July 21, 2018, 02:07:46 AM

Author Topic: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications  (Read 37676 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ***************
  • Posts: 22829
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #150 on: February 24, 2018, 11:02:42 PM »
The presumed target consumer of every camera is dominated by people who couldn't care less about 3 or more stop shadow lifting.  Only the DR "enthusiasts" who dominate forums such as this one care.  Real photographers who take real pictures and know how to set the exposure are the target consumer and it is time for them to dictate the conversation about what is and what is not important in a new camera.

You you've ever really worked with high contrast scenes (that mostly applies to landscapes, but non-studio portraits, concert photography etc. are also in this category) you wouldn't have said that. DR is a very important metric and "proper exposure" doesn't help if the scene requires say 15 ev range and your camera is only 10 ev.
You can deal with 10-stop-DR-camera too but it doesn't mean professionals don't need greater DR.

When will the DRoning stop?  ::)

The point dak723 is making is that for the majority of buyers/owners of any given camera, DR is not a primary concern. I haven't seen anyone here (seriously, at least) denying the utility of more DR. It's about placing the that utility into the context of overall system capabilities and performance...for the majority. Sure, there are many people who are not in the majority, but most people are – by definition.  If you doubt the conclusion that DR is not of primary importance to most buyers, please explain why Canon was the #1 ILC manufacturer 8 years ago – the year that Nikon sensors started delivering significantly more DR than Canon (as did Sony soon thereafter)...and Canon remains the #1 ILC manufacturer, with an even greater share of the ILC market than they had 8 years ago.

The whole 'shadow-lifting stress test' was a DPR-initiated phenomenon that seems to have come about about mainly for two reasons: 1) in recent years, cameras have simply gotten so good that there's little to differentiate them, and 2) DPR needed a way to differentiate them.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking your needs/wants represent those of the majority. If you crave more DR, good for you...so maybe you look at DxOMark's (biased) scores, and decide Sony is a great option. Someone else may highly value weather sealing, and look at Imaging Resorce's test where the Sony a7RIII failed for water ingress, or Roger Cicala/Lensrentals' teardown of the a7RIII showing it's very well sealed, except for the bottom of the camera which has no sealing whatsoever (portrait orientation, who uses that?), and decide that Sony is worthless as far as their needs go.

Personally, I'd never say no to more DR, and I've run into plenty of real-world situations where I needed more DR than my camera could capture.  But...I've run into vanishingly few real-world situations where an additional 1-2 stops of DR would have been of significant benefit – the gap between scene DR and camera capability is usually much greater.  But maybe you've just never worked with really high contrast scenes before.  The five stops in your example, sure, that would make a difference.  But that's not really a relevant comparison unless you're comparing a camera from >10 years ago with one from today.

As for your scene with 15 stops DR...which camera would you use to capture that full range? I have some that can, but they're research-grade cameras used in a laboratory setting.  Today's ILCs cannot capture the full range of a 15-stop scene.  Perhaps you've been a bit duped by DxOMark, since they typically report (calculated) DR following a (theoretical) downsampling to an 8 MP image.  While that certainly does increase the DR of an existing image by reducing the noise floor, what it doesn't do is bring back DR that was lost at capture – the details that were not captured are gone.
EOS 1D X, EOS M6, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #150 on: February 24, 2018, 11:02:42 PM »

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2373
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #151 on: February 24, 2018, 11:18:18 PM »
The presumed target consumer of every camera is dominated by people who couldn't care less about 3 or more stop shadow lifting.  Only the DR "enthusiasts" who dominate forums such as this one care.  Real photographers who take real pictures and know how to set the exposure are the target consumer and it is time for them to dictate the conversation about what is and what is not important in a new camera.

