December 21, 2014, 02:02:11 AM

Author Topic: 70D and Dxomark....  (Read 74912 times)

MichaelHodges

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #75 on: August 29, 2013, 12:52:04 PM »
Yeah, but the DR recovery capabilities of the Nikon FF sensor is a pretty nice brush.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #75 on: August 29, 2013, 12:52:04 PM »

Apop

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
    • View Profile
    • Apophoto
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #76 on: August 29, 2013, 12:58:48 PM »

Its the art you create with it that matters.


+1. but painters totally complain about their brushes.

Ehm in that analogy i think the brush would be the lens and the sensor the paint/thingy where you paint on ( piece of paper:p)

Or lens the paint plus brush and the paper the sensor

Or the body the brush , the sensor the paint , but then the lens would be the paper hmmmmm
No?
« Last Edit: August 29, 2013, 01:00:39 PM by Apop »

horshack

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #77 on: August 29, 2013, 01:00:38 PM »
Nikon picked up their game for sensors.

I think you mean Sony picked up their game, and Nikon came along for the ride.

love you neuro

How about the Nikon-designed D4 sensor? It doesn't have the Exmor's DR but it's still 1 1/2 stops higher than the 1DX at base ISO.

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1088
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #78 on: August 29, 2013, 01:01:15 PM »
... awkward when handholding a d800 ..to change the ISO settings (top left of the camera), I could not find how to assign it to any of the other buttons.

?? In Av mode I've got my front control wheel for aperture, rear wheel for ISO

The same to change autofocus points, hard to reach that switch...

short thumb?

Quote
The af-on switch needs too much pressure..

OK, maybe your hands aren't the best fit for a d800
I have mid-size paws and d800 feels perfect in my mitts with a 70-200 hanging off it.

Quote
4fps? really?

5d2 was pretty slow too, who's complaining about that?

Nikon bodies are quite different, you need to spend some time with them to adjust yourself to how to get the best handling with them.  No different than any other mfr.  I have to admit, my long term Canon use gave me a similar bias but no more.
D800 isn't a spray'n'pray kind of camera, it requires more deliberate use.. but has more forgiving (under)exposure latitude

.. learn how to expose properly, and take some freaking pictures for God sake or sell your gear and jump to sony for all I care... Just stop this nonsense. 

how do YOU "expose properly" for a scene that exceeds your Canon's DR?
Are you content to clip highlites and shadows and live with the out-of-camera tone curve for every shot?
If so, your advice may not register with the more artistic photographers.

Apop

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
    • View Profile
    • Apophoto
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #79 on: August 29, 2013, 01:02:41 PM »
Nikon picked up their game for sensors.

I think you mean Sony picked up their game, and Nikon came along for the ride.

love you neuro

How about the Nikon-designed D4 sensor? It doesn't have the Exmor's DR but it's still 1 1/2 stops higher than the 1DX at base ISO.


That lacks the resolution ! , 16mp just doesn't cut it for full frame

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1088
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #80 on: August 29, 2013, 01:11:53 PM »
As for jumping ship, I think people tend to exaggerate how hard it is.  In the past few years I've jumped ship from Nikon APS-C to Pentax APS-C to Canon FF, bought a second ship (Olympus) and toyed with a third (Nikon FF) before deciding against it after renting a couple.  Each time I switched I sold all the previous equipment I had bought.  Depending on whether I had bought it new or used I received less/more/the same as I had paid for it in the first place.  I may have overall "lost" but I don't look at it that way - I think if it as the (not very high) price of using that equipment during the time I owned it and an extremely useful learning experience.

