p.2 #1 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
I would believe Chuck Westfall's statement about DR over any rumored subjective observation. First, in the dpreview interview it was obvious Chuck was aware the question might be asked and was prepared with an answer that clearly came from Canon Japan...he even prefixed his statement with "Canon says..." And that statement said the 5Ds would have the DR of the 5DM3. It might be safe to assume that's a quantitative statement and that the 5Ds will at least enjoy the perceptual improvements to DR in terms of the elimination of read noise banding. But on a quantitative basis Chuck's statement seems rather clear.
We know from past experience that users many times overstate the perceived noise improvements of a new camera. In this instance perhaps it's a combination of exuberance but also partly from actual qualitative improvements in read noise as well (matching the improvements of the 6D and 7DM2).
p.2 #2 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
snapsy wrote:
I would believe Chuck Westfall's statement about DR over any rumored subjective observation. First, in the dpreview interview it was obvious Chuck was aware the question might be asked and was prepared with an answer that clearly came from Canon Japan...he even prefixed his statement with "Canon says..." And that statement said the 5Ds would have the DR of the 5DM3. It might be safe to assume that's a quantitative statement and that the 5Ds will at least enjoy the perceptual improvements to DR in terms of the elimination of read noise banding. But on a quantitative basis Chuck's statement seems rather clear.
We know from past experience that users many times overstate the perceived noise improvements of a new camera. In this instance perhaps it's a combination of exuberance but also partly from actual qualitative improvements in read noise as well (matching the improvements of the 6D and 7DM2)....Show more →
I don't know how DR is measured, but I know what I want, I want to be able to push an ISO100 image shadows 3 stops in post without introducing banding or noise.
In the meantime, I run NR on all my ISO100 shots before I run them in SNS-HDR pro or NIK-HDR PRO.
p.2 #3 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
ben egbert wrote:
I don't know how DR is measured, but I know what I want, I want to be able to push an ISO100 image shadows 3 stops in post without introducing banding or noise.
That seems likely considering the qualitative noise improvements in the 6D and 7DM2.
p.2 #4 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
justruss wrote:
On the other hand: Keeping expectations so low with such a long runway on such a debated topic could be a very risky move-- letting Sony or Nikon swing in and further steal shooters.
If I was Canon, and I knew that my product could deliver even 1 stop better DR at low ISO... I'd be shouting it from the rooftops precisely so that people don't jump off the plane before it has a chance to even land.
I can certainly see that view as valid. It is a risky proposition for Canon either way.
OTOH, Canon may be so confident (detractors might say "arrogant") that they have such a large lead in loyal owners, that they are reluctant to do or say anything that could later be categorically defined as failing to live up to their claims. IOW, the chance of getting egg on their face could drive away more buyers than simply not contesting the features of their lesser (in terms of numbers of units and owners) FF competition (Nikon, and Sony to a smaller extent).
This approach might stir the hornet's nest of advanced shooters, whether pros or amateurs, who have been trending toward Nikon and Sony. But those are always the loudest detractors, acting like betrayed investors or jilted lovers.
I think Canon is taking the relative high road by keeping expectations low and forcing reviewers to really plumb the new models. Canon marketing must know there is a lot of prestige to be won or lost on this new product.
p.2 #5 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
According to the guys at http://www.senscore.org/ the 1DX has quite good dynamic range, so if the Northern Lights report is accurate the 5Ds/R will be quite an excellent performer.
6400 ISO is fine for me, although I like to shoot at 64 when possible, but many of my collection of adapted medium format glass isn't so fast so I shoot at up to 5000 somewhat often.
Hopefully the 5Ds/R color filter array will have a Sensitivity Metamerism Index of 85 or greater. We will see when the labs get their hands on production cameras.
Still 5 months to buy better glass.
EDIT: Northlight 5Ds preview updated to include:
"I'm told that the colour filter array of the 5Ds is much closer to the 1Ds mk3 than the 1D"
p.2 #6 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
Gunzorro wrote:
I can certainly see that view as valid. It is a risky proposition for Canon either way.
Canon may be so confident (detractors might say "arrogant") that they have such a large lead in loyal owners, that they are reluctant to do or say anything that could later be categorically defined as failing to live up to their claims. IOW, the chance of getting egg on their face could drive away more buyers than simply not contesting the features of their lesser (in terms of numbers of units and owners) FF competition (Nikon, and Sony to a smaller extent).
