p.18 #1 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
The well-respected Photons-to-photons website shows these two cameras as having 11.9 and 7.5 stops respectively. The high contrast that ensues from low DR can excite some plain images shot in flat or controlled light, that is very true, but there are limits.
Low DR may be responsible for the familiar portrait look of Caucasians having blown out or almost clipped ultra flat skin tones. Egad, I still see this today, courtesy of many lenses and cameras failure to clip high tones gracefully.
And people just get used to what they see, unfortunately, and it can stick with them as their idea of how things should be. It's a truly horrible look, the low DR rendering.
Resources:
Gordon Laing reviewed the D30 (for reasons known only to himself):
YT title: 'Canon EOS D30: 23 years later! RETRO review'
As usual, you get the talking head for 90% of the runtime, but the image fun starts at 14.15.
I wonder how many people think the (natural) sky is a flat silver? Or the day ended 30 minutes earlier? City scenes turned into Gothic overdrive. Horrible color grading too, as color tonality varies alongside brightness tonality.
p.18 #2 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
philip_pj wrote:
The well-respected Photons-to-photons website shows these two cameras as having 11.9 and 7.5 stops respectively. The high contrast that ensues from low DR can excite some plain images shot in flat or controlled light, that is very true, but there are limits.
Low DR may be responsible for the familiar portrait look of Caucasians having blown out or almost clipped ultra flat skin tones. Egad, I still see this today, courtesy of many lenses and cameras failure to clip high tones gracefully.
And people just get used to what they see, unfortunately, and it can stick with them as their idea of how things should be. It's a truly horrible look, the low DR rendering.
Resources:
Gordon Laing reviewed the D30 (for reasons known only to himself):
YT title: 'Canon EOS D30: 23 years later! RETRO review'
As usual, you get the talking head for 90% of the runtime, but the image fun starts at 14.15.
I wonder how many people think the (natural) sky is a flat silver? Or the day ended 30 minutes earlier? City scenes turned into Gothic overdrive. Horrible color grading too, as color tonality varies alongside brightness tonality....Show more →
Yes, all that is obviously true.
But we are not dealing with a reasonable person here it would seem. He is willing to believe that measurement changed over time but not that sensel technology has improved, nor that downsampling helps with DR (the whole PDR concept seems to have escaped him).
Leaving aside this silly D30 discussion, one valid question would be "would a 3mp sensor with the latest Sony tech have more or less DR than a 100mp sensor". And the answer is that we will never know because Sony is not going to design and manufacture 3MP sensors anymore.
p.18 #3 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
chez wrote:
Since it seems you’ve shot with both the d30 and Gfx100, maybe post some samples that backs up your points. Talk is cheap.
i already debated the subject on DPR S&T forum over a year ago. guess who won 😊 if you look hard enough you can download the Kodak DR test strip from both cameras and then tell me which one has the smoothest tonal transitions and the widest DR 🙄
p.18 #4 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
bernardl wrote:
Yes, all that is obviously true.
But we are not dealing with a reasonable person here it would seem. He is willing to believe that measurement changed over time but not that sensel technology has improved, nor that downsampling helps with DR (the whole PDR concept seems to have escaped him).
Leaving aside this silly D30 discussion, one valid question would be "would a 3mp sensor with the latest Sony tech have more or less DR than a 100mp sensor". And the answer is that we will never know because Sony is not going to design and manufacture 3MP sensors anymore.
Cheers,
Bernard
any sensor with larger pixels wins over the 100 meg sensor. properties of silicon, do you think silicon has changed its electrical response 🤔
p.18 #5 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
i already debated the subject on DPR S&T forum over a year ago. guess who won 😊 if you look hard enough you can download the Kodak DR test strip from both cameras and then tell me which one has the smoothest tonal transitions and the widest DR 🙄
You confuse people getting tired of your constant rubbish and leaving to thinking you won something. The photons to photos site makes it quite clear…but that requires you to actually want to learn the truth.
p.18 #6 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
chez wrote:
You confuse people getting tired of your constant rubbish and leaving to thinking you won something. The photons to photos site makes it quite clear…but that requires you to actually want to learn the truth.
heres the DPR review comment on the d30 😁
The first thing that strikes you about the D30's images is their virtual lack of any noise (obviously some becomes apparent at higher ISO's but still impressive), zoom in as far as you like, all you'll find are smooth gradients and sharp details. The next thing you'll notice is a lack of any kind of sharpening artifacts; jagged lines or black / white halo's, that's because the D30 has very little internal sharpening (or if any it's very mild), that produces these beautiful clean images, so noiseless in fact that in this respect I can't really find another camera to compare to the D30.
p.18 #7 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
heres the DPR review comment on the d30 😁
The first thing that strikes you about the D30's images is their virtual lack of any noise (obviously some becomes apparent at higher ISO's but still impressive), zoom in as far as you like, all you'll find are smooth gradients and sharp details. The next thing you'll notice is a lack of any kind of sharpening artifacts; jagged lines or black / white halo's, that's because the D30 has very little internal sharpening (or if any it's very mild), that produces these beautiful clean images, so noiseless in fact that in this respect I can't really find another camera to compare to the D30....Show more →
I believe I can speak on behalf of everybody here by stating that we are extremely happy that you found that hidden gem and appreciate your restless efforts to make the world aware about what they, what we, have been missing. Because I must confess I am guilty also.