You you've ever really worked with high contrast scenes (that mostly applies to landscapes, but non-studio portraits, concert photography etc. are also in this category) you wouldn't have said that. DR is a very important metric

totally overblown metric.

there's little use cases that would see a window of 1EV or less difference between a 80D styled sensor and a D7300 / D500 styled sensor.

and many a landscape photographer has had little problems with DR.

in most cases, if you need more DR odds are you are over what the best sensors can provide anyways, so you are far better off honing your technique than worrying about your camera.

granted there's some with real need, however, in alot of cases, having an ISO invariant sensor works against you if you use it as your primary way of boosting shadows to midtones.

« Last Edit: February 25, 2018, 12:10:44 AM by rrcphoto »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6977
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #152 on: February 25, 2018, 12:26:38 AM »
The presumed target consumer of every camera is dominated by people who couldn't care less about 3 or more stop shadow lifting.  Only the DR "enthusiasts" who dominate forums such as this one care.  Real photographers who take real pictures and know how to set the exposure are the target consumer and it is time for them to dictate the conversation about what is and what is not important in a new camera.

You you've ever really worked with high contrast scenes (that mostly applies to landscapes, but non-studio portraits, concert photography etc. are also in this category) you wouldn't have said that. DR is a very important metric

totally overblown metric.

there's little use cases that would see a window of 1EV or less difference between a 80D styled sensor and a D7300 / D500 styled sensor.

and many a landscape photographer has had little problems with DR.

in most cases, if you need more DR odds are you are over what the best sensors can provide anyways, so you are far better off honing your technique than worrying about your camera.

granted there's some with real need, however, in alot of cases, having an ISO invariant sensor works against you if you use it as your primary way of boosting shadows to midtones.
But I want to be able to lift the shadows by 5 or 6 stops..... How else am I supposed to display random noise?
The best camera is the one in your hands

Woody

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1065
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #153 on: February 25, 2018, 01:39:17 AM »
It's always good to have more DR.

But in my books, system reliability and usability are far more important.

In all my years of photography, I had only encountered a couple of instances when I wished I had more DR. Most of the time, I could lift shadow details from Canon RAW images with impunity.

Isaacheus

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 152
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #154 on: February 25, 2018, 02:26:29 AM »


granted there's some with real need, however, in alot of cases, having an ISO invariant sensor works against you if you use it as your primary way of boosting shadows to midtones.

Not really wanting to see this thread dive into another dr debate but I don't understand what you mean by this? I'm not sure I see how having an iso invariant sensor could be a downside, no matter the way it's used? Not meaning that in a pointed way, I'm just not aware of where it would be bad

On the other hand, the specs for this camera look pretty decent, didn't really think canon would put these specs into a camera at this level. This would appear to be the first camera canon has done in this price bracket/level with 120 fps in HD?

Quarkcharmed

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #155 on: February 25, 2018, 03:05:03 AM »
The presumed target consumer of every camera is dominated by people who couldn't care less about 3 or more stop shadow lifting.  Only the DR "enthusiasts" who dominate forums such as this one care.  Real photographers who take real pictures and know how to set the exposure are the target consumer and it is time for them to dictate the conversation about what is and what is not important in a new camera.

You you've ever really worked with high contrast scenes (that mostly applies to landscapes, but non-studio portraits, concert photography etc. are also in this category) you wouldn't have said that. DR is a very important metric and "proper exposure" doesn't help if the scene requires say 15 ev range and your camera is only 10 ev.
You can deal with 10-stop-DR-camera too but it doesn't mean professionals don't need greater DR.

When will the DRoning stop?  ::)

The point dak723 is making is that for the majority of buyers/owners of any given camera, DR is not a primary concern. I haven't seen anyone here (seriously, at least) denying the utility of more DR. It's about placing the that utility into the context of overall system capabilities and performance...for the majority. Sure, there are many people who are not in the majority, but most people are – by definition.  If you doubt the conclusion that DR is not of primary importance to most buyers, please explain why Canon was the #1 ILC manufacturer 8 years ago – the year that Nikon sensors started delivering significantly more DR than Canon (as did Sony soon thereafter)...and Canon remains the #1 ILC manufacturer, with an even greater share of the ILC market than they had 8 years ago.

