Dynamic range comparison between the EOS RP, EOS 6D Mark II and EOS R

[Viggo]

Optical limits found 3.24 ev at f/1.2: "Ultra-high speed lenses produce quite some vignetting on full format sensors and the RF 50mm f/1.2 USM L is no exception to the rule here. At f/1.2 the vignetting exceeds 3EV (f-stops) which is, of course, easily visible. For some this may be an issue whereas others may actually prefer such an effect. Stopping down to f/1.6 and, more so, to f/2 reduces the issue substantially albeit there's still some light falloff visible. Traces remain at f/4 and beyond." https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1055-canonrf50f12?start=1

I can't see any real problem either.

Perhaps I can upload a couple of examples later

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Perhaps I can upload a couple of examples later

I can't see this is an issue either...it's a simple matter of physics. Personally I love the vignetting on my 85mm f1.2 L II wide open...for portraits...it's like a photoshop preset that I don't have to apply.
It takes a special kind of obsessive who says...I want to shoot a 50mm at f1.2 and I want it pin sharp across the frame with no vignetting....for real???
A stop here or there in low light DR...it's really not that high on my shooting requirements.

 

[Tom W]

Optical limits found 3.24 ev at f/1.2: "Ultra-high speed lenses produce quite some vignetting on full format sensors and the RF 50mm f/1.2 USM L is no exception to the rule here. At f/1.2 the vignetting exceeds 3EV (f-stops) which is, of course, easily visible. For some this may be an issue whereas others may actually prefer such an effect. Stopping down to f/1.6 and, more so, to f/2 reduces the issue substantially albeit there's still some light falloff visible. Traces remain at f/4 and beyond." https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1055-canonrf50f12?start=1

I can't see any real problem either.

That's pretty much the rule for lenses with extremely large apertures. The EF 50/1.2 also has significant vignetting at f/1.2, which drops precipitously as you stop down. Pull up any fast prime on the opticallimits.com web page and you'll see a similar pattern, although the RF 50 seems to have a bit more than most.

 

[John MARK]

Oh please Canon, make my dream come true : a new sensor that can be "pushed" far enough in post to see what was behiind the lens cap I forgot to remove last time I shot a wedding in that badly lit church !!

 

[digitalride]

it has over 4 stops of vignetting in the sides and corners, which would make a simple correction already onerous with the 26 MP chip.

Does anybody remember anyone complaining about being unable to correct vignetting 10 years ago with the "horrible" dynamic range of digital sensors at that time? Why is it suddenly an issue now?

In general I don't like "it was fine for us back then, it should be good enough for you now" arguments but I am legitimately perplexed by this comment.

 

[Adelino]

Oh please Canon, make my dream come true : a new sensor that can be "pushed" far enough in post to see what was behiind the lens cap I forgot to remove last time I shot a wedding in that badly lit church !!

Use an UV filter as a lens cap ;-)

 

[smozes]

Not looking to pull 5 stops, but I've been frustrated with blown out skies with all my Canon cameras. This is disappointing.

 

[padam]

The 6D sensor is fine...its just exactly what you said, years behind pretty much every other company. Its closer to matching a m4/3 sensor than what Sony is producing.

If I'm shooting outdoors, in shifting clouds, I might miss an exposure by a bit. Or on a bright day against an open background, the camera might miss the exposure some. Being able to shoot to save the higlights and push the shadows gives me a lot of room. And having the flexibility to work longer windows at sunrise/sunset without bracketing...especially on days without a lot of clouds. All scenarios where Sony saves me a lot of time post-processing. That's less time I spend in my hotel room processing and more time I have to explore the city I'm in.

Though Im far more annoyed with the battery life decision and the weird video crippling than I am with keeping the 6DII sensor

As fair as 'real-life' image quality is concerned, I really don't think the 6D is years behind (the improvements in recent years have slowed down considerably), and certainly ahead of any crop sensor camera for almost all uses (of course if DR is the most important thing, there are alternatives). Just because it is not up-to-date as a hybrid camera, it is still an excellent stills camera (could very well be the best in terms of cost vs IQ).

