Gear Talk > EOS Bodies - For Stills
1DX new all-time low-light king?
briansquibb:
It is interesting that the benchmark (Canon) for low noise at low iso is the 2007 1DS3.
Eyeballing the 2004 1DS2 I would say that is very close to the 1DS3, just of course that it is only 16mp. I would say the 1DS2 is a little better IQ than the 1D4 and looks like less noise (through DFINE).
Like everything, put an image through pp and the difference pretty much disappears on a 16x12 print
LetTheRightLensIn:
OK, so the read noise is slightly lower than I stated. It turns out the test files had a fast lens mounted and all the DSLRs cook the RAW gain books when they sense a lens faster than f/2.8 to make up for micro-lens losses from extreme angles (as fast glass provides).
So with a real, normal ISO100 black frame, no lens the actual true read noise at ISO100 on 1DX is 5.29 not 5.79 and the 8MP normalized DR (as per DxO) is then not 11.75 but 11.9 +/- about 0.1 depending on exact well depth (which I don't have recorded yet, and maybe +/- 0.2 if you also add copy variation into the mix).
OTOH the banding characteristics appear to be slightly worse than I had thought since this frame didn't lift past them quite as much. That said, the banding is still better than for all the recent banding messes from Canon of the last 3-4 years, better than 5D2,5D3,7D,1D4 but it's probably not quite as good as the 1Ds3, I'd need to go compare directly again though, so it's hard to say for sure, from I remember I think the 1Ds3 had less banding than the true 1DX ISO100 file. But as I said, I can say the 1DX, for sure, does have less banding than 5D3,5D2,7D,1D4 though so it's workable DR should be the best from Canon other than the 1Ds3 at slightly better.
LetTheRightLensIn:
--- Quote from: LetTheRightLensIn on July 02, 2012, 01:40:14 AM ---OK, so the read noise is slightly lower than I stated. It turns out the test files had a fast lens mounted and all the DSLRs cook the RAW gain books when they sense a lens faster than f/2.8 to make up for micro-lens losses from extreme angles (as fast glass provides).
So with a real, normal ISO100 black frame, no lens the actual true read noise at ISO100 on 1DX is 5.29 not 5.79 and the 8MP normalized DR (as per DxO) is then not 11.75 but 11.9 +/- about 0.1 depending on exact well depth (which I don't have recorded yet, and maybe +/- 0.2 if you also add copy variation into the mix). Not that anyone will particularly notice a 0.15 stop difference in DR. ;D but just to be legit about. It's about 1/3 stop more than my 5D3 and with less banding it probably has a solid 2/3 stop advantage usable DR ISO100 compared to my 5D3, hard to say, depends how much banding bothers you.
OTOH the banding characteristics appear to be slightly worse than I had thought since this frame didn't lift past them quite as much. That said, the banding is still better than for all the recent banding messes from Canon of the last 3-4 years, better than 5D2,5D3,7D,1D4 but it's probably not quite as good as the 1Ds3, I'd need to go compare directly again though, so it's hard to say for sure, from I remember I think the 1Ds3 had less banding than the true 1DX ISO100 file. But as I said, I can say the 1DX, for sure, does have less banding than 5D3,5D2,7D,1D4 though so it's workable DR should be the best from Canon other than the 1Ds3 at slightly better.
--- End quote ---
nightbreath:
Taking into account all posts in this discussion, can someone make a picture with 1D X and 1Ds III in the same conditions for us to make a comparison?
wockawocka:
Believe me, as soon as mine arrives you'll have it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version