December 08, 2016, 11:32:54 AM

Author Topic: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]  (Read 107212 times)

MichaelHodges

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #90 on: January 10, 2014, 07:55:57 PM »

Of those low ISO images, for how many did you have to blow highlights or block shadows to preserve the other end AND you had a difference of not more than 2-stops such that the greater low ISO DR of the Sony/Nikon sensor would have solved the problem AND of that subset, how many of those shots were rendered unusable by the lost detail in the shadows or highlights? 


You could apply this logic to every facet of image taking when arguing against technological improvements:


"Of all your high ISO shots, how many were so truly noisy that you simply couldn't use the image?"

"Of all those shots of grizzly bears, how many were truly ruined by using only a 2-stop IS system?"
 
etc....



canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #90 on: January 10, 2014, 07:55:57 PM »

MichaelHodges

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #91 on: January 10, 2014, 07:59:29 PM »
Of course it is.  But what fraction of the total market do nature photographers comprise?

A ton of people get into DSLR's for landscape and wildlife. This is where you have zero control of light (or wildlife) so the ability to recover highlights is critical.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 20039
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #92 on: January 10, 2014, 08:21:52 PM »

Of those low ISO images, for how many did you have to blow highlights or block shadows to preserve the other end AND you had a difference of not more than 2-stops such that the greater low ISO DR of the Sony/Nikon sensor would have solved the problem AND of that subset, how many of those shots were rendered unusable by the lost detail in the shadows or highlights? 


You could apply this logic to every facet of image taking when arguing against technological improvements:

Yes, and if you had quoted my entire post, you'd see that I'm not arguing against it.  Rather, I'm stating that such technological improvements aren't necessary in every situation.

There have been significant technological improvements from Canon in AI Servo subject tracking thanks to the high-density 61-pt AF sensor and continual improvements in predictive algorithms.  How necessary are those technological improvements to your tripod-based low ISO landscape shooting?
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2198
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #93 on: January 10, 2014, 08:44:54 PM »
Regardless of the sensor (which I doubt will be much if any superior to the current D4)...based on other performance aspects such as autofocus performance, isn't the 1DX already the answer to the D4S?

9VIII

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1459
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #94 on: January 10, 2014, 09:28:45 PM »

Canon is not the one playing catch up here.

In terms of low ISO IQ they most certainly are.

Point being as an industry wide trend, Nikon is playing catch up, as they have been since the 90's.
This time last year I was dead set on getting a D800, it was the best thing since sliced bread and I could easily have bought a D800 instead of the 5D2. However, as I looked into it more the advantages presented to me did not outweigh the disadvantages, I chose the Canon system as a whole over the temporary advantages of one camera. For some people I'm sure the D800 is everything they could have wanted.
I guess one way to tell how people truly feel about it would be to ask how many people have actually bought one. It would also be interesting to compare that with the effect of the 5D2 on the industry a few years ago.

Here's a poll I made on the topic.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19012.0

dufflover

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 246
  • OH YEAH!
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #95 on: January 10, 2014, 09:37:38 PM »
This is a logical fallacy. The same argument could be applied to the first implementation of auto focus, Image stabilization,

Definitely agree. In fact I'm getting tired of that lame line, in the exact same bucket as "it's not the gear it's photographer". I do not disagree with those statements at all; it's just that in the context of gear, money and let's face it just being camera enthusiasts, we want to improve things, and spend our hard earned with good return - it is not good return when spending top dollar in a given price bracket for something that is old tech, and the competition has proven things can be better.

Obviously some people have money to burn. Good for you, not for most other people  ;) .

Same with Canon business vs. users' wishes. I don't disagree that Canon don't have to do anything with sales figures and what not - that doesn't make the camera any better or the "wishlist" any less valid (or factually untrue). It's a point that just kills discussion in a forum.
Hurry up Canon and do something with your sensors! :P

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #96 on: January 10, 2014, 09:54:44 PM »
Of course it is.  But what fraction of the total market do nature photographers comprise?

A ton of people get into DSLR's for landscape and wildlife. This is where you have zero control of light (or wildlife) so the ability to recover highlights is critical.

Why aren't those people buying a ton of D800's, since it appears to be the best landscape DSLR on the market now?  I can think of two explanations: either landscape photographers don't know how to choose the right gear, or the number of landscape-oriented photographers is not as large as you believe.

I suspect most consumers buy a DSLR for vacation photos, bling, and to be their children's first paparazzo.

