December 08, 2016, 11:15:17 AM

Author Topic: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon  (Read 127150 times)

nwardrip

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 9
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #150 on: October 10, 2012, 06:38:04 PM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #150 on: October 10, 2012, 06:38:04 PM »

Woody

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 832
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #151 on: October 11, 2012, 01:09:08 AM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer

That is a link to the Canon US website. All major decisions are made in Canon Japan. Not sure if it'll have much of an impact. :)

tnargs

  • Rebel T6i
  • ****
  • Posts: 138
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #152 on: October 11, 2012, 02:24:22 AM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  ...

No thank you, too busy making great shots with my 7D using its excellent sensor.

symmar22

  • Guest
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #153 on: October 11, 2012, 06:06:29 AM »

Indeed, a sad time. I liked Velvia 50 in my old yashica TLR.

You should post your portfolio. You've got some good stuff here, and forget about ze gear. It really doesn't matter as much as some posters make it out to be.  8)

If I had the time, I'd re-purchase some of my old 4x5 gear again.

+1

I never sold my 4x5, going out for landscape with my Linhof is a pure refreshment, it's a kind of back to the roots, and the results are far from ridiculous...
« Last Edit: October 11, 2012, 06:10:06 AM by symmar22 »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 20038
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #154 on: October 11, 2012, 09:39:01 AM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer

Thanks for the link. I let them know how thrilled I am with the 1D X sensor performance.  Acceptable ISO 12800, and 25600 usable at need...simply awesome!!
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

EYEONE

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 612
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #155 on: October 11, 2012, 10:47:05 AM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer

Thanks for the link. I let them know how thrilled I am with the 1D X sensor performance.  Acceptable ISO 12800, and 25600 usable at need...simply awesome!!

And the 5D Mark III isn't far behind that honestly. I don't hesitate to use 6400 for a professional shoot. 12800 is very acceptable in most cases. I couldn't be happier with the performance of the 5D Mark III.
Canon 5D Mark III w/BG-E11, Canon 7D w/BG-E7: EF 24-70mm f.2.8L, EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, EF 40mm f2.8 Pancake STM, Speedlite 430EXII + 430EXI, Canon EOS 3

Sony

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #156 on: October 11, 2012, 11:36:17 AM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer

Thanks for the link. I let them know how thrilled I am with the 1D X sensor performance.  Acceptable ISO 12800, and 25600 usable at need...simply awesome!!
I have pics that taken in ambient light of a church with 5DMKiii @ around ISO 20000 (I used Auto ISO in M mode). They are usable in 4x6 format. My friend with D800 was there but couldnt do that. As far as DxOMark said, D800 is the top of FF camera. Can other Nikons do that? LOL.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #156 on: October 11, 2012, 11:36:17 AM »

Razor2012

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 618
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #157 on: October 11, 2012, 12:57:28 PM »
I encourage everyone to let Canon know of your disappointment with their recent sensor performance (compared to the competition).  http://usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer

Thanks for the link. I let them know how thrilled I am with the 1D X sensor performance.  Acceptable ISO 12800, and 25600 usable at need...simply awesome!!
I have pics that taken in ambient light of a church with 5DMKiii @ around ISO 20000 (I used Auto ISO in M mode). They are usable in 4x6 format. My friend with D800 was there but couldnt do that. As far as DxOMark said, D800 is the top of FF camera. Can other Nikons do that? LOL.

That's going by what DxO says, in the real world it's alittle different.  That's like saying my 5DIII is the best because of it's AF, FPS & high ISO.  It all depends on what you're using it for.  Wait, I guess it is the best for what I'm doing.
5D MKIII w grip, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 24-70 2.8L II, 16-35 2.8L II, 100 2.8L IS macro, 600EX-RT

FunkyCamera

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 29
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #158 on: October 11, 2012, 07:51:31 PM »
All these 35mm DSLR's have pretty similar IQ at reasonable ISO's.

Nikon D800 | ISO 100 | 1/100s @f/11:


Canon 5D Mk III | ISO 100 | 1/100s @f/11:


... and that's at 800px web size.

What a terrible hoax. lol.

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #159 on: October 11, 2012, 10:06:48 PM »
All these 35mm DSLR's have pretty similar IQ at reasonable ISO's.

Nikon D800 | ISO 100 | 1/100s @f/11:


Canon 5D Mk III | ISO 100 | 1/100s @f/11:


... and that's at 800px web size.


That kind of bullsh*t is what really ticks me off about this whole debate. The exposure there (f/11 @ ISO 100!!!!!) is OBVIOUSLY botched to intentionally create a scenario where you have to lift the entire shot out of the shadows. Expose the damnable thing properly, and you won't HAVE to lift any shadows! NO ONE does what those photos demonstrate in the real world. It is entirely unrealistic, a bogus scenario to create a comparison that purposely puts Canon sensors in the worst light possible. It is entirely possible to create a photograph with a Canon camera at a wider aperture that looks every bit as good as the D800 photo...and in real life, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE DONE...at a WIDER aperture.

DON'T BUY INTO THIS LOAD OF BULL, PPL!

IronChef

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 21
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #160 on: October 12, 2012, 03:32:23 AM »
All these 35mm DSLR's have pretty similar IQ at reasonable ISO's.

Nikon D800 | ISO 100 | 1/100s @f/11:


Canon 5D Mk III | ISO 100 | 1/100s @f/11:


... and that's at 800px web size.