I was commenting on the statement that read as "pros don't care about shadow lifting and just set proper exposure".
That's simply not true. Pros do care about DR, however I know that many modern cameras have enough DR for many purposes, say studio portraiture with controlled light doesn't really require a huge DR.

The whole 'shadow-lifting stress test' was a DPR-initiated phenomenon that seems to have come about about mainly for two reasons: 1) in recent years, cameras have simply gotten so good that there's little to differentiate them, and 2) DPR needed a way to differentiate them.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking your needs/wants represent those of the majority. If you crave more DR, good for you...so maybe you look at DxOMark's (biased) scores, and decide Sony is a great option. Someone else may highly value weather sealing, and look at Imaging Resorce's test where the Sony a7RIII failed for water ingress, or Roger Cicala/Lensrentals' teardown of the a7RIII showing it's very well sealed, except for the bottom of the camera which has no sealing whatsoever (portrait orientation, who uses that?), and decide that Sony is worthless as far as their needs go.

I do look at DxO mark score but treat it with a grain of salt. They're not really a public organisation and we don't know how exactly they measure. Say their 'perceptual megapixels' is a popular but technically useless metric as we don't even know how exactly they measure it. Any independent scientific measure must be reproducible and nobody knows how to even attempt to reproduce their measurements.

On the other hand, again I don't think that 'majority of photographers don't care about DR'. It may be not the main issue, but they do care.

Personally, I'd never say no to more DR, and I've run into plenty of real-world situations where I needed more DR than my camera could capture.  But...I've run into vanishingly few real-world situations where an additional 1-2 stops of DR would have been of significant benefit – the gap between scene DR and camera capability is usually much greater.  But maybe you've just never worked with really high contrast scenes before.  The five stops in your example, sure, that would make a difference.  But that's not really a relevant comparison unless you're comparing a camera from >10 years ago with one from today.

As for your scene with 15 stops DR...which camera would you use to capture that full range? I have some that can, but they're research-grade cameras used in a laboratory setting.  Today's ILCs cannot capture the full range of a 15-stop scene.  Perhaps you've been a bit duped by DxOMark, since they typically report (calculated) DR following a (theoretical) downsampling to an 8 MP image.  While that certainly does increase the DR of an existing image by reducing the noise floor, what it doesn't do is bring back DR that was lost at capture – the details that were not captured are gone.

I do landscapes and concerts, that's exactly where I need more DR. My 5D MkIV does great in these genres but I cannot say I don't want more. I can compare 5D MkIV RAWs with 5D MkIII, 100D, 70D, 550D (not that I have all those cameras) and it's so much better in terms of DR, it really gives you more freedom.
It's also very important when shooting scenes with constantly changing light (i.e. concerts, especially art/dancing performances). You just get less throw-always with a high DR camera.
Canon 5D MkIV, EF 24-70 f2.8L II, EF 16-32 f4L IS, EF 70-200 f2.8L II IS, EF 50 f1.8 STM

Quarkcharmed

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #156 on: February 25, 2018, 03:07:28 AM »
But I want to be able to lift the shadows by 5 or 6 stops..... How else am I supposed to display random noise?

To tell the truth, that's the case where proper exposure could help, it looks like your moon was underexposed from the very beginning. It's wasn't a good exposure if the moon was the only subject.
Canon 5D MkIV, EF 24-70 f2.8L II, EF 16-32 f4L IS, EF 70-200 f2.8L II IS, EF 50 f1.8 STM

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #156 on: February 25, 2018, 03:07:28 AM »

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3432
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #157 on: February 25, 2018, 06:23:15 AM »
Canon's 5DMarkIv is greatly improved in DR. I do not understand why many forum members behave as if it does not exist!

BillB

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 644
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #158 on: February 25, 2018, 06:56:54 AM »
Canon's 5DMarkIv is greatly improved in DR. I do not understand why many forum members behave as if it does not exist!
Well, not everybody is able, or willing, to pay Sony fullframe, Nikon 850 or 5DIV prices, even on this forum.  Also, there are people who think the 5DIV doesn't match up to comparable Sony and Nikon equipment.  And there are people who have decided that the 5DIV doesn't have enough to make it worthwhile to upgrade their 5DIII.  And so it goes....