I don't think missing exposure is a big problem if the result is already previewed in the EVF and easily correctable.
That being said, the 6D Mark II metering - improved from the 6D - seems to do a fine job as well, so I think the WYSIWYG is a little overrated.

As for saving time in post processing - I spend much less time with Canon images, because of the color being better.


I do agree about the RP battery being the biggest bugbear (for them, it was quite simple, lower price = more raised eyebrows and more sales)

 

[Tom W]

Agree on the battery. I'm fortunate - I have an M5 and since it also eats batteries if you stare at the LCD too long, I have an extra battery for it already. Same battery. Would have been nice to have something with a little more life, but with bigger batteries come bigger cameras.

 

[Kharan]

Does anybody remember anyone complaining about being unable to correct vignetting 10 years ago with the "horrible" dynamic range of digital sensors at that time? Why is it suddenly an issue now?

In general I don't like "it was fine for us back then, it should be good enough for you now" arguments but I am legitimately perplexed by this comment.

Because some of us have gotten accustomed to better results in the meantime? No, it's not the end of the world, and it can be worked around, but for $4,300 combined (RP + 50mm f/1.2) I expect better. That's not chump change.

 

[Jethro]

How often is this sort of vignetting not fixable via a single click in Lightroom?

 

[dtaylor]

Not looking to pull 5 stops, but I've been frustrated with blown out skies with all my Canon cameras. This is disappointing.

All digital sensors are in the same boat here. It's the nature of the way the individual pixels record light. On digital you can push shadows but do not blow your highlights.

 

[digitalride]

Because some of us have gotten accustomed to better results in the meantime? No, it's not the end of the world, and it can be worked around, but for $4,300 combined (RP + 50mm f/1.2) I expect better. That's not chump change.

What camera+lens have you gotten used to in the meantime? Do you have some examples of the RP + 50mm f/1.2 that show the problem? If you need better shadow pushing capabilities maybe the cheapest canon bodies aren't for you, but I have never looked at a photo shot with a 6Dii or older bodies and said - look at all that ugly noise due to vignetting correction! Maybe the cheapest canon full frame camera is not the most perfect match for a $2000 lens.

And I don't understand your math, RP for $1300 + RF 50mm f/1.2 for $2000 = $3300, not $4,300. You could spend $5500 on a 5Dsr and 70-200 2.8 and complain it doesn't focus fast enough or have enough reach for birds in flight - that's not chump change but you have to use some sense and buy the right tool for the job. The A7r iii doesn't focus as fast as the A9, the A9 doesn't have the resolution of the A7r iii. Some day maybe there'll be a "best of everything" camera but it's not going to cost $1300 anytime soon.

Has anyone who actually shoots with a 6D ii or another camera that can only push shadows 4 stops complained about being unable to correct vignetting adequately? Is inadequate vignetting correction a new talking point being pushed by other manufacturers?

 

[mb66energy]

I do not like the fact to have reduced DR with the EOS RP - but Canon offers at the moment two options. Which are both well suited for those who like to have a system which works fluently with e.g. existing EF lenses.

I am torn between R and RP:
The R has better video modes I intend to use from time to time and 1...2 stops more DR for those high contrast scenes while shooting against the sun. It's 1500 EUR with the "boring" adapter I do not need. So I had to spent 1700 EUR with the control ring adapter.
The RP is lighter, maybe not so attractive for thieves and has the better mode dial. It's 2000 EUR from Hong Kong with 3 year worldwide warranty extension + 2200 EUR

If I needed the full functionality of the R NOW I would chose the R - 500 EUR more isn't that much more compared to the 1700 bucks.