This approach might stir the hornet's nest of advanced shooters, whether pros or amateurs, who have been trending toward Nikon and Sony. But those are always the loudest detractors, acting like betrayed investors or jilted lovers.
I think Canon is taking the relative high road by keeping expectations low and forcing reviewers to really plumb the new models. Canon marketing must know there is a lot of prestige to be won or lost on this new product.
For at least 30 years Chevy sold lots of 6 cylinder cars against Fords V8's until they finally introduced a V8 in 1955. America stuck with push rod engines decades after overhead cam was used by the rest of the world. I never figured that out either.
I suspect that Canon had no way to match Sony DR because of patents or cost or something, but they could match or surpass pixels. At least for one release.
Lack of DR alone will not push me out. Canon has glass that nobody else offers.
p.2 #7 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
Gunzorro wrote:
I can certainly see that view as valid. It is a risky proposition for Canon either way.
OTOH, Canon may be so confident (detractors might say "arrogant") that they have such a large lead in loyal owners, that they are reluctant to do or say anything that could later be categorically defined as failing to live up to their claims. IOW, the chance of getting egg on their face could drive away more buyers than simply not contesting the features of their lesser (in terms of numbers of units and owners) FF competition (Nikon, and Sony to a smaller extent).
This approach might stir the hornet's nest of advanced shooters, whether pros or amateurs, who have been trending toward Nikon and Sony. But those are always the loudest detractors, acting like betrayed investors or jilted lovers.
I think Canon is taking the relative high road by keeping expectations low and forcing reviewers to really plumb the new models. Canon marketing must know there is a lot of prestige to be won or lost on this new product.
I'd much rather wait and let Canon release a fully tested and quality certified product, than leave it to the consumers to do the beta testing and Quality Assurance, mentioning no names here
p.2 #8 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
Mescalamba wrote:
That "something" is nicely full 14-bits (if you expose right, not that Canon has many other options) and very high metamerism (color error) index. 86 under daylight, to be precise.. only Sony A900 had 87 (and its known for excellent colors).
1Ds MK3 and 1D MK3 used same CFA and were colorwise best cameras Canon ever produced. Unfortunately since then, they jumped off the cliff with color quality. Nikon did same after D700, only today D810 is somewhat comparable and quite nice.
Nothing so far matched Sony A900. Probably nothing will, cause manufacturers dont want to go banckrupt cause of one camera....Show more →
I could not agree more regarding earlier Canons. I would rate the 1D(s)3 as THE best color-machine from Canon ever made. The first 5D was seriously good too but only 12 bit which could be a problem in certain scenarios. I think the 1D mark 4 is quite allright but other models have gone downhill when they started the ISO race with weaker CFA:s
Funny you should mention the color response score of 87. There's actually another model sharing the impressive A900 score - and that's Canon 50D. Yup - check it out. What happened there? I've been tempted to buy a used one and test it just for this specific reason.
p.2 #9 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
Yea Im aware about 50D, its not only camera with high metamerism and nice colors. Another is for example old Sony A380. Pretty wierd little APS-C based on last CCD sensor from Sony.
Issue with 50D was that its really noisy sensor. Better CFA has its negatives, which is that unless electronics around chip is top notch (like 1D/s class), then cause good CFA cuts off some light, it makes sensor slightly (or a lot) noisier. A900 isnt exactly squeeky clean either, which is why even when its one of best "color" cameras, I would favor 1Ds MK3, cause its "trouble free". A900 output is 14-bits compressed in camera to 12-bits, favoring highlights and with that is tied quite a bit of trouble when processing.
Its same reason why Canon left good CFAs in favor of much weaker ones. More light = less noise. If you mix it with fact that less color separation also means you can much easier hide color noise, its pretty logical step.
Nikon did same, but currently they are starting to come back with D810 and D4s (D4s is almost as good as D700 in that color part of things). Simply cause sensors they get are so good, they allow better CFAs without any negatives towards image quality as whole.
Also if 5Ds R/S has improved CFA (might have, colors in JPGs despite watercolor NR look tiny bit better) its probably reason why ISO is limited. I suspect that without NR, it wont be nice even on base ISO. Sony or better Samsung tech could handle it, but x-years old 500nm process, nope..
Its like overclocking 486DX2 and trying to beat Core Q6600 with it..
p.2 #10 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
I came from 1DS3 to 5D3, I like my 5d3 files better. Much cleaner. I use a camera profile for both and can't say either are very accurate without a profile and still has problems with one.
p.2 #11 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
justruss wrote:
On the other hand: Keeping expectations so low with such a long runway on such a debated topic could be a very risky move-- letting Sony or Nikon swing in and further steal shooters.
