1Dx simple DR stress test

[Neutral]

There are a lot of heated discussions about Canon versus SoNikon sensor DR performace, sensor technology, about DXO not measuring sensors correctlly in favour of Nikon  etc.
  So here is a simple DR stress test results for 1Dx shadow recovery limits for those who are interested:
  I did these tests to see  myself what is 1Dx is capable of.
Attached are 4 pictures (snapshots from LR4 screen by Win7 snipping tool):
1. 1Dx shot at ISO100 with EV = (-3 )   - showing 100% crop area shown below
2. Corrected with +3 EV in LR4, no shadow correction, no noise reduction applied
3. The same as #2 above with shadows raised to max 100%
4. The same as #3 above but with NR applied in LR  with L=40, C=40.
Results are self explanatory -  no further comments from me on this subject.
  Despite for what we see here regarding 1Dx DR  performance here my experience with 1Dx is very positive - almost perfect tool for low light sport  and events shooting.
In daylight 1Dx images also look much cleaner and having more 3D look than 1DsM3 and 5DM2 that I used before (just my personal perception)  and allow more image sharpening to be applied safely.
Also seems that 1Dx has a bit weaker anti-aliasing filter  - with extreemly sharp 24-70 2.8L II I could see moire on  some areas of ISO resolution chart  where image elements (projected on sensor)  become comparable in size with pixel size on camera sensor.  I have not observed that with other lenses including very sharp 70-200 2.8L IS II

[Viggo]

Thanks for posting.

But, again, I must ask, why on earth would one's starting point ever be that underexposed. And anyone with the slightest knowledge of photo and light would either expose correctly or over and bring down highlights. I have shot more than 14000 images with the 1d X in all sorts of scenarios, not once have I need to pull shadows by any amount under the wtf-category values...

[neuroanatomist]

Why  must and should we exposure Canon richer= longer exposure time and even then get a poorer results in the shadows compared to Nikon.

We must, because last time I checked, sensors do not take pictures.  Cameras take pictures.  Sure, you can manipulate images and identify differences in sensor performance.  But the fact remains that I (and I mean me, personally) can get images from my Canon camera that would be impossible for me to get with a Nikon or Sony.

[neuroanatomist]

I'm tired of your patronizing comments, see photos above.and show me one example of what you can do with a Canon and not with a Nikon except shooting faster

I'm tired of you reposting the same or equivalent shots in thread after thread after thread.  Nikon/Sony sensors have better DR than Canon sensors.  If your point in reposting the same statements and images in every thread that even tangentially mentions DR is to convince members of this forum that Nikon/Sony sensors have better DR than Canon sensors, you can stop - we get it, and we got it before you started posting here.  If your point is to induce Canon to produce sensors with better DR, this is not the place for that effort, not to mention that I'm sure Canon knows the DR of their sensors, know the DR of Sony/Nikon sensors, and has chosen to emphasize other design priorities to this point.

Is DR the only thing that matters to you when taking a picture?  To me, it's not.  If my 'once-in-a-lifetime shot' was a black barbeque against the side of a white shed in full sunlight, then my answer might be different.

When I said that I, personally, can get images from my Canon camera that I could not get from a Nikon camera, did you jump to the erroneous conclusion that I am also saying the converse?  One could certainly get images from a Nikon camera that one could not get from a Canon camera.

Instead of test images manipulated to repeatedly argue the same point, which has already been conceeded, let me remind you that taking pictures is about far more than the sensor inside the camera, and leave you with the following rhetorical questions:  Where is Nikon's MP-E 65mm?  Where is Nikon's 600mm f/4 lens which is light enough that I can carry it for a 5 km hike then use it to take a handheld shot?


EOS 5D Mark II, MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro @ 5x, 1/60 s, f/11, ISO 400, MT-24EX


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 1.4x III Extender, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 100

EDIT: I have come to the conclusion that your primary purpose here on CR seems to be agitating and formenting rancor, the bold-face edits to your post above after I hit the quote button clearly show that, as do your 150 posts with something like 90% of them beating exactly the same dead horse. 

[RLPhoto]

Really Now? Beat the DR Dead horse some more eh michael?

[dsiegel5151]

I don't even know why I am posting here, but I'm bored...

I agree with Neuro 100%. The variables involved in creating a great image are far more more numerous than sensor DR. I consider a camera a tool. I have lots of cameras that I use for lots of different situations. The most important variables to me are knowing how to use your camera, being in the right place at the right time, knowing your subject, and executing your shot appropriately (exposure, shutter speed, flash, etc...). I would argue that I couldn't get this shot below with a Nikon b/c I don't have a Nikon camera, I don't own a Nikon lens, and I don't know all the intricacies of how the Nikon system works. However, I have a Canon camera, I have Canon lenses, and I know all the intricacies of how my Canon cameras work. Thus, I feel that I can produce fine images no matter how dated the camera (image was shot with a Canon 20D, iso 100, f8, 1/160s, tripod mounted, 180mm f3.5L, 430 EXII flash, hand-held reflector to help fill shadows).

