October 22, 2014, 05:40:41 PM

Author Topic: 70D and Dxomark....  (Read 67979 times)

Chuck Alaimo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 986
    • View Profile
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #210 on: August 30, 2013, 04:49:30 PM »
This makes ZERO sense.  If there is no real world difference the where is the inferiority - or the superiority?  The sensor camera combo is only inferior/superior if there is a REAL tangible REAL WORLD Difference.  If there is no real world difference then logically - one is not greater than the other.  Again, this is photography, people buy images, people hire you because you craft good images - they don't hire/buy because the sensor is better.  And you can even take that to the consumer level - ohhh...thanks for taking some pictures of my sons first birthday, but, I saw that you used a canon so I don't even want to look at the pics because nikon has better sensors?????does anyone in the real world do that?????

The real world also includes hobbyists, who do not buy or sell photos. They are curious about the challenges pros face and about the way the run their business but do not really relate to that.

It is like being a car enthusiast and discussing taxis which professional taxi drivers drive. Every taxi driver would tell you than the clients could not care less about handling, acceleration but they care about space and a smooth ride. The drivers themselves want reliability, trunk space, fuel economy. This automatically excluded the hottest car brands.

That's why I added the bit with shots of my, your, someones sons first birthday party, and telling your friend with the canon to just delete the shots cause their on a canon and they can't be good because nikons sensors are much better...  Yes, the real world involves hobbyists, who may care more about the tech side than the rest of us...still though, using your own analogy = "The drivers themselves want reliability, trunk space, fuel economy."  These are things that would make a real world difference.  You are completely illuminating the real world from your equation.  Might a hobbyist be more into the tech side of things?  Perhaps, but, don't the actual images count for something, anything at all?????

Again you claim that ----"It is what it is, and apparently most of the sensors are inferior to the nikon's(or sony) in almost every aspect.  Whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is not really that relevant."  Again, how many National geographic covers show just text saying "image withheld due to inferior sensor."  Or a sports illustrated swimsuit edition where instead of a center fold you see, image withheld for lack of DR.  Or a billboard with text  just say 14 stops of DR here.   LOL  Why are you buying a camera if not for images?????  whether your a hobbyist, a photo-journalist, a porn photographer, weddings, need a camera for my newborne baby, to shooting disaster scenes for insurance companies to grandma's new P&S ---- isn't about the images??? 

So yes, DXO may say nikon has better sensors.  But, the sensors in canon's are damn good too.  Tests show one thing, real world shows us a ton of images from both systems that are freaking amazing.  And when i look at images, the only time I really care what body/lens was used is if i am in the market to buy one.  If I am looking for new posing ideas, I don't go to DXO....lol....uggg...stop typing now....

Maybe because you don't need more DR for every type of shot and for swimsuit models and such they just pop up some reflectors or what not if there are any issues. Not every scenario is like that. How can you say just because sidelines have lots of white lenses that this proves DR makes no difference? What does sports sidelines have to do with shooting in a forest?? (also for a while there the sidelines had gone from just about pure white to more black than white for a while with the 1D3 AF and other issues for a while although it is turning back a bit again)

Never did I say having DR doesn't matter, or is useless, or shouldn't be a concern.  My argument was against the idea that - "It is what it is, and apparently most of the sensors are inferior to the nikon's(or sony) in almost every aspect.  Whether it is noticeable or not in real world usage is not really that relevant." 

A 1dx or a d4 is gonna perform better shooting sports than a d800 would do.  Take it to the next extreme - A rebel would probably outdo a hasslebad shooting sports as well.  this claim of outright inferior/superior is just silly, it all depends on what you shoot, what your needs are, what your style is...what you want to do.    If it's your passion to shoot in a forest with vast amounts of DR to contend with, by all means, buy the body with better DR.  But just because that body is top of the line in a forest, that doesn't mean it's better for something else.  this still doesn't address the idea that 'whether it is noticeable in real world usage is not really that relevant.'  Because if that's the case, then your what about shooting in forest scenario doesn't matter because thats a real world scenario.  Intended use doesn't matter, that's real world too.  All that matters is what the spec sheet says, or the lab results say because, whether it is noticeable in real world usage is not really that relevant. 

