I had NOT paid ANY attention to the Canon/Nikon debate so far. But the pictures posted here by Mr. Risedal make me sit up and take notice.
And take notice is the only thing I can do as I have Mr. X, 3 and whole bunch or lenses already.
I was happily cruising along and then I see these photos...
So...one guy takes a few pictures with a specific agenda in mind, deliberately choosing an exposure that is not optimal (and not just a little off - several stops underexposed), and then processes them in ways which may be totally irrelevant to your images, and that makes you doubt your decision to shoot with Canon gear?
I agree with neuro, Michael is definitely doing something wrong in his processing. Look at my 7D example of recovery and that's not even the best sensor around but easily recovered by NR and good enough for a full-res prints.
10 stops underexposure from a Pentax with Sony inside
Only a clot would underexpose 10-stops.
But it works, and doesn't with a Canon
Then shoot pentax and underexpose all your picture's 10 stops if you like.
while real photog's will continue to get correct exposures, since the days of the wet plates to ansel adams to modern digital.
I don't know if anyone has informed you that in the end, the camera doesn't matter. The fleshy device behind the camera matters and how it will get the most of a camera. BTW, where's your portfolio?
You do realize that Ansel Adams was the guy who went to almost crazy lengths to get the right sort of film and would spend endless hours in the lab to extend and manipulate DR as best as he could and was not just an artist but about as interest in the tech side too as you could get and that he was interested in the tech side not just for tech alone but also because of the practical implications for his real world shooting....
And it actually is nice to be able to rescue a blown shot if need be no? But also keep in mind, that it is only a little bit about that, mostly people are talking about wanting more DR while at the same time exposing as they had hoped for the scene....
Yes, but Ansel Adams would have gotten his exposure correct (Not 10 stops underexposed) and processed for DR. He also used filters to achieve the DR he wanted, and not solely on his film to capture all the range he needed.
Everyone knows the nikon sensor has more DR, but its not like the canon sensors are as bad as other make them to be. IE: the 7D file I posted earlier.
Michael tests show noise like I've never seen before in my canon cameras, which makes me question the validity of the said persons tests & creditials.
1. Do you understand the concept of what a demonstration is?
2. Do you understand that you can have the exact same problem when you expose something so that the bright parts are exposed as far to the right as can be?
3. Plenty of others have seen noise like that at times. If you don't trust him then what about the Fred Miranda tests???