twinsfan7777 wrote:
This has nothing to do with not understanding light. I understand and am capable of exposing an image correctly, but I like to shoot into the sun to get that dramatic look, so I would either need to bracket the image (more time, need to lug around a tripod) or have a camera with great dynamic range. I\'m trying to save time, so I would prefer if a camera had enough dynamic range where I would not need to bracket and then merge the photos in photoshop. And that brings back the original question, which camera provides the most amount of flexibility in those terms.
One thing to consider when hoping that extra DR will solve such a problem is that when comparing cameras with differing DR capabilities, there are basically three possibilities:
1. The dynamic range of the scene doesn\'t exceed the capabilities of either camera.
2. The dynamic range exceeds the capability of the less capable camera, but only by a small enough increment that it doesn\'t exceed that of the more capable camera.
3. The dynamic range exceeds the capacity of both cameras.
The most common situation by far is case #1. The second most common is case #3 —and your \"straight into the sun\" photographs fall into that category. The least common circumstance, since it is the smallest exposure window, is case #2, where one camera can handle it and the other cannot.
I suspect that you\'ll find that shooting directly into the sun exceeds the DR capability of any camera that you would consider, and that you\'ll still have to resort to there techniques for that no matter what camera you get.
Dan
Oct 20, 2016 at 10:49 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #13773077 « Canon 5D Mark III or Sony A7ii? »