Sorry, I say real world usage is relevant.  If you spend most of your shooting time with your camera on a tripod, at ISO 100, then yes, DR and low ISO IQ makes a huge difference to you, and the nikon sensor is superior for that purpose...no arguments there.  But if your shooting events, sports, weddings - then that DR advantage goes away because your not using ISO 100 the majority of the time.  For sports fps and accurate servo tracking trump DR any day of the week.  For weddings, High ISO and AF trump DR.  For these 2 types of shooters canon is superior at that price point.   

And for the hobbyists...sorry to bring in a small dose of reality here ---but talk about first world problems.  I'm not letting Canon off the hook, but, this is 2013!  this is a first world problem for sure, I mean cry me a river, my $XXXX value camera can't do 14 stops of DR which I process on my expensive computer using the latest professional grade software????  I get that we have wants, but seriously now, this is 1st world craziness written all over it.  Its a hobby.  That shot you get of your kid at the birthday party, is 14 stops vs 11 stops of DR going to really stop you from showing it grandchildren?  That landscape you took and had framed and put on the wall, are your friends really coming over for a bbq and telling you wow, look at that banding in the corner, see it, here's the magnifying glass - or wow, this would have been so much better had you lifted the shadows 2 stops.  I'm not trying to be elitist here, but at least pros do have some valid concerns for tech upgrades, their livelyhood depends on it.  But as a hobby, come on now, can't we all just agree that the modern age has a lot of badass tools we can use???????


 
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #210 on: August 30, 2013, 04:49:30 PM »

docsmith

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 297
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #211 on: August 30, 2013, 04:51:25 PM »
You all remember that the 70D is a consumer level, maybe prosumer level,camera body right?  We aren't talking about the 1DX or 1DXII.  I can understand that you are wanting improvement in Canon's sensor tech...but did you really expect improvement in DR, which to me is a "higher end" feature, in a consumer level product?

For a consumer level product, I actually think Canon nailed the sensor improvement.  Give the masses better AF during video while still having great stills!  So the masses don't need to buy a camcorder and a dSLR, they can just buy the 70D. 

To me, Canon nailed the improvement that matches the market for this body.

For those of you that are arguing, were you ever going to buy a 70D?  Going with the car analogy from a page or two ago, this is like Acura owners complaining about the horsepower in the latest Honda Civic.  You were never going to buy one and you are not the target market.....

zlatko

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
    • http://www.zlatkobatistich.com
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #212 on: August 30, 2013, 04:55:19 PM »
Canon has been often falling behind in color sensitivity though and has fallen way behind in DR. In fact they were actually getting worse in terms of DR and banding for most of the last half decade and only recently have just managed to get almost back to where they had gotten to with the old 1Ds3.
I edit thousands of Canon files each week, and have done so for 10+ years.  I've seen each new generation of camera bring improved image quality.  And I've edited thousands of photos from photographers who use the latest Nikon cameras.  Thank goodness they are very skilled photographers and know what they're doing because their cameras are not giving them the slightest advantage vs. Canon.   Canon "banding getting worse" ... what banding?  Canon "falling behind in color sensitivity"? ... I wish Nikon color were as good. 

heptagon

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 182
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #213 on: August 30, 2013, 05:00:50 PM »
This forum feels like being caught in a loop, the same arguments repeated over and over again...

duydaniel

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #214 on: August 30, 2013, 05:20:52 PM »
You are under captivity of negativity

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #215 on: August 30, 2013, 05:41:28 PM »
To cover some stuff not covered by DxO regarding sensors:

Low ISO banding definitely seems better than with the 7D, almost for certain the vertical banding is clearly less. Don't have the proper samples to judge horizontal banding yet, but almost for sure it is not worse and it certainly might be better or much too, don't know yet. But horizontal handn't been as bad on the 7D, using masked area on RAWs you see lots of fine vertical banding at ISO100 although horizontal in that little area looks OK. With the 70D all the fine vertical bandings that leap out at you are gone.