[Neutral]

Thanks for posting.

But, again, I must ask, why on earth would one's starting point ever be that underexposed. And anyone with the slightest knowledge of photo and light would either expose correctly or over and bring down highlights. I have shot more than 14000 images with the 1d X in all sorts of scenarios, not once have I need to pull shadows by any amount under the wtf-category values...

Very simple reason - if one have some tool one need to know limits of this tool  - where is green zone where is yellow and where is red.
To know that one need to do some special tests and these tests conditions are definetely different from normal tool usage because the goal is different than goal of normal shooting.
And post title tells this very clearly - this is stress test - meaning testing something in extreme conditions - and this  is normally done in any industry.
  I just did number of tests for myself to see what are this camera possibilities in recovering shadows areas, where is the limit  and shared results for those who would be interested to see results )))
And no hidden context in that.
Knowing tool capabilities and limitation helps in using the tool in optimal way  - this is very basic.
So for 1Dx  ETR  (exposure to the right) rule is still alive - and not acually required for Nikon D800.
And in fact 1Dx is amazing camera in all areas I really enjoing using it - mentioned this in my initial post.
Regards

[preppyak]

some  answer with facts  as mature people does and others  write boring long posts  based on emotion/ feelings  instead of facts.   

And some of us post really long statements about boring photos of grills and what they mean...when the answer is they don't mean a whole lot.

As Neuro pointed out, the Nikon D800 could have 10 more stops of DR than a Canon 5dIII or 1DX, but, DR means nothing to his shot if he can't be at 3-4x magnification. It wouldn't mean much if the extra 4lbs of a Nikon 600mm lens means he has to setup a tripod and miss that bird shot (or worse, try it hand-held and come out blurry).

If sensors and DR were the only important thing in a photograph, you wouldn't like that picture of a snake taken with an 8yr old  8MP sensor that gets crushed in DR by the Nikon camera.

[AdamJ]

In portraits, I still contend that the "look" of Canon images is simply more flattering than Nikon images.

[Orangutan]

It appears that Mikael Risedal is seeking recognition or approval.  Perhaps he believes he can be the great leader who will organize the oppressed serfs of Canonia as they present their sad laments to the royalty in the Big White Palace.  Moved by their plight, the Royals will soften their hearts, and bestow upon the poor peasants an abundance of Dynamic Range.

Mr. Risedal, please read Neuro's previous comments: it's widely discussed that the D800 sensor has a little more DR than Canon sensors.  You aren't presenting anything new, and this incessant arguing does not show you in a good light. The reason you haven't gained acclaim here is that you haven't presented anything new/useful.

I would like to be able to read useful discussion of DR, and I usually try not to be snarky, but this is a tedious waste of time.  A camera is more than just a sensor.

[RLPhoto]

you are really boring, meet me with facts, the grill is only a illustration and it is boring but true

Yes, of course, because DR graphs and test charts are the most exciting thing's in photography.  :|

Michael, We already know that nikon/sony sensors are better but they're not that much better.

[Kernuak]

some  answer with facts  as mature people does and others  write boring long posts  based on emotion/ feelings  instead of facts.   

And some of us post really long statements about boring photos of grills and what they mean...when the answer is they don't mean a whole lot.

As Neuro pointed out, the Nikon D800 could have 10 more stops of DR than a Canon 5dIII or 1DX, but, DR means nothing to his shot if he can't be at 3-4x magnification. It wouldn't mean much if the extra 4lbs of a Nikon 600mm lens means he has to setup a tripod and miss that bird shot (or worse, try it hand-held and come out blurry).

If sensors and DR were the only important thing in a photograph, you wouldn't like that picture of a snake taken with an 8yr old  8MP sensor that gets crushed in DR by the Nikon camera.

do you believe what you are writing, or is it a wishful thinking? 2 stops av DR are 2 stops and with out banding

Any chance of a link to your professional website?

[dtaylor]

Tis is 1dx vs nikon d800 in the shadow same exposure time same f-stop, d800 to the right

No NR, which we can see from the original post makes a huge difference and minimizes (though not eliminates) the difference.

But why compare "best possible" when we're out to make a point!

[dtaylor]

Where is Nikon's MP-E 65mm?  Where is Nikon's 600mm f/4 lens which is light enough that I can carry it for a 5 km hike then use it to take a handheld shot?

Oh snap! 

But...but...but...DYNAMIC! RANGE! 

In all seriousness, great shots Neuro. The macro shot is awesome.

[dtaylor]

what a baloney, has a little more DR  seeking recognition and approval , I have shown with pictures and measurable data that Canon's sensors are  a lot  inferior compared to  Sony, 2 stops DR and banding and pattern noise, get a life

You've spent how much time beating the DR horse on this forum? 

And you're telling other people to get a life?