« on: December 07, 2014, 02:25:01 PM »
I'm trying to learn here. I've tried HDR (Photomatix and PS CC 2014) with my own photos. In most cases, I prefer my results when I simply adjust the best of the multiple shots I took of a subject. But, I probably don't know how to properly merge the multiple exposures.
And, unlike the motionless scene in the deserted house in the photo linked by the OP (which Neuro has so artfully pointed out), it seems to me that in many (or most) shots in the wild, something is moving. It may be the ocean, branches on a tree, tall grasses, whatever. So, an HDR image is never gong to look crisp in all of the detail in those situations (anti ghosting seems to work if one thing moves, but not if there are multiple things moving in multiple directions???).
So, with everything else being equal, if Canon were to produce a sensor with more low ISO DR, say like the A7r, would that be a bad thing? And, knowing it is possible, do we really blame loyal Canon users for wishing that Canon would get on with it and provide cameras that match or exceed the Sonys? (Perhaps not so coincidentally, two landscape photographers I know from going on workshops with them have recently switched, in whole or in part, from 5DIIIs to A7rs. Not a scientific sampling, but perhaps indicative of what is happening in the real world. I know many folks who haven't purchased an "American" car in 40 years (and yes, I live in California). Don't think it couldn't happen to Canon).
It will be a long time (if ever) that my technical knowledge and artistic abilities exceed the capabilities of my 6D. But I wouldn't mind knowing that as I expand my Canon glass collection, the back end of the system is evolving a pace.
I'm not a DRone or anti-DRone. I'm just trying to learn and understand the issue.