Considering your remarkable contribution to the world of photography and art in general, I would personally be inclined to propose your name for Peace Nobel prize winner if we didn't already have another highly qualified applicant.
p.18 #8 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
any sensor with larger pixels wins over the 100 meg sensor. properties of silicon, do you think silicon has changed its electrical response 🤔
Sorry, I had mistakenly assumed that engineers designing sensors had been doing something the past 20 years, but I now realize thanks to you that it's silicon itself that converts photons into bits and not complex imaging chips.
I'll look for silicon on Amazon and use that instead of my expensive cameras.
p.18 #9 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
bernardl wrote:
Sorry, I had mistakenly assumed that engineers designing sensors had been doing something the past 20 years, but I now realize thanks to you that it's silicon itself that converts photons into bits and not complex imaging chips.
I'll look for silicon on Amazon and use that instead of my expensive cameras.
Cheers,
Bernard
sensor electronics is very basic just multiplied 30 million times, all thats happened is increased NR in camera to produce cleaner images at higher iso. and also operating speeds.
p.18 #10 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
bernardl wrote:
I just checked your numbers on Photon to Photon, and as I expected the PDR difference between the Z8 (11.3 stops) and a7rV (11.7 stops) is only 0.4 stops, not 1 stop.
I am sorry, I am 100% sure that this is completely impossible to tell apart in a double blind test. I don't doubt your honesty, but what you think you see is your pre-conveived idea that there is a difference. I have spent enough time in high-end audio to know this is very common even among highly educated individuals aware about this phenomenon.
Considering this tiny difference, it would IMHO be a mistake to stick to BIS sensors because of this DR gap considering the huge advantages of stacked sensor for many schooting scenarios.
The cost if higher for the Z6III and even higher for the a9III which is clearly by far the worst sensor in terms of DR. Not that it really matters that much for the applications where it is used.
The next interesting sensor development could come with the Z9II. It shouldn't be that far off now.
Base ISO matters primarily for landscape, and studio photography and film scanning. Since the A1ii, Z8, Z9, and Z6III are not designed with those genres as their main focus, their dynamic range performance at base ISO is of limited relevance.
What truly matters is dynamic range at the same ISO . In real-world use, for events, weddings, sports and so on, it is far more common to shoot above the base ISO. Here the A1ii is up to one entire stop ahead of the Z9.
One extra stop of DR means the brightest object the A1ii can capture before clipping is twice as bright as the Z9. This is a significant gap.
p.18 #11 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
RoamingScott wrote:
As usual, the only people that care about DR enough to post about ceaselessly it never produce examples of the cameras in question falling short in tough conditions.
It's really easy to see through the schtick.
I may not have kept the photos where I blew out the bride's dress, but I sure remember that lesson . Good thing I was the second photographer then.
Greg posted his samples too, you should take a look
Oct 08, 2025 at 09:48 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.18 #12 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
aCuria wrote:
You are comparing ISO 64 to ISO 100.
Base ISO matters primarily for landscape, and studio photography and film scanning. Since the A1ii, Z8, Z9, and Z6III are not designed with those genres as their main focus, their dynamic range performance at base ISO is of limited relevance.
What truly matters is dynamic range at the same ISO . In real-world use, for events, weddings, sports and so on, it is far more common to shoot above the base ISO. Here the A1ii is one entire stop ahead of the Z9.
One extra stop of DR means the brightest object the A1ii can capture before clipping is twice as bright as the Z9. This is a significant gap. ...Show more →
No, that isn't accurate. The A1 II only has about a stop more DR at ISO 100 and just that ISO. At ISO 125 the gap is about .9 of a stop and decreases to about three quarters of a stop at ISO 400. At ISO 500 the Z9 actually has slightly higher DR than the A1 II and from ISO 640 to ISO 12800 the gap remains about half a stop or quite close to that. You are right for a lot of usages that 640 to 12800 range is the critical one for these cameras but in that range the A1 II's advantage is much better characterized as a half stop advantage and not as a stop.
p.18 #13 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Ross Martin wrote:
I can geek out on photo specs at times including DR numbers, like any good photo forum nerd but the truth is I have not been able to see any problems in actual real-world shooting of cameras from many different brands over the years that have different DR numbers. The example here is from the Z9 and I intentionally and massively underexposed to protect the highlights, then pulled up exposure/shadows in Lightroom by 3 stops, and to me it looks good.
p.18 #14 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Immortal wrote:
Z8 and Z6 III are almost matched in DR till ISO 400, after that till roughly 700-750 Z8 is ahead and again, from ISO 800 and up they're matched. The real benefit of Z8 is that you can shoot at ISO 64 with higher DR than Z6 III at its base ISO of 100.