Quarkcharmed

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #159 on: February 25, 2018, 08:09:30 AM »
Canon's 5DMarkIv is greatly improved in DR. I do not understand why many forum members behave as if it does not exist!

It's exceptionally good to me not only because of DR but because of many other features, and its DR is one of the best on the market.  It was one the crucial factors when I was choosing between 5DIV and 5DsR.

If they release 5DsR II with the sensor as good as 5DIV but 50Mpx, it'd be a D850 killer...
Canon 5D MkIV, EF 24-70 f2.8L II, EF 16-32 f4L IS, EF 70-200 f2.8L II IS, EF 50 f1.8 STM

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2373
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #160 on: February 25, 2018, 10:01:32 AM »
Not really wanting to see this thread dive into another dr debate but I don't understand what you mean by this? I'm not sure I see how having an iso invariant sensor could be a downside, no matter the way it's used? Not meaning that in a pointed way, I'm just not aware of where it would be bad
if you boost shadows to the midtone via an ISO invariant sensor you effectively move the ISO up one 1EV with each 1EV of movement between shadow to midtone.  each 1EV of ISO essentially loses you one bit of color depth and also less micro contrast then if you left the ISO alone.

when you bracket, use grad filters, etc - you leave the ISO alone, which keeps those areas you want in the midtones at a higher bit depth and a higher level of microcontrast.

rrcphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2373
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #161 on: February 25, 2018, 10:03:28 AM »
Canon's 5DMarkIv is greatly improved in DR. I do not understand why many forum members behave as if it does not exist!

where does anyone say it doesn't exist?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2018, 10:12:17 AM by rrcphoto »

dak723

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 865
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #162 on: February 25, 2018, 10:17:50 AM »
Canon's 5DMarkIv is greatly improved in DR. I do not understand why many forum members behave as if it does not exist!

where does anyone say it doesn't exist?

What?  You missed all the dozens (or hundreds) of posts that mention how Canon is way behind Sony and Nikon in DR?   :)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #162 on: February 25, 2018, 10:17:50 AM »

dak723

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 865
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #163 on: February 25, 2018, 10:39:31 AM »
The presumed target consumer of every camera is dominated by people who couldn't care less about 3 or more stop shadow lifting.  Only the DR "enthusiasts" who dominate forums such as this one care.  Real photographers who take real pictures and know how to set the exposure are the target consumer and it is time for them to dictate the conversation about what is and what is not important in a new camera.

You you've ever really worked with high contrast scenes (that mostly applies to landscapes, but non-studio portraits, concert photography etc. are also in this category) you wouldn't have said that. DR is a very important metric and "proper exposure" doesn't help if the scene requires say 15 ev range and your camera is only 10 ev.
You can deal with 10-stop-DR-camera too but it doesn't mean professionals don't need greater DR.

Quite the contrary.  I shoot primarily landscapes and have done so for almost 40 years.  I have never had to underexpose - or then to push shadows more than 3 stops - usually far less is all that is necessary.  I see a lot of photos where people are pushing shadows far more than I would consider necessary, to the point where there is almost no differentiation between light and shadow.  If that is what they want to do  - by all means - they should do it.  What they shouldn't do is assume that that is the way it should be done and that other photographers should do it that way, too, and that Camera companies that fail to meet the demand of those few are somehow negligent. 

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6977
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #164 on: February 25, 2018, 11:18:29 AM »
But I want to be able to lift the shadows by 5 or 6 stops..... How else am I supposed to display random noise?

To tell the truth, that's the case where proper exposure could help, it looks like your moon was underexposed from the very beginning. It's wasn't a good exposure if the moon was the only subject.

We have a winner!

Technology is not the answer to bad photography......
The best camera is the one in your hands

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Leaked: Canon EOS M50 Image & Specifications
« Reply #164 on: February 25, 2018, 11:18:29 AM »