+1

Quote
Pentax, by the way, provided a rather good example of why DR isn't enough.  I owned a K-5, with a K-x as back-up.  At the time there seemed to be fairly wide agreement that the K-5 had the best sensor of any APS-C camera (the same Sony sensor as the D7000 but run by slightly better software), and it was a good camera in other ways too (esp. ergonomics).  The dynamic range was simply astonishing - when I first bought it I would amuse myself by fooling around with deep shadows in DxO and LR, amazed by what it could reveal (not that the results were worth keeping...); and yes, there were a few times, mainly involving sharply contrasting light in the alleys of Lugano, when it proved useful.  But the relative shortage of first rate lenses with fast, accurate focusing soon became old....

I've added Pentax gear to my kit over the last year.  I really like the k52s, the thing will AF in near dark w-o assist light.  And it likely still does have the best overall low ISO raw performance of any crop body... per-pixel anyway. and the high iso end is also very good.
But I agree, Pentax lenses are a different collection compared to the competition but I've managed to find some that work extremely well for me, tho only my body-driven primes focus super fast.  Their SDM AF is kinda slow on my 16-50/2.8 and that's cost me a few shots.
Still, I use it because I love the images I get with it and the ergonomics and highly customizable interface.  It's a very good photographic tool and has replaced my 60D + 15-85mm as my go-to rig.  If they would bring out a fast lens with more range, like 15-85mm f/2.8-4.5, that'd be even better.

David Hull

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #81 on: August 29, 2013, 01:20:42 PM »
All this really proves that even two of the best cameras currently made are each capable of producing suboptimal images when used incorrectly.

That statement implies that you don't know how to use a camera correctly actually  ;).
Just about anyone who knew what they were doing (and was actually trying to make a good, low noise image as opposed to a bad, noisy one) could have done a good job on this scene using either of these cameras.  The fact that this guy did not only speaks for his choice of technique not for the quality of the equipment.  These shots were made with a deliberate bias to make a specific point.  However, in most of these “examples” it turns out to be a moot point because (in almost every case), not only could the image be made with either camera but a dramatically better image could be made with either camera if that were your goal (that is assuming you know how to use your camera correctly  ;) ).

Based on the examples continually put up, the number of real images that actually demand application of a single shot technique with serious shadow lifting must be pretty few and far between (otherwise we would not be continually entertained with the junk we are always shown).  In this particular case the guy went to Mono Lake and Yosemite and he shows a whole series of magnificent images shot with the Canon gear.  Apparently he could not find a real world example in that usually very challenging environment where the Canon gear was not up to the task.

While this particular parameter provides plenty of fodder for the endless sabre rattling over which brand is superior to the other, in the real world of practical photography (save for a small number of specific applications executed over a pretty narrow range of the ISO capability of the equipment) it appears to be pretty much a nonstarter.  I would guess that you could probably type out the screen names for everyone that has ever participated in these types of threads on one side of a single sheet of A size paper which is probably not enough to produce noticeable movement on the Canon/Nikon market share needle.

Incidentally, the example we are discussing has to do with pattern noise which has nothing whatsoever to do with the thing the DxO curve is reporting.


 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #81 on: August 29, 2013, 01:20:42 PM »

Chosenbydestiny

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #82 on: August 29, 2013, 01:21:36 PM »
I love how people keep arguing over the sensors and how much more DR they actually need. These people aren't photographers, they're editors with cameras. Tons of DR is like a crutch for them. Wow, they screwed up their shots,, shouldn't that mean they have to live and learn from loss? Lazy. Such a worthless excuse for a petty argument.
Nikon electric fan, gas stove, and slippers. Canon Elan 7, 1D Mark III, 5D mark III, and 2x6D. Canon 24mm Samyang/Rokinon, 85L, 135L, and many other lenses. 2x Canon 580ex II, third party speedlites, studio strobes

MichaelHodges

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #83 on: August 29, 2013, 01:36:52 PM »
I love how people keep arguing over the sensors and how much more DR they actually need. These people aren't photographers, they're editors with cameras. Tons of DR is like a crutch for them. Wow, they screwed up their shots,, shouldn't that mean they have to live and learn from loss? Lazy. Such a worthless excuse for a petty argument.