The reason sales numbers are important is that they give us data against which to test our assumptions.  If we believe that most people want model X, but many more people buy model Y, then it shows that our belief is not supported by the data, and may well be wrong.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #96 on: January 10, 2014, 09:54:44 PM »

MichaelHodges

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #97 on: January 10, 2014, 10:09:09 PM »

Quote
I suspect most consumers buy a DSLR for vacation photos, bling, and to be their children's first paparazzo.

True, but then again I doubt most of us active on the CR forums are like that.  There's nothing wrong with that at all, but most of these conversations steer towards the middle and upper end of the gear spectrum, and for specialist uses.  Not too many people are buying 800 5.6's, but it's still a kick ass lens. Based on these conversations, we're sort of the crowd that is listening for production and engineering background noise on super audio cd's or vinyl, and wondering if the remaster of Dark Side of the Moon has more "air" than the previous versions.

To consistently quote what the average user buys/does has no bearing on most of these technological discussions on CR. It's simply a red herring.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2198
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #98 on: January 10, 2014, 10:30:36 PM »

Quote
I suspect most consumers buy a DSLR for vacation photos, bling, and to be their children's first paparazzo.

True, but then again I doubt most of us active on the CR forums are like that.  There's nothing wrong with that at all, but most of these conversations steer towards the middle and upper end of the gear spectrum, and for specialist uses.  Not too many people are buying 800 5.6's, but it's still a kick ass lens. Based on these conversations, we're sort of the crowd that is listening for production and engineering background noise on super audio cd's or vinyl, and wondering if the remaster of Dark Side of the Moon has more "air" than the previous versions.

To consistently quote what the average user buys/does has no bearing on most of these technological discussions on CR. It's simply a red herring.

Nice to see the audiophile analogy!

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #99 on: January 10, 2014, 10:59:48 PM »
Quote
I suspect most consumers buy a DSLR for vacation photos, bling, and to be their children's first paparazzo.
To consistently quote what the average user buys/does has no bearing on most of these technological discussions on CR. It's simply a red herring.

But I don't think it is a red herring: while the folks on this forum want 1DX features plus a D800 sensor packed into a 5D3 body, it's the "average user" who drives profits.  And without profits there is no business.   I think most folks would totally agree with you that it would be nice, and occasionally essential to have more DR and IQ to get a specific shot the way we want it.  But we recognize the reality that there is no perfect product, so we choose the brand that comes closest to meeting our needs. 

There are plenty of folks who express their wishes that Canon would include certain features in the next model; however, what's tedious -- and pointless -- is the few who step well beyond that, and become nearly frothy in their vehement denunciation of Canon's product choices, as though it were a deep personal insult.

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #100 on: January 10, 2014, 11:08:12 PM »
When approaching the conversation with intellectual honesty, one cannot dispute that low ISO IQ is an important aspect of photography....especially for nature photographers.

AN important aspect of photography. Not THE important aspect of photography. You made my point for me.

Yes, it is important, I said as much. It is no where near as important as a growing number of photographers seem to think. It is AN important factor of IQ, but by no means the singular most important one. You are also missing part of my point. Canon has dynamic range, quite a lot of it in the grand scheme of things. The argument I was debating was that Canon so utterly and desperately needed more low ISO DR.

I levy the question again...how many of your shots are at ISO 100, and more importantly, of those ISO 100 shots, in how many did you desperately NEED to push shadows more than two or three stops?

Privatebydesign offered part of the answer:

That is an interesting question that illustrates why there are so many diverse opinions about th same piece of equipment, we all use them differently.

As for me I took a look, of my last 19,500 images, 9,000 were at 100iso, 7,500 at 200iso, 2,000 at 400 iso and 1,500 at 800 and other random intermediate iso stops.

I'd like higher low iso image quality. But I am not going to spit my dummy out waiting for it.

We know how many he takes at low ISO. He takes a lot, but that doesn't address my actual question, and the question that actually pertains to having more than 12 stops of DR at ISO 100: How many of those 9000 ISO 100 images needed to be pushed by four, five, or six stops? I would guess VERY FEW. Practically none, unless PBD shoots exceptionally difficult scenes with massive dynamic range on a regular basis/for a living. If that is the case, then hell, I highly recommend a D800 for him. In the grand scheme of things, though, I doubt most photographers even think about pushing shadows that much (or could even find a legitimate reason to.)

Personally, I've taken about 55,000 photos at ISO 800 - 3200. I've taken about 15,000 at ISO 400, and less than 10,000 at ISO 100 and 200. Of the ISO 100 photos, I have needed more dynamic range than my 7D offers in about 2000 shots, however I am usually short by maybe one stop (and that is more because of the 7D pixel size...if I had a 5D III, I would have what I need for pretty much everything I've shot before.) In the cases where slight vertical banding noise did show up in the shadows (maybe a couple hundred at most)...I used Topaz DeNoise 5, and was not only able to remove the banding, but I also gained more dynamic range (that's what happens when you reduce noise anyway...you gain DR, but Topaz has a feature that attempts to further recover DR that was lost to shadow noise due to a loss of tonal fidelity, which gains me even more.)

