p.2 #1 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
SoftImage wrote:
No, it is not likely. The most optimistic estimate is that D5 is 0.5 stops better than D4/D4s. Early adopters in Nikon forums are saying that JPEG is better. Moreover, some high ISO samples (ISO 12800 to 51200) are available for both D5 and 1DXII. You will find it hard to tell the difference.
Let's wait for the actual side by side comparison.
Half a stop seems about right for the D5, DPReview just released their studio scene for the D5 and it appears to perform a bit better than the D4s but not up to the standard of the A7s.
p.2 #2 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
I appreciate all the work so thank you all,
To me, only differences from 1Dx2 to previous Canon bodies are of any interest, but I suppose that for those who contemplate on switching, Nikon numbers may be important.
Even if all of these numbers are to be confirmed and true in real shooting, what interests me most is whether or not the 1Dx2 is as reliable as the 1Dx. I intend to buy a 1 series once (it would be my first and only owning one, although I've used 4 previous models) and I want it to last for years (probably until CPS stops servicing it or until I stop functioning as a human being) and allow for carefree use in the meantime. I will shoot about 15000-20000 per year so theoretically it could last a good part of a lifetime.
p.2 #3 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
bcgarcia:
Thank you for all this work.
To me the great thing here is that Canon seems to have improved their dynamic range at iso100-800 which is where the majority of my 5dsr is performed. This suggests that the 5dsr2 is going to sell a lot when it comes out, since 5dsr is focussed on landscape with the high mpx (ability to print big).
I will not buy a 1dx2 to use at iso 100 when there was a 50mpx 5dsr as an alternative, for landscape. Like the a7r2, the increased dynamic range is not enough to justify the change when you consider AEB and bracketing delivers better.
So my puzzle is why they are pursuing high dynamic range at low iso at expense of high iso - it feels like a bad trade for the majority of users who use 1dx for sports and wildlife. I guess they are creating the generalist camera thats good at everything. However I guess it will be great for mid day shooting, where you need lots of dynamic range.
p.2 #4 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
Scott Stoness wrote:
bcgarcia:
Thank you for all this work.
To me the great thing here is that Canon seems to have improved their dynamic range at iso100-800 which is where the majority of my 5dsr is performed. This suggests that the 5dsr2 is going to sell a lot when it comes out, since 5dsr is focussed on landscape with the high mpx (ability to print big).
I will not buy a 1dx2 to use at iso 100 when there was a 50mpx 5dsr as an alternative, for landscape. Like the a7r2, the increased dynamic range is not enough to justify the change when you consider AEB and bracketing delivers better.
So my puzzle is why they are pursuing high dynamic range at low iso at expense of high iso - it feels like a bad trade for the majority of users who use 1dx for sports and wildlife. I guess they are creating the generalist camera thats good at everything. However I guess it will be great for mid day shooting, where you need lots of dynamic range....Show more →
p.2 #5 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
Canon was obviously very good at getting the most out of its old process. And I think clearly this sensor and the new 80D sensor are using a much different process... likely a "first generation" run for Canon. Perhaps it's going to take them some time to figure out how to tweak it certain ways, like Intel when it comes out with a new node....
Me personally... I wish they had this tech in the 5DsR. As much as I love the size of the A7R, I'd much prefer going back to Canon only.
p.2 #6 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
Scott Stoness wrote:
bcgarcia:
Thank you for all this work.
To me the great thing here is that Canon seems to have improved their dynamic range at iso100-800 which is where the majority of my 5dsr is performed. This suggests that the 5dsr2 is going to sell a lot when it comes out, since 5dsr is focussed on landscape with the high mpx (ability to print big).
I will not buy a 1dx2 to use at iso 100 when there was a 50mpx 5dsr as an alternative, for landscape. Like the a7r2, the increased dynamic range is not enough to justify the change when you consider AEB and bracketing delivers better.