Maybe. But it could cut both ways. Imagine that test cameras make it "into the wild," and those who test them start reporting (as is the case here) that the camera is even better than what we expected. That plays quite nicely in the marketing sense, too, especially if it happens in the next month or two... during the time when Canon would rather than we not forget about the upcoming release or become less interested in it.
ben egbert wrote:
We are all just speculating, but what else can we do until June?
p.2 #12 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
gdanmitchell wrote:
Maybe. But it could cut both ways. Imagine that test cameras make it "into the wild," and those who test them start reporting (as is the case here) that the camera is even better than what we expected. That plays quite nicely in the marketing sense, too, especially if it happens in the next month or two... during the time when Canon would rather than we not forget about the upcoming release or become less interested in it.
Photography. ;-)
Just got back from a try at that, winter without snow is ugly.
p.2 #13 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
justruss wrote:
On the other hand: Keeping expectations so low with such a long runway on such a debated topic could be a very risky move-- letting Sony or Nikon swing in and further steal shooters.
If I was Canon, and I knew that my product could deliver even 1 stop better DR at low ISO... I'd be shouting it from the rooftops precisely so that people don't jump off the plane before it has a chance to even land.
Ask yourself, who is debating? Who is jumping? Vast numbers of working photographers don't care about this debate or about 1 stop better DR at low ISO. They've been working with Canon DSLRs for years and know that they get the job done. That's why we see so many photographers using Canon, including some of the biggest names in photography. Canon delivers great images for them, day after day, job after job. If Canon sensors were deficient, they would never have used them, or would have left Canon a long time ago. Instead, Canon met and exceeded their needs a long time ago. Those who are complaining are a vocal group whose complaints keep reverberating in the online echo chamber, but don't represent the many photographers who have found that Canon works just fine for them. On the one hand you have working photographers who stake their reputations and income on their images — they are extremely unlikely to jump brands because of a press release or interview with DPReview. On the other hand you have online sensor critics, many of whom are anonymous, who seem eager to show off their knowledge of sensor fabrication.
p.2 #14 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
zlatko wrote:
Ask yourself, who is debating? Who is jumping? Vast numbers of working photographers don't care about this debate or about 1 stop better DR at low ISO. They've been working with Canon DSLRs for years and know that they get the job done. That's why we see so many photographers using Canon, including some of the biggest names in photography. Canon delivers great images for them, day after day, job after job. If Canon sensors were deficient, they would never have used them, or would have left Canon a long time ago. Instead, Canon met and exceeded their needs a long time ago. Those who are complaining are a vocal group whose complaints keep reverberating in the online echo chamber, but don't represent the many photographers who have found that Canon works just fine for them. On the one hand you have working photographers who stake their reputations and income on their images — they are extremely unlikely to jump brands because of a press release or interview with DPReview. On the other hand you have online sensor critics, many of whom are anonymous, who seem eager to show off their knowledge of sensor fabrication....Show more →
There's truth to what you say-- but also plenty of logical fallacies (mainly of the past proof = present/future performance sort).
My peers are the folks you're talking about. Indeed, Canon has fed me for the last decade (http://www.russjuskalian.com/photography/vista.html), and none of my editors have ever balked at the quality of my images.
And Canon still delivers. And the 5Ds will be a boon for those who need the resolution, no question. I was on the line about picking one up myself.
But photography is a competitive business-- and anything that makes the job easier, or more likely for success, or able to deliver better results will in the long run keep the jobs coming. Both resolution and DR fall into this category (as do other things like AF, etc). Where "good enough" is-- we each decide for ourselves in part by feedback from editors and with a view to what our peers are producing.
Canon is still the leader, but there are people jumping, including top dogs submitting to top publications, galleries, and clients. A resolution monster might win some back from the MF crowd, but every further falling behind DR might lose others. And the amateurs tend to reflect their impressions and purchases in part on halo products and reputation-- Canon didn't make its halo projects just to satisfy the few folks who would buy them, but to impress the dreaming amateur who may only ever pick up a kit lens. People still talk about that old rangefinder 50mm f/0.95, EF 50mm f/1.0L, and 1200mm L... all somewhat silly products for 99.9999% of working pros even.