That kind of bullsh*t is what really ticks me off about this whole debate. The exposure there (f/11 @ ISO 100!!!!!) is OBVIOUSLY botched to intentionally create a scenario where you have to lift the entire shot out of the shadows. Expose the damnable thing properly, and you won't HAVE to lift any shadows! NO ONE does what those photos demonstrate in the real world. It is entirely unrealistic, a bogus scenario to create a comparison that purposely puts Canon sensors in the worst light possible. It is entirely possible to create a photograph with a Canon camera at a wider aperture that looks every bit as good as the D800 photo...and in real life, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE DONE...at a WIDER aperture.

DON'T BUY INTO THIS LOAD OF BULL, PPL!

Why don't you quote the whole post? You left away the most important part.

Canon-F1

  • Guest
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #161 on: October 12, 2012, 06:19:00 AM »
That kind of bullsh*t is what really ticks me off about this whole debate. The exposure there (f/11 @ ISO 100!!!!!) is OBVIOUSLY botched to intentionally create a scenario where you have to lift the entire shot out of the shadows. Expose the damnable thing properly, and you won't HAVE to lift any shadows! NO ONE does what those photos demonstrate in the real world. It is entirely unrealistic, a bogus scenario to create a comparison that purposely puts Canon sensors in the worst light possible. It is entirely possible to create a photograph with a Canon camera at a wider aperture that looks every bit as good as the D800 photo...and in real life, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE DONE...at a WIDER aperture.

DON'T BUY INTO THIS LOAD OF BULL, PPL!

yeah your posting is bullS___.. because you don´t get HIS posting.   ::)

i don´t need a porsche that drives 290 km/h.
because in real life i never would drive 290 km/h and in america i would not even be allowed to drive 290 km/h.

still arguing that a VW Golf is a s good as a Porsche GT3, when driving at normal speeds.... is wrong.

even when i don´t use all resources of a porsche (or a camera) all the time... i still have them when i need them.

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 927
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #162 on: October 12, 2012, 06:37:28 AM »

even when i don´t use all resources of a porsche (or a camera) all the time... i still have them when i need them.

This is exactly what I do when I keep all my fat with me - even when I don't use all those resources all the time, I still have them when I need them :D
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #162 on: October 12, 2012, 06:37:28 AM »

nightbreath

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 454
    • Свадебный фотограф в Днепропетровске
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #163 on: October 12, 2012, 08:13:47 AM »
even when i don´t use all resources of a porsche (or a camera) all the time... i still have them when i need them.

This is exactly what I do when I keep all my fat with me - even when I don't use all those resources all the time, I still have them when I need them :D
I should take this into my list of quotations, it's a really good one!  ;)
Wedding photography. My personal website: http://luxuryphoto.com.ua

woytek

  • Guest
Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #164 on: October 12, 2012, 09:52:44 AM »
Inevitably, someone's going to wonder why I severely underexposed the photo & then lifted the exposure; rather than getting into the logic of why I did that, I'll just post the following comparison, where each camera was exposed so as to not clip the red channel in the sky near the sun. Shadows were then lifted to reasonable levels for viewing:

First, the full-frame images:

Nikon D800:


Canon 5D Mark III:


Now, let's view them side-by-side at 100%, w/ the D800 downsized to 5DIII size for easy/fair comparison:


from http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/optimizing_exposure.shtml:

Quote
For example, with a typical DSLR, when photographing a red flowers under natural daylight, the LCD histogram will typically show the red channel as blown out. This doesn't tell whether the native raw red channel is actually blown. So one doesn't know whether to increase the exposure for ETTR, or reduce it. The natural reaction of most users is to say, "Uh oh, I'm gonna blow the red channel in these flowers, so I better reduce the exposure till the red histogram doesn't look blown out anymore." Unfortunately, that's almost always the wrong thing to do. In fact, the red channel (in the raw data) rarely clips on a typical DSLR with a normal daylight exposure, because the red sensitivity is very low (about 1.5 stops darker than green). If one was to reduce exposure till the red histogram no longer showed clipping, then the actual raw red channel would be very underexposed with a poor SNR. Result: noisy red flowers!

I see the difference in noise and it sure is there! But, this example is flawed in my opinion since the exposure in these photo's was just wrong. I have seen that current Sony sensors offer better shadow recovery, no doubt about that. But in this particular situation it was not necessary to have such an underexposed image and the same photograph could be achieved by both Canon and Nikon camera when properly exposed.

Can you post a jpg of the unedited raw file?

Also from http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/on_safari.shtml#suckout :

Quote
The bottom line is that the vast majority of the tonal information that a sensor can capture lies on the far right side.  In fact, usually 75% of the total tonal information a sensor can capture lies in the small right hand area of the two top F/stops just below pure white.  And yet, almost all cameras leave the factory calibrated to center the histogram instead of moving it as far to the right as possible.  To make matters worse, the screens in the backs of cameras are also calibrated to show a good exposure with the histogram centered. This is nonsense!

So what are the consequences of Tonal Suckout?  As the name implies, it is as if someone grabbed your image and sucked the tonality out of it,  If there are millions of shades of green in a landscape, you may end up with a few dozen.  If there is a terrific richness of tonalities in a face, you will end up with a small sub-set that makes the face look bland.

Maybe useful to keep in mind the next time you want to get an underexposed image!
« Last Edit: October 12, 2012, 10:06:47 AM by woytek »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« Reply #164 on: October 12, 2012, 09:52:44 AM »