That's not saying much when they are both worse than the D750, a 11 year old camera.
Oct 08, 2025 at 10:06 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.18 #15 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
aCuria wrote:
I am not much of a landscape guy, but the color and detail have suffered in that shot compared to what I am used to at ISO 100.
You can't compare Ross' shot with your shots. They are quite different approaches. Among other things he stopped down to f/22 and I don't think you did. That in and of itself can create a difference in detail due to differences in defraction. That said, I really like Ross' and what makes it work to me anyway has nothing to do with the amount of detail in the shot. There is so much more to a good landscape shot than the amount of detail captured. I like Ross' shot for the relation of the forms of landscape and the shapes which isn't at all about detail.
p.18 #16 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
bernardl wrote:
We have always compared the DR of sensors by comparing the highest DR value, which is at the native base ISO of the sensor. 64 for the Z8, 100 for the a7rV.
Why so? Because that determines the ability of the sensor to extract useful shadow information while not saturating it’s highlights. Which is the very definition of DR.
And this matches the way cameras are used in the real world. Nobody shoots landscape at ISO100 with a Z8. The lower base ISO of the Z8 is a feature.
Choosing the Z8 primarily for landscapes isn’t the most practical decision.
When it comes to the sports and wildlife photography this camera is marketed for, dynamic range at the same ISO is what really matters...
Oct 08, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.18 #17 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
aCuria wrote:
That's not saying much when they are both worse than the D750, a 11 year old camera.
The Z8 and Z9 are only worse than the D750 below ISO 500, an ISO range that you yourself have characterized as not the range for which these cameras are typically shot given the genres for which they are used.
p.18 #18 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
You can't compare Ross' shot with your shots. They are quite different approaches. Among other things he stopped down to f/22 and I don't think you did. That in and of itself can create a difference in detail due to differences in defraction. That said, I really like Ross' and what makes it work to me anyway has nothing to do with the amount of detail in the shot. There is so much more to a good landscape shot than the amount of detail captured. I like Ross' shot for the relation of the forms of landscape and the shapes which isn't at all about detail....Show more →
You could be right that maybe its a poor example of what the camera is capable of.
However, using f/22 should not affect the color, primarily lens resolution is whats affected.
Could lens resolution have been degraded by diffraction so much that we don't even have 1MP (1200x800) left?
I think we are seeing some of that color shifting that was being discussed maybe.
Oct 08, 2025 at 10:26 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.18 #19 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
aCuria wrote:
Choosing the Z8 primarily for landscapes isn’t the most practical decision.
When it comes to the sports and wildlife photography this camera is marketed for, dynamic range at the same ISO is what really matters...
By the way there are lots of uses beside landscapes for base ISO. Anytime you have adequate shutter speed and enough light to shoot at base ISO you should. For example, I almost always shoot outdoor portraits at base ISO. When I shoot on a tripod, whether it is macro, landscapes, or architecture I almost always shoot at base ISO as well. Here are five of my favorite shots all shot at base ISO none of which are landscapes.
ILCE-7RM2ZEISS Loxia 2.4/85 lens85mmf/2.41/500s100 ISO0.0 EV
LEICA M10Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/50 ASPH. lens50mm9s100 ISO0.0 EV
ILCE-7M2100mm F2 lens100mmf/4.51/320s100 ISO+1.3 EV
Canon EOS 5D Mark IIZeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 ZE lens100mmf/2.01/800s100 ISO0.0 EV
ILCE-7RM2Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm F1.2 Aspherical lens40mmf/2.01/500s100 ISO+0.3 EV
p.18 #20 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
The Z8 and Z9 are only worse than the D750 below ISO 500, an ISO range that you yourself have characterized as not the range for which these cameras are typically shot given the genres for which they are used.
I am not much of a wildlife photographer either but these are 400-500 7IV01757 by acurian, on Flickr
. Good thing I was the second photographer then. 
but the truth is I have not been able to see any problems in actual real-world shooting of cameras from many different brands over the years that have different DR numbers. The example here is from the Z9 and I intentionally and massively underexposed to protect the highlights, then pulled up exposure/shadows in Lightroom by 3 stops, and to me it looks good.