If I could get the RP for 1100 EUR + 200 EUR for the control ring adapter maybe in 6 months I would buy it just for diving into FF incl. some video for having the fun at 900 EUR less compared to the EOS R. EDIT: And reuse the FD lenses on a FF body like 4.0 17, 1.4 50 S.S.C., both 2.5 and 3.5 135 S.C.

Until I have to make such a decision I will have a lot of fun with the entry level stuff from Canon which IMO does a lot of things right and is IQ wise in APS-C land on the same level like the much "higher level" stuff!

 

[degos]

Also, I just ordered the 24-105 RF lens ... I know that lens will hold its value.

That's optimistic; the EF 24-105 L II loses 30%+ just by taking it out of the box, at least in the UK. List price £1,015 / street price £949 / common resale around £600.

The era of L lenses holding their value has long since passed, except for rarities like the 11-24 or 17 TSE.

 

[AlanF]

Because some of us have gotten accustomed to better results in the meantime? No, it's not the end of the world, and it can be worked around, but for $4,300 combined (RP + 50mm f/1.2) I expect better. That's not chump change.

What do you really expect buying a top of the range lens to put on an entry level body?

 

[maico]

That's optimistic; the EF 24-105 L II loses 30%+ just by taking it out of the box, at least in the UK. List price £1,015 / street price £949 / common resale around £600.

The era of L lenses holding their value has long since passed, except for rarities like the 11-24 or 17 TSE.

New gray market EF 24-105 L are well under £600, for example https://www.e-infin.com/uk/item/3270/canon_ef_24-105mm_f/4l_is_ii_usm_lens_mark_2_(white_box)

Doing some number crunching on the RP, list is circa 43% less than the R, so in due course the gray market will be under £800 gbp

 

[Tom W]

That's optimistic; the EF 24-105 L II loses 30%+ just by taking it out of the box, at least in the UK. List price £1,015 / street price £949 / common resale around £600.

The era of L lenses holding their value has long since passed, except for rarities like the 11-24 or 17 TSE.

The "L" lenses generally do well on the Buy and Sell forum on Fred Miranda's site. I've bought and sold a couple of dozen lenses of various types there over the years. I'm in the US - maybe a different market here.
The EF 24-105 I and II are going to lose value a little faster than most L lenses simply because there are so many out there. Supply and demand. Still, a pretty solid lens. There are no stellar 4X zoom lenses.

 

[jeffa4444]

I have the 6D, 6D MKII, 5DS & the EOS R. These kinds of tests are frankly stupid. As Jared said "get your exposure correct, sure there are times that the dynamic range is tested between the brightest part and the darkest part of a scene but if your working within your histogram 99% of the time the shots will be fine.

I shoot low key portraits with the 5DS, a camera that was slammed at launch for poor dynamic range and rarely have issues even when cropping shots. The 6D & now 6D MKII is my go to camera for landscape and Ive never been concerned with dynamic range issues. Ive yet to shoot in anger with the EOS R but I doubt dynamic range will be my biggest concern.

If dynamic range is the No.1 concern switch to Sony. We have Sony cameras in our rental fleet they have far lower utilisation than the Nikon & Canon cameras and we are servicing some of the top still photographers in London covering fashion and food advertising on big bucks campaigns.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Ok, if I shoot a serious low light landscape...by that I mean...I use a really sturdy tripod, i'm very careful with my metering and exposures and often I take 2 images. One for highlights, one for low lights...then I merge them in Lightroom to create a raw / dng file that contains all the dynamic range of the 2 images. Or I pop them in photoshop and layer them down. Either way...I get eye popping detail...pixel sharpness...and a colour and contrast range at 100iso with super noise free files. You won't get that type of file from pulling even 3 stops....the files just don't compare. So for me, the ex stream DR of the sensor is relatively unimportant.
I'm sure there are the odd occasions where I was shooting hand held on the fly and I couldn't get the DR that I'd have liked...but that's a very very rare occurrence...and I don't blame my camera for those results.