« on: July 22, 2013, 01:09:50 PM »
Shouldn't Canon be creating something greater than 23 megapixels before jumping with the big boys?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Dynamic range is Probably more Important to me than noise reduction or pixel count.
I think the way to do this is to split the sensor into highlights and shadows...
I rather have an 8mp 16-stop split sensor, than a 16mp one with less DR.
It can be done.
It is interesting that most HDR cameras take 3 exposures but nobody thought about changing the ISO Instead.
I believe in pushing things to the limit and opening up the possibilities of a device...
Like my jailbroken iPhone 5. Which is amazingly more useful and fun than the limited iOS from apple.
Kudos to magic lantern!
Keep up the great work!
why not 36Mp and the best DR ?
My 6D arrived few days ago.. and I can say.. WOW!
comparing my 6D with my old 40D and 1DS mk3
Canon, you are not getting a dime of my money on your recent cameras.
I'm sure they'll be crying all the way to the bank, as 60D and Rebel shooters, attracted by the allure of FF and by the 'affordable' price, coupled with consumer-oriented features like GPS, WiFi, and an SD card slot, buy up 6D's left and right.
If you should have the double resolution then you need 72 Mp
I think there is a big difference in resolution , look at X and the text authentic beers
said it before and will say it again... i have seen the light! Obviously charts and more charts are the way! I think from now on instead of giving clients images to review, I will just have dxo measure them, translate it to charts, and send my clients the charts and let them choose that way! Cause that's all that matters right? I mean who cares about images, lets just review charts all day!
If you had a camera that had the DR of the human eye but only shot one frame every 10 minutes at ISO 100 only and was only manual focus...I've read in a book of a Russian author (not sure if it was translated to English) that human eye has 5-6 stops of DR. And the reason we can see much bigger range of lightness levels is the ability of our eyes to adapt to the rapidly changing environment.
The book's author was a researcher in photography so this statement might be true. Did anyone hear anything like that?
Yes I have that somewhere.
I always was told our eye has a massive DR but not because of the optics but how our brain can dynamically adjust areas of a scene to make blacks brighter and highlights darker. Kinda like dynamic area ISO.
Dynamic range is the total sensitivity range. Just like with a camera and a computer, the eye/brain configuration chooses which range out of the total sensitivity range to "process to". I think our eyes are capable of well more than 5-6 stops on average at any given moment, but I do not believe we can see the entire 25+ stop dynamic range our eyes have all at once. Exactly how much we can see in any one go I can't say, although if I compare my eyes to my 7D, I can definitely see more than 11 stops at a time. My 7D will either clip highlights or block shadows if I try to capture a scene with 12 stops, but my eyes seem to concurrently handle the highlights and shadows of the same scenes just fine.
Actually, Nikon can start (re)naming their cameras as DXO4, DXO800 etc.LOL! That's a good one.