Acutance appears to be better than the 7D as well. I can't yet be 100% sure it is real, but I suspect it will prove to be. It could be a change in the AA filter and/or also the greens in the CFA might be so extremely split as they on the 7D so RAW converters can get better acutance out of the files without running into mazing issues. If you compare 7D files developed with the original beta RAW support in ACR or even Canon's own DPP they have a bit better acutance than when using release versions of ACR or later DPP versions. But the earlier RAW converters also left 7D files riddles with "mazing" artifacts all over which is why they had to be changed and were (after I reported the issue and then others concurred and also reported it).

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #216 on: August 30, 2013, 05:43:23 PM »
The 70D...has not improved and is slightly worse than the 9 year old 20D. 

Oh, I think it's a little better.  I hope your analysis really was quick, because I'd hate to think you wasted even more time.  Per-pixel SNR?  Funny, I haven't seen that phrase on the display placards at Best Buy or my local camera shop.  I wonder why?  I know...because notwithstanding a minuscule number of DR-obsessed Canon-bashing forum jockeys, no one who buys cameras cares.  The 70D is a massive improvement over the 20D in 99.9999% of ways that matter to people. Canon will sell loads of 70D bodies, quite likely more than the D7100 by a wide margin.

DxOMark measures sensors, but people buy cameras, not bare silicon sensors.  You can rehash DxOMark data until hell freezes over, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has been outselling Nikon for years, nor the fact that the 5DIII outsells the D800.  The obvious conclusion is that 'better' sensors (where 'better' is defined as low ISO DR) have not helped Nikon or Sony sell more cameras.

You keep touting this sales horn since forever and i cant really understand it, "what does X or Y matter when sales show that". Last i checked it was a hardware forum not retail or brokerage. Otherwise, lets dump our 5ds & 1ds cause, you know, rebels are where sales are.
People comment /grind on one particular deficiency of canon's line cause its exactly this, a deficiency. It doesn't make sense counteracting it with "what does it matter the rest of the camera is great" (or worse: oh but look at  the sales...)  Yes, everything else is great, people see that, and that makes it all the more obvious that a camera like 5d3 with d600's sensor would be the perfect camera. 90% of the users maybe don't mind but 10% does cause canon is trailing everybody else in this field, and its becoming obvious that its either arrogance or inability rather than decision.
And yes, since sensor isn't everything thats why people bitch about, otherwise they would just jump ship.

look at this:
Quote
DxOMark measures sensors, but people buy cameras, not bare silicon sensors.  You can rehash DxOMark data until hell freezes over, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has been outselling Nikon for years, nor the fact that the 5DIII outsells the D800.  The obvious conclusion is that 'better' sensors (where 'better' is defined as low ISO DR) have not helped Nikon or Sony sell more cameras.

What does this mean? That since Canon has been outselling Nikon then there is no point arguing about Canon ineficiency to improve low iso for the last decade? That doesn't make sense.
And btw, your 'obvious' conclusion isn't really that obvious or a conclusion. Sensors did help Nikon sales, hardware failures didnt.

+1

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #216 on: August 30, 2013, 05:43:23 PM »

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1036
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #217 on: August 30, 2013, 05:44:45 PM »
I've done well to stick to the topic of 70D and DxOmark, I think.
I've merely presented DxO's data in a way which tellingly demonstrates just what they measured on the 70D's sensor in comparison to what they measured to a 10 year old model. 
A per-pixel level comparison is important because this is what defines the quality of the electronics in the system.

Can we imagine how fabulous the 70D would be if it also had 2 full stops better SNR or DR?..  I'd be drooling!  The capabilities of such a CAMERA would be truly class-leading.
As it is, there's just a lot of compromising.


@Neuro; sorry, your big corp style capitalist justifications are not relevant when talking about sensor tech unless they're invested more of those profits into R&D or patent licensing to improve the foundation of the actual product, it's sensor technology.  And coming up with RESULTS.  It seems dividends were more important than technology investment in the last 10 years.
Can't argue with success tho, Canon's doing very well in that regard.

