whether or not they think it is important or a deciding factor when purchasing a camera. If the vast majority are happy with the current Canon DR, why should Canon listen to the vocal minority? I would assume that Canon is very away of their current technology and the competitors current technology. They don't need a few people on a forum to let them know what the limitations are.
Let me ask this again but in a different phrasing:
Why are we assuming that "the vast majority" of people who are prepared to spend over $3000 on a camera body do not understand what dynamic range is?
It isn't a matter of understanding what DR is. It is whether or not they think it is important or a deciding factor when purchasing a camera. If the vast majority are happy with the current Canon DR, why should Canon listen to the vocal minority? I would assume that Canon is very away of their current technology and the competitors current technology. They don't need a few people on a forum to let them know what the limitations are.
Jun 04, 2013 at 10:59 PM
p.12 #19So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
D. Diggler wrote:
True! And of the small minority who do know about dynamic range, how many will leave Canon over it. Even on this board amongst those who know about Canon's very inferior dynamic range, the vast majority will stay with Canon because they don't want to take the loss
That is the thing, "very inferior" is like saying, car A has a top speed of 130mph while car B has a top speed of 160mph so you definately need to purchase car B over car A.
The reason it's not discussed irl is because it's just not that relevant for what most people are doing with their photography. Most people rarely have to deal with it, if ever. The average joe might as well buy his cameras based on their estimated soap-chewing capacity. Typically he buys what he sees his friends (and others around him) using. People might read the reviews on amazon but not a camera specialty site like dpreview or a forum site like this one.
Canon's push has always seemed to be higher ISO even if it sacrifices their DR. Most electronics design isn't about who is 'better' or 'worse' it is really just about tradeoffs.
True! And of the small minority who do know about dynamic range, how many will leave Canon over it. Even on this board amongst those who know about Canon's very inferior dynamic range, the vast majority will stay with Canon because they don't want to take the loss
That is the thing, "very inferior" is like saying, car A has a top speed of 130mph while car B has a top speed of 160mph so you definately need to purchase car B over car A.
The reason it's not discussed irl is because it's just not that relevant for what most people are doing with their photography. Most people rarely have to deal with it, if ever. The average joe might as well buy his cameras based on their estimated soap-chewing capacity. Typically he buys what he sees his friends (and others around him) using. People might read the reviews on amazon but not a camera specialty site like dpreview or a forum site like this one.
Canon's push has always seemed to be higher ISO even if it sacrifices their DR. Most electronics design isn't about who is 'better' or 'worse' it is really just about tradeoffs.
Jun 05, 2013 at 12:29 AM
p.12 #20So, Uh...Canon shadow noise?
It's one thing to be "happy with" current sensor capabilities...but I was somewhat dissatisfied with 5d2 shadows before the D800 was even announced. When the D800 was tested, the dissatisfaction with 5d2 shadows grew. When the 5d3 was tested and found to have similar or worse shadow noise in low ISOs to the 5d2, it was a disappointing announcement for me.
When I bought a 5d3 for myself after craving good outer focus points with Canon lenses, I experienced no surprise and only minimal disappointment with the shadow noise. However, I couldn't forget that the D800 was so much better. Whether Sony or Nikon is responsible, it's in a Nikon camera and I wish something comparable was in a Canon camera.
It matters to me.
That's why I started the thread. Not because someone here has a solution, but because it should be acknowledged for what it is: Canon's shadow noise is inferior to the D600/D800/D4 and needs to be improved with the next update.
When I bought a 5d3 for myself after craving good outer focus points with Canon lenses, I experienced no surprise and only minimal disappointment with the shadow noise. However, I couldn't forget that the D800 was so much better. Whether Sony or Nikon is responsible, it's in a Nikon camera and I wish something comparable was in a Canon camera.
It matters to me.
That's why I started the thread. Not because someone here has a solution, but because it should be acknowledged for what it is: Canon's shadow noise is inferior to the D600/D800/D4 and needs to be improved with the next update.
Jun 05, 2013 at 12:35 AM