p.1 #1 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
Hmmm......
I sent Canon Professional Services a question about mechanical vs electronic shutter... below are some selected points from their response to me (I edited out their "camera basics" stuff):
"The bit depth of the photo is based off of the image quality you have selected. The bit depth will be the same for both mechanical shutter and electronic shutter photos. The main difference is in how the camera exposes the sensor."
"When the camera is in electronic shutter mode it exposes the photo in sections of the sensor. If you are taking photos of still subjects under natural light you wouldn't see much of a difference when using electronic shutter. If your subject is moving quickly you can start to see rolling shutter when using the electronic shutter since your subject might not be in the same place when it exposes the next section of the sensor. If you are under artificial lighting it can cause banding since the light may be flickered off when part of the image is exposed and on when the next part is exposed.
"If you are shooting at high ISOs or long shutter speeds you would likely get better results with the mechanical shutter. That would help limit rolling shutter if the owl moves and it would help with banding if there is any other light source in the area."
p.1 #2 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
Curious. Of course, you can't just take their word for it, but I tried to check the raw files I have and cannot find a good way to do so. In Sony's raw files they bake in to the file the bit depth that was used during capture. Canon does not include this information.
But, it does beg the question: where did the information that a lower bit depth was used in ES or HS+ Mechanical come from?
p.1 #4 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
Are those statements consistent with the published specs? Those reps almost certainly have no authority to make any claims inconsistent with the technical documents.
p.1 #6 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
If I had a nickel every time someone asked Canon consumer-facing service folks about technical specs of the Canon cameras, and they came back with inaccurate responses, I would be about $12.15 richer right now.
p.1 #9 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
Photosbydlee wrote:
I gave this a try and interestingly it was this
EFCS - 20.9MB
ES - 21.1MB
MS - 20.7MB
Not sure what to make of that
Hrm, interesting -- it would have to be a ridiculously static scene (same light, everything). Then again, it could be the file algorithms have some variance? (I'm totally guessing)
p.1 #10 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
Update:
I sent another email to CPS asking them to confirm with an engineer... I noted there is much on internet forums about bit depth of ES.
CPS responded: "I'm unsure why people are saying that online, but the only difference between mechanical shutter and electronic shutter is how the camera exposes the sensor. Things like bit depth are tied to things like the Image Quality setting."
So.....
Does anyone know where this all started?
Is there a Qbit cabal steeling bits and color masks don't work?
p.1 #13 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
EB-1 wrote:
Something is fishy. Are you saying that the published specs are incorrect?
EBH
Can you link to the published spec that shows this? I can't find it. It's not anywhere in the R6 manual, and not in the electronic shutter articles on Canon.com and Canon Europe that I found.
(The manual doesn't say anything about bit depth at all, for what it's worth...)
EDIT: Here it is from the R6 online spec sheet from Canon Europe
I shot a super complex and colorful fractal on my screen in a dark room, RAW, Manual, 200 ISO, 1/80, f/2.8. I was sure to focus on the exact same spot... as best I could. Given the R5 has sooooo many pixels, I suspect there is no difference in bit depth... assuming bit depth is reflected in file size.
p.1 #15 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
I would imagine file size would reflect bit depth, but this is on the presumption the 12-bit mode is used to push more data than a 14-bit file (a bandwidth limitation).
I could very well be wrong, though - maybe the limitation is processing this 'read' of the scene vs transporting the data, in which case it's possible a 12-bit file would contain 'dummy' or interpolated bits to make it almost as large as a 14-bit file, maybe to prevent posterization in editing programs.
These are just wild, barely-educated guesses from me, though - I should check it out myself.
p.1 #16 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
Quite interesting. I remember reading from both The Digital Picture review and Photos to Photos that it’s 12 Bit in ES. The only other test I can think of is to actually take two identical images with constant lighting and underexposed by a few stops and see how both files hold up...
The file is 14 bit, but the data that gets actually stored in it can be 14, 13, or 12 bits - depending on modes.
They way they lump it all together to me makes me questions it. This is what it has
JPEG: 2 compression options RAW: RAW, C-RAW 14 bit (14-bit with Mechanical shutter and Electronic 1st Curtain, 13-bit A/D conversion with H+ mode, 12-bit A/D conversion with Electronic shutter, Canon original RAW 3rd edition)
For me the way they list RAW then , C-RAW 14 bit and have the explanation in () to me personally makes me read it as only the C-Raw files have 12 bit under those particular conditions like ES/EFCS etc.
p.1 #19 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
That's how I read it as well, and we are both reading it correctly. As written, it's clearly stating that the CRAW files are 14-bit with MS, and electronic 1st curtain, 13 bit A/D with H+ mode, and 12 bit A/D conversion with ES.
It doesn't say how many bit the RAW vs. C-RAW file is in different modes.
Photosbydlee wrote:
They way they lump it all together to me makes me questions it. This is what it has
JPEG: 2 compression options RAW: RAW, C-RAW 14 bit (14-bit with Mechanical shutter and Electronic 1st Curtain, 13-bit A/D conversion with H+ mode, 12-bit A/D conversion with Electronic shutter, Canon original RAW 3rd edition)
For me the way they list RAW then , C-RAW 14 bit and have the explanation in () to me personally makes me read it as only the C-Raw files have 12 bit under those particular conditions like ES/EFCS etc.
p.1 #20 · R5/R6 Bit Depth, MS vs ES - Canon says NO DIFFERENCE
httivals wrote:
That's how I read it as well, and we are both reading it correctly. As written, it's clearly stating that the CRAW files are 14-bit with MS, and electronic 1st curtain, 13 bit A/D with H+ mode, and 12 bit A/D conversion with ES.
It doesn't say how many bit the RAW vs. C-RAW file is in different modes.
I would see it as the normal RAW files being 14 bit in all shutter modes since they don't specify differently though. It's very interesting if that is the case as even my old Sony A7III would drop to 12 bit when in bulb mode and MS.
