« on: August 09, 2014, 03:46:05 AM »
So, the thing you might be missing...is that HDR isn't difficult these days. If you need more DR, take an extra frame or two (or 14). That works in every camera, regardless of it's sensor capabilities.
HDR is only useful where you can use a shutter speed of > 1 second because otherwise the inter-frame changes make it look crap. Think wind blowing in trees, moving water, etc.
That assumes landscapes. There are plenty of still-life use cases...such as PBD's interior design scene, or my description of the WWII plane interior. You could expose for as long as you wanted with such a scene, as there are no trees, or flowing water, etc. Most of the 15-frame HDR images I've seen were still scenes, usually interiors of something or some kind.
Talking of landscape, I find it really really strange that the antagonist in this thread is clearly a studio photographer where you have full control over DR, in fact for a studio photographer DR is the last of your worries, assuming that is, that you are competent in studio set up. So I just don't see why this guy was banging on and on about DR. Oh well yes I do, it's the only area where the Canon sensor can be regarded as inferior to the Sony.
Ironically the landscape pictures that our antagonist posted as examples of greater DR were terribly flat. Even the small landscape shots posted by PBD shout tonal range and luminosity which complement and enhance the light that was already present.
I suppose when you compare those images it boils down to the age old adage: it's not what you've got, it's how you use it