I will repeat, what they've done in the 70D with the AF ability is very impressive.  I just wish they'd also bring more than minuscule improvements to the base stills performance of ALL their sensors.

Off-topic:
FWIW, 2012-2013 saw me liquidate a lot of newer Canon gear and give that money to Ricoh-Pentax.
I'm now only looking for a high performance crop body for long glass, dim light and high fps rates.
Will it be a 7d MkII, a D400, a K-3(?), or possibly even a new mirrorless system?
If the old 7D had less FPN, it'd have stayed in my inventory.  If the 7d2 has a vastly improved sensor, it'll top my list.

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #218 on: August 30, 2013, 05:49:17 PM »
You all remember that the 70D is a consumer level, maybe prosumer level,camera body right?  We aren't talking about the 1DX or 1DXII.  I can understand that you are wanting improvement in Canon's sensor tech...but did you really expect improvement in DR, which to me is a "higher end" feature, in a consumer level product?

How is DR a higher end feature when even the lowest end Nikon or whatnot has it better? Even a few POINT AND SHOOTS actually have more engineering measured lowest ISO DR than the 5D3! (yes the P&S still are worse in all other sensor aspects though, mostly by a decently large degree, not saying I whip out the P&S for landscapes, but just pointing out that I mean when P&S can on a per IMAGE basis get better DR than a FF DSLR.... and P&S are not high end).

Also even with Nikon, at low ISO the D4, their highest end body in some senses, has somewhat less DR than the D600 or even D7100.

Quote
For a consumer level product, I actually think Canon nailed the sensor improvement.  Give the masses better AF during video while still having great stills!  So the masses don't need to buy a camcorder and a dSLR, they can just buy the 70D. 

It's certainly a great thing.

Quote
To me, Canon nailed the improvement that matches the market for this body.

perhaps

although it wouldn't have hurt it they had nailed both (and they probably do have the tech in house to do it if they were allowed to)

it also makes some worried that they might also forget to do it for stuff like a 5D4 and such though too

Quote
For those of you that are arguing, were you ever going to buy a 70D?  Going with the car analogy from a page or two ago, this is like Acura owners complaining about the horsepower in the latest Honda Civic.  You were never going to buy one and you are not the target market.....

no, but there were some CR2 reports that said Canon was leaning towards re-using the 70D sensor for the 7D2

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #219 on: August 30, 2013, 05:54:34 PM »
  Thank goodness they are very skilled photographers and know what they're doing because their cameras are not giving them the slightest advantage vs. Canon.   Canon "banding getting worse" ... what banding?  Canon "falling behind in color sensitivity"? ... I wish Nikon color were as good.


You seriously did notice the banding got worse going for 1Ds3 to 5D2? Or 40D to 50D? And then better again from 5D2 to 6D (although maybe still a trace behind the old 1Ds3)?

You actually think that many Nikons have not had a lot less banding than stuff like 50D,5D2,5D3,1D4,etc.?

Maybe you don't ever shoot to where it matters, but that is something else.

You wish Nikon color sensitivity were as good? It's better.
As for what color is better overall, not just talking color sensitivity, that is a very complex topic with no easy answers. Overall it seems Nikon has filters that allow for more accurate color overall on average although Canon make make certain skin types easier to pull off nicely. It's a very twisted subejct and it varies model to model and in many cases there is probably no universal answer comparing any given body to any given other it might depend upon the very exactingly specific question you ask. But in terms of color sensitivity and metamerism overall on average Nikon has often been a full stop ahead recently.

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1036
    • View Profile
Black-Cap event
« Reply #220 on: August 30, 2013, 06:24:17 PM »
70D in stock at my local store.
Goin' in for some lens cap shots.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14720
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #221 on: August 30, 2013, 06:24:35 PM »
As a scientist, you should understand the point of isolating the contribution of specific factors to a certain outcome. Sure, sensor is only one of them, but that doesn't preclude from looking at it in isolation.

Certainly.  Say we identify a drug that completely inhibits a particular enzyme isoform.  We could evaluate performance against isoform 1 in isolation and declare success.  But there are three isoforms in every diseased cell, and thanks to the uninhibited activity of isoforms 2 and 3, the patient still dies.  Consider a given factor in isolation, fine - as long as you realize that factor is one element of a whole system, and it's really the system performance that matters in the real world.