This really doesn't make any sense.  Every good songwriter, author, or photographer is also a good editor. It's always been that way.

Also it's odd (IMHO) to excuse away technological advancement for the sake of technique. Why can't one attain both? Should we have puffed our chest at the implementation of auto-focus? Should we have held our noses at IS? After all, good technique can nullify those as well....
 
« Last Edit: August 29, 2013, 01:40:03 PM by MichaelHodges »

mkabi

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #84 on: August 29, 2013, 01:41:12 PM »
Gosh threads like this is why i visit canonrumors less and less.  I'd rather hang out at creativelive learning about what I CAN do with a camera and produce better images that I can SELL to my clients than hang out here saying I cant do this or cant do that with a camera.  It amazes me how many professionals for decades have been using Canon and selling images from their inferior canon camera and make money hand over fist.  Only photographers sit looking at their images 3 stop underexposed on the monitors at 200% looking for pattern noise at ISO 100.  Get a freaking life, learn how to expose properly, and take some freaking pictures for God sake or sell your gear and jump to sony for all I care... Just stop this nonsense.

+1. We need to hang out...

Canon 7D - EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L, EF - 20mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 100mm f/2.0, Custom Cine 50mm & Custom Cine 35mm

horshack

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #85 on: August 29, 2013, 01:44:46 PM »
Just about anyone who knew what they were doing (and was actually trying to make a good, low noise image as opposed to a bad, noisy one) could have done a good job on this scene using either of these cameras.  The fact that this guy did not only speaks for his choice of technique not for the quality of the equipment.  These shots were made with a deliberate bias to make a specific point.  However, in most of these “examples” it turns out to be a moot point because (in almost every case), not only could the image be made with either camera but a dramatically better image could be made with either camera if that were your goal (that is assuming you know how to use your camera correctly  ;) ).

Based on the examples continually put up, the number of real images that actually demand application of a single shot technique with serious shadow lifting must be pretty few and far between (otherwise we would not be continually entertained with the junk we are always shown).  In this particular case the guy went to Mono Lake and Yosemite and he shows a whole series of magnificent images shot with the Canon gear.  Apparently he could not find a real world example in that usually very challenging environment where the Canon gear was not up to the task.

While this particular parameter provides plenty of fodder for the endless sabre rattling over which brand is superior to the other, in the real world of practical photography (save for a small number of specific applications executed over a pretty narrow range of the ISO capability of the equipment) it appears to be pretty much a nonstarter.  I would guess that you could probably type out the screen names for everyone that has ever participated in these types of threads on one side of a single sheet of A size paper which is probably not enough to produce noticeable movement on the Canon/Nikon market share needle.

Incidentally, the example we are discussing has to do with pattern noise which has nothing whatsoever to do with the thing the DxO curve is reporting.

Hi Dave, nice to run into one of the other screen names that participates in these threads :) I would agree that nearly every High DR scene can be captured using techniques that don't require a High DR sensor. But one benefit of such sensor is workflow time savings. Here is a recent example where I shot a home interior for a friend for his real estate listing (using a D800). I wanted maximum IQ so I used two-shot blends for all the shots which had windows, to exhibit the woodsy setting outside his home. In this example it took me 20 minutes to manually blend the image, which I did in PS using layers and masks around the windows. For kicks I also performed the same exposure adjustment using a single image, which took me about 3 minutes. The latter has more noise than the two-shot blend but it's still perfectly usable even at the native 36MP resolution...and much more so at the resolutions the images were displayed at for the MLS listing. If you multiply this by 10 photos then the time savings can be significant...compared to either blends or interior strobe set ups.

