Canon just does not seem to be able to break that 11 point DR. If only their customers make fuss about it... but Canon customers are not demanding sensor quality and Canon is gladly shipping out decade old technology.
July 24, 2014, 09:11:58 AM
Topic: 70D and Dxomark.... (Read 58477 times)
poias
- EOS M2
- Posts: 165
-
Cognitive dissonance is very high with Canon customers who just shelled out a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that "I always expose properly, so who cares about pulling shadows", "I shoot JPG anyway", "I like how Canon feels in my hands", or "Canon sells way more cameras".
Logged
Don Haines
- Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
-
- Posts: 2785
- Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
-
Cognitive dissonance is very high with Canon customers who just shelled out a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that "I always expose properly, so who cares about pulling shadows", "I shoot JPG anyway", "I like how Canon feels in my hands", or "Canon sells way more cameras".And some say that canon does X better while Nikon is better at Y, and since X is more important to me, I went with Canon.
Logged
The best camera is the one in your hands
meli
- EOS M2
- Posts: 162
-
I'm sure I'll get flamed for this and maybe I'm missing something here, but when I compare the D7100 to the 70D and 7D on the graphs there doesn't seem to be all that much difference.
I admit I'm not a dynamic range freak, and I'm more interested in ISO performance, but it doesn't seem like there is any real world difference between the Nikon and Canon sensors.
There's a small real world difference in terms of IQ when you have to dig really deep into the shadows. It's blown up into a huge difference by...
* Shooting a wall in the dark.
* Shoving the exposure slider to +5 EV.
* Turning off all NR on the Canon sample.
If you normally shoot this way, Nikon is your first choice.
I was already on FF when 7d came out but through the years i had a chance to review files from assistants, friends & gfs from either 7d 60d or d7000 (have to find one with a pentax now
). The IQ difference isn't that tiny really. First you can get really nice files out of those sony sensors below 400. You can get FF quality easily, whereas 7d really has noise all over the spectrum. You can see a quantitative difference with local adjustments of about 1-2 stops and what happens to color and noise.
Obviously you can see a massive difference if you want to salvage shoots where flash or strobes didnt fire; basically those sony sensors are isoless, you could push an underexposed iso100 all the way to 3200 and there isnt much difference from a native 3200, plus the tonality will be actually greater.
From someone coming from compacts or cameraphones the difference is nonexistent but from someone who wants too squeeze every possible drop of quality from an apsc sensors, then you'll find canon isnt your best bet.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2013, 07:07:41 PM by meli »
Logged
zlatko
- EOS M2
- Posts: 242
-
Cognitive dissonance is very high with Canon customers who just shelled out a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that "I always expose properly, so who cares about pulling shadows", "I shoot JPG anyway", "I like how Canon feels in my hands", or "Canon sells way more cameras".Not exactly. I push and pull exposures as much as I ever need to with Canon cameras and never have a problem with shadows or anything else relating to sensor. And I have thousands of raw files from the D800, D7100 and D7000 and the color is never as good as Canon's.
Logged
sdsr
- 5D Mark III
- Posts: 641
-
Cognitive dissonance is very high with Canon customers who just shelled out a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that "I always expose properly, so who cares about pulling shadows", "I shoot JPG anyway", "I like how Canon feels in my hands", or "Canon sells way more cameras".
Maybe. But after owning a 5DII for a while and thinking it might be nice to own a Nikon as well, I shelled out a few hundred and rented a D800e and D600 and 5DIII and 6D before buying a 5DIII and 6D and neither a D800e nor D600 - because, for my purposes, the photos I took with the Nikons didn't look any better than the photos I took with the Canons (not quite as good, if anything, but for the most part probably indistinguishable, allowing for lens differences), there's probably only one Nikon lens for which I have any sort of lens envy, and I dislike Nikon's ergonomics. I suspect one or two others have had similar experiences.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2013, 07:17:59 PM by sdsr »
Logged
neuroanatomist
- CR GEEK
-
- Posts: 13529
-
Cognitive dissonance is very high with Canon customers who just shelled out a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that "I always expose properly, so who cares about pulling shadows", "I shoot JPG anyway", "I like how Canon feels in my hands", or "Canon sells way more cameras".
Cognitive dissonance is very high with Nikon customers who just shelled out (more than) a couple of Gs on their imaging equipment. They will try to justify by saying that, "I don't really focus on anything in the left side of the field," and, "The sharpness of my images isn't affected by the CA endemic to my lenses, that can be fixed in post," and, "I like lots of buttons," and, "A smaller, less successful, non market-leading company like Nikon treats me better (and no, I don't mind waiting almost a month for a service when needed)."
Logged
Pi
- 1D Mark IV
-
- Posts: 937
-
"A smaller, less successful, non market-leading company like Nikon treats me better[...]"
That is often true, actually. In the audiophile world, big companies are not big, for example.
Logged