The problem is when people equate better sensor performance on certain metrics to better overall camera performance across the board.  But honestly, when I read posts by Mikael/ankorwatt, Aglet, et al., it comes across that they believe that sensor DR is the only aspect of camera performance that matters, and that the same it true for everyone who picks up a camera.

You keep touting this sales horn since forever and i cant really understand it, "what does X or Y matter when sales show that"

That's not really the reason.  There are many aspects of camera performance that can be considered. Sensor performance is certainly one of them, and it gets beaten like a dead horse in part because its easy to measure.  How do you quantify AF performance in a standardized way, or ergonomics, or whether having a 14-24/2.8 is more important than having a TS-E 17mm, etc.  Different aspects of performance are going to have different relative importance to different people.  There's no such thing as "the best" camera, especially once cost is factored in.

Sales figures are a surrogate to discuss an overall comparison in the context of a generality. Obviously, everyone should make their own buying decision based on the factors that matter to them.  But in aggregate, the fact that Canon is the market leader means that more people decided the features, cost, and 'intangibles' of Canon dSLRs made that 'the best' for them.  So, if we say that Sony/Nikon has better sensor DR, but Canon sells more cameras, that suggests that, in aggregate, sensor DR is not a driving factor in the minds of the majority of buyers. Obviously, for some people it's the most important factor...but those people are in the minority.

You are under captivity of negativity

Well, 'agree to disagree' has been tried.  Unfortunately, the result has usually been 'agree to be disagreeable'.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14720
    • View Profile
Re: Black-Cap event
« Reply #222 on: August 30, 2013, 06:28:32 PM »
70D in stock at my local store.
Goin' in for some lens cap shots.

Case in point - this is how Aglet evaluates a new camera: 'pictures' with the lens cap on.  He'll then boost the black images 4-5 stops, and tell us all how crappy the 'pictures' are, and how Canon still hasn't made their sensors cameras any better.

Yawn.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Black-Cap event
« Reply #222 on: August 30, 2013, 06:28:32 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: 70D and Dxomark....
« Reply #223 on: August 30, 2013, 06:33:05 PM »
The problem is when people equate better sensor performance on certain metrics to better overall camera performance across the board.  But honestly, when I read posts by Mikael/ankorwatt, Aglet, et al., it comes across that they believe that sensor DR is the only aspect of camera performance that matters, and that the same it true for everyone who picks up a camera.

Not even Ankorwatt has ever specifically said that as far as I can recall and the rest of us sure as heck have not.

And if everything was trivialized and minimized we'd never have gotten the 7D it would still be all Rebels or xxD, the 5D3 would still have 5D2 AF, the 5D2 would never have gotten manual control for video (in that case it even took major major players and studios ranting and pressuring like crazy), etc.





LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: Black-Cap event
« Reply #224 on: August 30, 2013, 06:34:23 PM »
70D in stock at my local store.
Goin' in for some lens cap shots.

Case in point - this is how Aglet evaluates a new camera: 'pictures' with the lens cap on.  He'll then boost the black images 4-5 stops, and tell us all how crappy the 'pictures' are, and how Canon still hasn't made their sensors cameras any better.

Yawn.

And I suppose when you carry out bio research that instead of doing the simplest, most repeatable test (for which you have a good sense how the results would correspond in other scenarios of interest as well) you instead do very time consuming tests that are not easily repeatable to start?

Why should do some test that will take him two hours and that would be hard to match up with other tests when he could do a lens cap test in like literally 60 seconds and get something easily and repeatably comparably to other tests he has done at different times or to tests carried out by others. While doing that test also takes just about 15 seconds extra to also examine banding performance. If you already have a good sense how those relate to the real world why would you not start there? Maybe you like to waste hours of your time only vaguely accurately measuring DR for hours, but maybe he doesn't.

« Last Edit: August 30, 2013, 06:43:00 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Black-Cap event
« Reply #224 on: August 30, 2013, 06:34:23 PM »