Performance matters. Perception does to. It's not one way or another. Canon still delivers, but we're not blindly following them as if a matter of faith.
p.2 #15 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
Mescalamba wrote:
That "something" is nicely full 14-bits (if you expose right, not that Canon has many other options) and very high metamerism (color error) index. 86 under daylight, to be precise.. only Sony A900 had 87 (and its known for excellent colors).
Late to the party (and a bit OT),
I couldn't find a metamerism index for the Kodak SLR/C. I'd be curious to know what it is, so I'd have some basis for how much (color accuracy) gain / loss I'd occur when I should finally update to something more current ... like the 5DS or 5DSR.
p.2 #16 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
ben egbert wrote:
Just got back from a try at that, winter without snow is ugly.
I hear you.
zlatko wrote:
Ask yourself, who is debating? Who is jumping? Vast numbers of working photographers don't care about this debate or about 1 stop better DR at low ISO. They've been working with Canon DSLRs for years and know that they get the job done. That's why we see so many photographers using Canon, including some of the biggest names in photography. Canon delivers great images for them, day after day, job after job. If Canon sensors were deficient, they would never have used them, or would have left Canon a long time ago. Instead, Canon met and exceeded their needs a long time ago. Those who are complaining are a vocal group whose complaints keep reverberating in the online echo chamber, but don't represent the many photographers who have found that Canon works just fine for them. On the one hand you have working photographers who stake their reputations and income on their images — they are extremely unlikely to jump brands because of a press release or interview with DPReview. On the other hand you have online sensor critics, many of whom are anonymous, who seem eager to show off their knowledge of sensor fabrication....Show more →
I'd like to pin that paragraph at the start of about 15 new FM threads each week.
justruss wrote:
Canon is still the leader, but there are people jumping...
There are always a small number of people switching systems, and for a range of reasons: they got a better deal on A than B, B does some particular thing that they need for a particular project, their new employer has or gives them A instead of B, they have a new sponsorship or other relationship with B, they are the kind of people who always believe the grass is greener on the other side of the fence, they feel that A's or B's service program treated them badly once, etc.
The switches go both directions, and there are frequently switches back that get less press. (It is kind of embarrassing to loudly announce that you moved from A to B because B is hugely better than A, only to have to admit a year later that you moved back to A. That latter announcement is rarely made as loudly or with as much enthusiasm as the former.)
Again, in forums like this one — perhaps especially in this one right now — there is (how to put this gently?) a contingent of folks who say they have moved on to something else but who seem to have some kind of need to validate their decision by returning daily to repeatedly, obsessively, continuously tell the rest of us how wrong we are and how right they are. An observer not used to the dynamics of such a forum could be forgiven for imagining that a huge percentage of Canon users is seriously disaffected by Canon and has moved or is moving to another brand. The reality is much different.
p.2 #17 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
gdanmitchell wrote:
[...] (It is kind of embarrassing to loudly announce that you moved from A to B because B is hugely better than A, only to have to admit a year later that you moved back to A. That latter announcement is rarely made as loudly or with as much enthusiasm as the former.)
[...] An observer not used to the dynamics of such a forum could be forgiven for imaging that a huge percentage of Canon users is seriously disaffected by Canon and has moved or is moving to another brand. The reality is much different.
Right. That's the Internet Amplification Effect.
Just like online polls are junk, so are assessments of group sentiment based on online posts.
p.2 #19 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
RustyBug wrote:
Late to the party (and a bit OT),
I couldn't find a metamerism index for the Kodak SLR/C. I'd be curious to know what it is, so I'd have some basis for how much (color accuracy) gain / loss I'd occur when I should finally update to something more current ... like the 5DS or 5DSR.
Two FM members who might know the metamerism index of the Kodak are theSuede and Worldinlens over on the Alt board, if they don't Know, it probably doesn't exist.
p.2 #20 · 5DSR Low ISO DR 1.5-2 stops better than 1DX ...
My local bricks and mortar camera store* here in the UK is stating MAY for delivery on the first stock arriving on the 5DR. They are awaiting confirmation from the Canon rep on a date for a hands on demo of the 5DS/R etc, I swung by today and pre ordered
* An Independent specialist photographic store, recent expansion of premises and stocking a solid line up of Canon, Fuji, Leica, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic Pentax, Ricoh and Sigma gear and all purchases covered by a 2 year warranty. So, I can't decide if they are acting in their customers interest or the 2 year warranty is a bridge too far, but they don't stock any Sony stuff