I use GND filtration for my landscape photography, so dynamic range is actually something I have a lot of control over in the field. I would actually greatly appreciate more native sensor DR, as it would reduce my need to use GND filters. It would also help me avoid that unsightly GND artifact where mountaintops end up dark or even black when you need to use more than two to three stops of filtration. That is the single situation where I think having more dynamic range would actually be the most important factor for IQ...ONE situation. I also suspect that tonemapping 14 stops into 8-10 stops without ending up with quirky shifts in contrast and color fidelity would still be very challenging, and I highly doubt I would stop using GND filters even if I had a D800. I still doubt I would push shadows around more than 2-3 stops....but it would be 2-3 stops along with fewer GND filters, which still makes the job easier in the end.

Again, I am not saying more DR is bad. Certainly not. I would just like to know, given how many people have started complaining about it since the release of the D800, how many of them actually have a real-world USE for more DR. Of PBD's 9000 ISO 100 shots...in how many did he actually push shadows around more than 2 stops? That's the real indicator of how much dynamic range we NEED, vs. how much more dynamic range we just WANT because, well, you know...the other guy has it.

Personally, I know the use cases I would love to have more DR for. It's a small fraction of my work. I also know that the kind of photography I do most is in line with the majority of DSLR users...action. Action photographers are what make the Canon Photography world go round. There are far more action shooters than any other kind of shooter, when you factor in sports, air shows, car races, bike races, watersports, wildlive, birds, and all those little children running around dimly lit houses. I want more DR, but I also know it isn't the singular most important IQ factor that so many forum talkers seem to think it is. If more people would honestly answer the question: "How often do you NEED to lift ISO 100 shadows more than 2-3 stops?" I think people might get a clearer picture of how important more dynamic range actually is to their work.

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #101 on: January 10, 2014, 11:17:07 PM »
This is interesting. I've never tested it in pictures, but I know in video that ISO noise is non-linear. So technically 160 is better than 100, and 320 is better than 200 or 250, so on and so forth. Wouldn't it be the same in terms of pictures?

This is a Canon quirk. It's actually one of the very few things I hate about my Canon cameras. Canon doesn't have native third-stop ISO settings. Unlike Nikon and Sony (and probably others) who use electronic gain to boost the signal on-sensor for all ISO settings (up to a certain point, like ISO 1600 or 3200, after which more complex means are usually employed to boost the signal), Canon uses a downstream secondary amplifier to additionally adjust for third-stop ISO settings.

This is also where the "ISO 160 base ISO" MYTH for Canon cameras comes from. Canon's native base ISO is literally ISO 100, no question. Canon employs a full stop gain for ISO 200. For ISO 160, Canon does a downstream third-stop "push" for ISO 125, which actually COSTS you a third of a stop of dynamic range (clipping highlights). Since it is a post-read push, it also amplifies read noise by a third of a stop (not much, but if you do end up having to push shadows around a LOT, you notice it.) For ISO 160, Canon does a downstream third-stop "pull", which again costs you a third of a stop dynamic range (crushing blacks). Since it is a post-read push, it reduces read noise by a third of a stop (hence, the notion that ISO 160 is "cleaner" than ISO 100...it is, by a minuscule amount.)

The push pattern is used for all third-stop settings just above full stops (125, 250, 500, etc.) The pull pattern is used for all third-stop settings just below full stops (160, 320, 640, etc.) Depending on the camera, this pattern is abandoned at higher ISO. It used to be that all Canon cameras employed this push/pull third-stop pattern up through ISO 1600, after which a different and more complicated approach was used. With the 5D III and 6D, I believe the pattern is employed up through ISO 6400, beyond which their more complicated approach is used. The 1D X does not seem to exhibit the same differences in noise and DR for third stops as all the rest of Canon's cameras. I am not sure why, but for whatever reason, the 1D X third stops are much better and more linear overall, and therefor much more usable (with no loss of DR.)

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #102 on: January 10, 2014, 11:42:06 PM »

Statistically, higher ISO settings are used more frequently these days than lower ISO settings...so it really baffles me that this is such a broad and ubiquitous issue. I am not saying that better low ISO DR is a bad thing, of course it's good...but it is still only one IQ factor out of many. Given how well the D800 has sold, I wouldn't go so far as to say Canon is now playing "catchup" in the low ISO DR arena yet.

