RoamingScott wrote: dmcphoto wrote: artsupreme wrote:
Yes but the 1DXIII stayed at 20MP. The jump to 45MP seems like it could be quite a task for Canon to improve DR over the 5DIV.
I'd point out that there are other cameras with more MP than the 5DIV that also have more DR, so it's definitely possible. For instance, the 2017 vintage 45.7 MP Nikon D850.
*cough*sonysensor*cough*
Dynamic Range - everyone wants it but everyone makes way too big a deal of it
Most sites report dynamic range normalized to a 8mpx print (eg they downsample 42mpx to 8mpx and 20mpx to 8mpx) at iso 100. This leads to higher mpx looking better because there are more mpx per 8mpx. This metric is informative but misses much of the story.
If you look at DPReview comparisons in their reviews you will compare performance of cameras where they are underexposed and pushed back by 1,2,3,4,5,6 stops. Which shows usable dynamic range that is useful. (ISO invariance). iso invariance is useful for action shooters who don't have to worry about exposure as much just shoot underexposed and raise the exposure after the fact without much penalty. But with skill (exposing properly) this can be offset. To date the sony sensor has beeen a stop or more better at this. Thus you can push a 6 stop under exposure on sony to look like a 5 stop underexposure on a canon.
Dynamic range at base (eg iso 100) is useful to landscape shooters who can shoot long shutter speeds on a tripod because they can get details from one image for shadows while not blowing out bright areas. But the gains are marginal because if there is motion you can't shoot long and generally if there isn't motion, AEB and blending does a better job on colours in shadows. Better is better but only for certain circumstance like not on the tripod or with moving leaves.
Dynamic range at > iso 800 for wildlife / sports shooters ( who can push to eg iso 16,000 to keep their shutter speed up and still get a good (worth printing) picture. It is more important for wildlife than sports because people are willing to accept more noise because of emotional involvement with subject than wildlife. Thus ISO 32,000 works for sports but for birds, unless you are a orthamologist, you might want to top out at 16,000 iSO. Pretty much every modern camera (5div, 1dxii, a7Riv, a9) has similar performance above iso800 where all pictures are taken. eg it does not matter much. https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon--EOS-1D-X-Mark-II-versus-Sony-a9-versus-Sony-A7R-IV___1071_1162_1326
The real gains, given how close the camera's are in dynamic range, is mpx [for landscape], fps, burst, tracking, ergonomics, battery life, and reliability [for sports/wildlife]. We wont' know that until the R5 is tested, but I expect that not much will change but the battle cry of the brand loyalists (including me) over the marginal differences. Lets hope that the Canon battle cry is bigger
Feb 21, 2020 at 06:29 PM
Previous versions of Scott Stoness's message #15150368 « EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype? »
