p.2 #1 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
You don't say which camera but if you are talking about a R5 then I think the first consideration when selecting which shutter type is shutter shock which on the R5 is a real thing at 1/250 and slower. For this reason, I and others default to EFC which is 14 bit on the R5.
p.2 #2 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
Visually Oriented wrote:
You don't say which camera but if you are talking about a R5 then I think the first consideration when selecting which shutter type is shutter shock which on the R5 is a real thing at 1/250 and slower. For this reason, I and others default to EFC which is 14 bit on the R5.
You're right... I didn't realise that there was such a difference between recent models. In my case it's an R6ii but I started the questions because I had not heard about this when I upgraded from dSLR - That's on me but it would NOT have changed my choices... Just trying to understand the options, limitations, best practices on this platform.
Thanks all as been a eye opening discussion for me to do more reading about....
p.2 #3 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
Visually Oriented wrote:
You don't say which camera but if you are talking about a R5 then I think the first consideration when selecting which shutter type is shutter shock which on the R5 is a real thing at 1/250 and slower. For this reason, I and others default to EFC which is 14 bit on the R5.
At 8fps and higher EFCS drops readout down to 13-bit on the R5.
p.2 #4 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
RustyRus wrote:
There is 100% a difference between 12 and 14 bit color-
Its small though but its real if you know what you are looking for with color processing.
This is not a hit on you- If you are asking, you aren't the person that it matters for. Just like me-
I owned a Hasseblad 100c- 16 vs 14 bit- If you really dig in and process hard there is a slight advantage but thats now how I like to spend my time.
So again- If you are asking, 100% stop worrying about it. Thats about as honest as I can respond-...Show more →
Yeah no dramas... Just tripped over and trying to understand more... I'll pay a bit more attention, do some playing with test shots and reading but I have not noticed in the year or so I've had the camera and that might be me been colour deaf ;-) or just has not come up in the types of shots and processing I do. I'm not sure if I'd change the camera setup as at this point it's working pretty well but I'd like to understand better the trad off's is all - I always try to avoid future me thinking past me is an idiot .
p.2 #5 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
Has anyone actually noticed artifacts with 12bit? Like in a shot with a green gradient; does it have more banding artifacts than 14bit that are noticeable? Or is this more a dynamic range issue where it matters most in post?
p.2 #6 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
Some great advice in here about using settings appropriate to your shoot, and when to sweat over 12-bit vs 14-bit, RAW vs cRAW vs. jpg, etc.
For me, when I do portraits, I always shoot RAW at the best possible settings. Because afterwards I will use Lr and PS to try and bring out the best in each photo.
For wildlife/birding, I fluctuate. If it's a challenging environment (low light, high ISO) I will likely shoot RAW to use post to smooth things out. If it's super bright outside and I'm more focused on just catching a fast creature in motion, I will shoot RAW+jpg unless buffer speed is a consideration, and then I'll drop down to maybe cRAW or just jpg.
For non-pro sports (I've yet to be able get my gear into an NFL/NBA/MLB game due to stadium policies) where speed is of the utmost priority, I almost always shoot jpg. Why? Because in the 18+ months I've shot my friends' kids playing youth sports (outdoors), not once have I ever tweaked the RAW. With good lighting and technique the R6ii and now the R5ii nail the shot almost every single time in terms of exposure. And every parent (and their child who competed) wants the photos ASAP so it's easy for me to just download it to their computer right after the event.
p.2 #7 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
CanonMark wrote:
Has anyone actually noticed artifacts with 12bit? Like in a shot with a green gradient; does it have more banding artifacts than 14bit that are noticeable? Or is this more a dynamic range issue where it matters most in post?
You will see it if you are jacking up the shadows and more than 14-bit if you are doing other extreme processing.
I have a very nice stitched 800MP R5 image with 10-shot focus stacks (autmatically goes to ES) and over 75 frames each, or something like that.
At mid-high ISO for wildlife I see the artifacts on rapidly moving wings sometimes.
No matter what settings are used on R5 or R5 II you will not get nearly the great depth of the Sony sensors like the a7rIV/V for example. As mentioned above the R5 II gives and takes away compared to the R5. The stackable sensor is no such thing as the free lunch.
p.2 #11 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
There is a difference between iq with bit depth - primarily in the dark shadows but it does no matter unless you are a landscape (low iso shooter).
Beyond iso 800 or so, bit depth does not matter because the gain noise is great enough that 14 bit does not improve the resolution/dynamic range.
The same is true of craw. Above iso800, there is insignificant loss.
All things equal, you should not fuss over using electronic for action/wildlife where usually you are limited by light and using >iso800, because of 12bit.
But all is not equal.
Slow read speeds of r7 and r5 and r6iii, cause read speed distortion (top read first, bottom last eg foot out of sync with head) , and you would be better off using EFCS if you are using beyond 400mm lens (angular motion is higher above 400). EFCS has very fast read speed (3ms) vs electronic (13,15, 33 for R6iii, r5, R7 respectively).
So the rule of thumb is:
on R5II, with fast read speed, use electronic always, except for landscape (EFCS for vibration over straight mechanical).
On all others, use EFCS as default unless you really need fps/precapture and accept the downsides of slow read speed (even though 12 bit /craw don't matter above iso800)
p.2 #12 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
Mechanical shocks the shitter, especially on tghe r7.
R5 II is better with EFCS or even MS when flash is used.
There are plenty of low ISO uses that are not landscapes, so MS is the best for IQ.
p.2 #13 · Mechanical vs Electronic - Bit Depth - Should I care?
I find that 15fps is more than fast enough for what I shoot, so I am fine with EFCS for most subjects. The downside (on cameras like the R6 series) is viewfinder blackout. C'est la vie.