Which statistic?  Can you point to the result of a scientific study?

And what exactly do you mean by “higher ISO settings”? Higher than 100, 400, 800, 1600…?

I buy into a camera system and the sensor is just one part of the system, but I would love to have the low iso DR of the D800 in my 5DIII.
It’s the one area Canon is really outperformed by just about all other manufacturers. I think they should address that for the next generation and they probably will.
All manufacturers are playing catchup in some way, because none of them are the best at everything.

High ISO...I'd call that ISO 800 or above. ISO 100, 200, and 400 I consider low ISO, although ISO 400 is kind of in the middle there, and others might have a different opinion.

I don't have a specific study. It's a simple observation, however on that I have been making over the last four years or so. (FYI, I've moderated photo.stackexchange.com since 2010, and have encountered and chatted with quite a number of photographers over the last four years from a wide range of photographic endeavors.) How many white Canon lenses do you see at pretty much every sporting event around the globe? Hundreds to thousands at each and every event. Canon dominates sports, hands down, no question. They really dominate action, not just sports. I spend a lot of time out in nature, and meet a fair number of nature photographers. The very vast majority of the people I've met out in the wilderness, including both wildlife and bird photographers as well as landscape photographers, overwhelmingly have Canon equipment. Canon 1D IV, Canon 5D III, and Canon 1D X are becoming almost ubiquitous in the wildlife and bird world. Canon great white lenses, 300s, 500s, and 600s, are extremely common (particularly the 500 Mark Is...lot of wildlifers and birders use that lens, guess it's at a sweet spot of weight and cost). I've met a few who have Nikon equipment, two of whom use D800's for bird photography. I know of one (now a good friend) who uses Pentax and Nikon. I also know and have encountered/chatted with a decent number of wedding & portrait photographers. Most use the Canon 5D II. A few still use the 5DC (they don't seem to care about resolution). Some use the 5D III (and all of the 5D line wedding photographers had one consistent complaint before the 5D III: Sucky AF.) I know of several wedding photographers who use Nikon and other brands (some have gone to mirrorless as of late, with a variety of brands.) I know two wedding and portrait photographers who use Nikon exclusively. One uses a D800 and D3, the other uses a D7000, with a D800 planned for very soon. I would say that Nikon seems to have a growing following in the strait portraiture arena...not so much for DR, but for the sheer amount of detail the D800 or D600 bring to the table...seems that ridiculous, razor-sharp detail that brings out every single pore is really "in" right now, and there is no question that the D800 offers that in spades.

So, sorry, I don't have an official study for you, but it really isn't a difficult observation to make. Just look around.  It's a very well-educated guess. The number of cameras and lenses that you can spot in the world that say "Canon" on them vastly outnumber  any other brand. Of those, the biggest group that uses the most cohesive set of camera features are the action shooters. Sports/Olympics, Wildlife, Birds...and you can throw in car racing, air shows (know a few guys who do this, damn good at it too), kayaking, boat racing, pretty much anything you could remotely call a sport, or has moving subjects...the camera is going to be at a higher ISO setting, and is probably a 5D III or a 1D X. The next two biggest groups would be Wedding & Portrait, and Landscapes. Not sure which is bigger...seems pretty evenly split here in Colorado, but if you hit larger metropolitan areas, I would make the educated guess that Wedding and Portrait photographers would end up significantly out-pacing the Landscape photographers (and I mean real landscape photographers...I know more people than I can count who use entry level cameras, Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, everything...and call themselves landscape photographers, but their work wouldn't land on anyones walls (no offense to anyone like this, but)...blown clouds, random people in the frame, lack of interesting composition, effectively point-and-shoot mountain peaks and a few scattered rocks or stubby evergreen trees here and there, never any post processing, thrown up on Imgur, PhotoBucket, or Facebook.)

I honestly don't have all that much knowledge about studio photographers. I can't really say how big a customer segment studio photographers might be for Canon...but I guess big enough for them to create the 1Ds line in the past. What I DO know about studio photography, it seems to lean medium format (or maybe Leica S-system) a lot more than it leans Canon, Nikon or Sony. Phase One also seems to be the brand I hear about most from the studio photogs I do know or have crossed paths with.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #102 on: January 10, 2014, 11:42:06 PM »

V8Beast

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1121
    • Stephen Kim Automotive Photography
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #103 on: January 10, 2014, 11:44:17 PM »
I'm quite content with the DR of my 5D3 ;D


jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #104 on: January 10, 2014, 11:52:04 PM »
I'm quite content with the DR of my 5D3 ;D



I've always loved your cars! Great stuff!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]
« Reply #104 on: January 10, 2014, 11:52:04 PM »