Full 36MP Images:
Orig lower exposure image: http://horshack.smugmug.com/photos/i-pVMB6WN/0/O/i-pVMB6WN-O.jpg
Two-shot blend: http://horshack.smugmug.com/photos/i-VBVhdth/0/O/i-VBVhdth-O.jpg
One-shot HDR/shadow push: http://horshack.smugmug.com/photos/i-DGKLj57/0/O/i-DGKLj57-O.jpg
« Last Edit: August 29, 2013, 01:47:23 PM by horshack »

awinphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2013
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #86 on: August 29, 2013, 01:50:14 PM »
.. learn how to expose properly, and take some freaking pictures for God sake or sell your gear and jump to sony for all I care... Just stop this nonsense. 

how do YOU "expose properly" for a scene that exceeds your Canon's DR?
Are you content to clip highlites and shadows and live with the out-of-camera tone curve for every shot?
If so, your advice may not register with the more artistic photographers.

Aglet Aglet Aglet ::Shakes head::  I expose the way I expose.  I've been shooting professionally for the last 10 years and been shooting even longer...  I look at a scene, look at what the meter tells me, and I either go with it or call it's bluff and compensate as i see fit.  It's not rocket science.  I get a shot, if it looks the way I want it to, great, if not, I compensate more.  When it's exposed the way I want it, It's good.  If you dont know how to expose, go, get off this forum, and start shooting. 

As far as going into a scene with too much DR... what absolute non-sense...  I've shot back in the days of 4x5 film, shot transparency, medium format, the early canon DSLRs which had what, 5 stops of DR?  If a scene is too dark, brighten it, if you cant brigten it without over exposing something else, use flash, or even better off camera flash, or reflector or some other way to manipulate the light.  Dear god son, this is photo 101, well maybe 102.  This isn't hard.  A real photographer doesn't blame his gear for not getting the shot.  A real photographer knows what needs to be done, and makes the photo even better. As i've said before, a client NEVER has looked at my photos and said "it's a shame there wasn't more DR"... Hell, the average client doesn't even know what noise is.  This is pure pixel peeping madness and it's disgusting. 
Canon 5d III, Canon 24-105L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 70-200 F4L, Canon 100L 2.8, Canon 85 1.8, 430EX 2's and a lot of bumps along the road to get to where I am.

CR00

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #87 on: August 29, 2013, 01:52:57 PM »
If someone ever mention Dxomark in any threads, everytime someone have to mention Nikon.  I thought this is 70D and Dxomark.... thread, it would be more useful to see how it compares to other Canon if you care about Dxomark.  If you want to read, write or care about Nikon, you should go to Nikon Rumors forum and stay there.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #87 on: August 29, 2013, 01:52:57 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15227
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #88 on: August 29, 2013, 01:54:42 PM »
If you want to read, write or care about Nikon, you should go to Nikon Rumors forum and stay there.

That would totally defeat the purpose of being a DRoll Troll.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Chosenbydestiny

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #89 on: August 29, 2013, 02:10:22 PM »
I love how people keep arguing over the sensors and how much more DR they actually need. These people aren't photographers, they're editors with cameras. Tons of DR is like a crutch for them. Wow, they screwed up their shots,, shouldn't that mean they have to live and learn from loss? Lazy. Such a worthless excuse for a petty argument.


This really doesn't make any sense.  Every good songwriter, author, or photographer is also a good editor. It's always been that way.

Also it's odd (IMHO) to excuse away technological advancement for the sake of technique. Why can't one attain both? Should we have puffed our chest at the implementation of auto-focus? Should we have held our noses at IS? After all, good technique can nullify those as well....

Right, but you're supposed to be a photographer first and an editor second. DR doesn't help you when you're actually taking your shot, though it might give you peace of mind knowing the very basics of exposing an image is no longer relevant. At least for however many stops you can recover =P No one has to hold their noses with IS btw, apparently you no longer need the breathing technique to prevent motion blur.
Nikon electric fan, gas stove, and slippers. Canon Elan 7, 1D Mark III, 5D mark III, and 2x6D. Canon 24mm Samyang/Rokinon, 85L, 135L, and many other lenses. 2x Canon 580ex II, third party speedlites, studio strobes

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #89 on: August 29, 2013, 02:10:22 PM »