So my puzzle is why they are pursuing high dynamic range at low iso at expense of high iso - it feels like a bad trade for the majority of users who use 1dx for sports and wildlife. I guess they are creating the generalist camera thats good at everything. However I guess it will be great for mid day shooting, where you need lots of dynamic range....Show more →
As background, I own both a the 5DSR and A7Rii as well as a 7Dii. I have placed an order for the 1Dx2 - but if I knew when the 5D4 would be announced, I would probably wait - but I do agree about the next 5DSR II - might mostly kill off the remainder of medium format - i.e. lets say 60 megapixels with another 1.25 stops of DR at 100-400 ISO (especially if at that point if Canon has released the new 50L, 85L, 135L, 24-70, 70-200, 24-105L (all with the 35L II special treatment)
That said, addressing what you wrote, Canon fixed the easiest thing that needed fixing - and they did it with a dramatic improvement in DR at low ISOs. 2nd, they gave multiple AF pt at F8, 2 more FPS, massive increase in buffer, basic codec 4K for 8 MPix frame grabs - and - there is no doubt that the quality of the 'noise', even though the DR range at 12,800 and 25,600 is about 0.15 - 0.2 stops of a negative hit, is going to be improved such that the end result is a better picture after PP or jpegs SOOC. It isn't just DR that determines the quality of an end picture.
p.2 #7 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
Optimization for video IMHO, better dynamic range at low ISO and less artifacts at high ISO (pattern, blotching) at the price of slightly more fine grained noise at high ISO (not so disturbing in video as the artifacts).
p.2 #8 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
What i don't understand is that the 1dxII has more DR at lower iso's but would show more noise compared to other cameras with longer exposures at base iso (According to some in another thread). Someone care to explain?
p.2 #10 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
Still not sure what Canon was using for metrics for high ISO performance but it must only be chroma noise to claim the camera was better than 1DX at high ISO. It might not matter in practical terms, but still strange to see DR going backward, even if only a small amount, above ISO 800. Given the massively improved chroma and surely no worse luma and I thought it was supposedly better, why would effective DR be worse. Also seems strange read noise would go backward. I can't wait for Clark vision to test the 1DXII for a definitive answer on read noise and DR.
Good news though is it'll make a very good all round camera even landscape and for a lot of sport under ISO 800.
p.2 #12 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
I've talked with a lot of photographers who use D3/4 or 1D's and their priority is not low ISO DR. Hilarious to read the disappointing comments from DPR. Poor Rishi.
p.2 #13 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
ggreene wrote:
I've talked with a lot of photographers who use D3/4 or 1D's and their priority is not low ISO DR. Hilarious to read the disappointing comments from DPR. Poor Rishi.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
was never a big issue, but techies like to compare studio shots and pixel peep.
Those extended high ISO examples of D5 are pretty nasty. If it can pick up a license plate number on the run without taillight on moonless night, so be it. I'm sure every police department is lining up to buy a $6k camera for that. Otherwise, it's marketing gimmick.
As a total package, 1DXII seems to be bit better value (fps, 4K/60p, low ISO DR, f8 AF pts) costing ~$500 less, though at this price point it isn't much an issue. Will wait for the final 1DXII raws comparisons, but I doubt there's enough difference to justify switching systems either way.
p.2 #14 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
Quite interesting and possibly a concern for those who rely on high ISO for sport shooting that are hoping for visual improvement in this area. One thing that might be lost in the conversation is that the data appears to be from a BETA i.e. pre-production body. I for one am keeping my fingers crossed that the high ISO output of the 1DX2 will be a true improvement over the existing 1DX.
If basically the same, there is little reason for me to consider upgrading.
p.2 #16 · Canon 1DX2 dynamic range analyzed from RAWs
EB-1 wrote:
Is the 1Dx II noisier than the 1Dx at ISO 3200 or not?
Using the DPR Studio shot tool set to RAW with the 1DX and the D5 I'm not seeing really much difference until about 12800 where I think the D5 slightly starts to pull ahead. Still waiting on the 1DX2 RAW's.
so thank you all,