There are still surprises in store for the Canon EOS R5 announcement [CR2]

Jan 29, 2011
10,675
6,121
And I’m saying the DGO in one form or another could get us closer, especially if optimized for stills. If you’re looking for hard evidence, maybe a rumor site on a thread about unknown “surprise” specs isn’t the best place to be asking someone for it. This still falls under “killing time until the 9th”, lol.
Yes you do keep saying that, but you don't explain how when it fundamentally doesn't do what you keep suggesting it does.

It's akin to saying "I want a higher resolution EVF, they have developed a good swivel LCD so maybe they could make it work?" or, "I need 1/8,000 sec shutter speed, they have developed an intervalometer maybe they could make that work?"

Even if the DGO technology is in the R5 it will not "greatly improving high ISO performance" because that isn't what DGO does, and even if Canon do put it in and say it does independent testing will show that in unmolested RAW files it doesn't, because, yet again, that isn't what DGO does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Apr 25, 2011
2,509
1,884
Dual Gain Output on the C300 III
  • 16 stops of DR at ISO 800 (base)
  • Effectiveness is lowered at higher ISOs (they mention 14 stops), but it still is effective/working

But this is how it works now and on a video-only camera.
You are missing its point. It is only good for video-like frame rate. It's just a way to speed up a ramp-compare ADC, nothing more.

Instead of reading both dark and light areas with the same slow 16-bit linear ramp-compare ADC, you provide two pictures: one is read with a 4 times faster 14-bit ramp-compare ADC, with posterisation in shadows, and one with a 4 times faster 14-bit ramp-compare ADC specifically to capture the shadows (and to overflow in around midtones). Then you combine those two pictures into one and send it off your sensor to your DIGIC (or whatever).

On the C300 III they turn off DGO for faster sensor read. Speed is only half the story (pun).
Actually not.

DGO allows for 4K*2K*60P*16 bits throughput. Roughly 8 Gbps of data from sensor. If you DIGIC (or whatever) is not fast enough to consume more data per second than that, then, at higher frame rates, you just have no use for all the bits DGO could provide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Yes you do keep saying that, but you don't explain how when it fundamentally doesn't do what you keep suggesting it does.

It's akin to saying "I want a higher resolution EVF, they have developed a good swivel LCD so maybe they could make it work?" or, "I need 1/8,000 sec shutter speed, they have developed an intervalometer maybe they could make that work?"

Even if the DGO technology is in the R5 it will not "greatly improving high ISO performance" because that isn't what DGO does, and even if Canon do put it in and say it does independent testing will show that in unmolested RAW files it doesn't, because, yet again, that isn't what DGO does.

It’s exactly what it does according to all the reference links provided. I think we’re taking past each other with no hope of consensus. Let’s revisit on the 9th.
 
Upvote 0

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
233
212
This is my first comment but I wonder if Canon could be introducing computational photography tricks that we have seen on our phones over the past few years. Does anyone have thoughts on that? I keep waiting for a big camera manufacturer to attempt what Apple and Google are doing with their tiny little sensors.

More computational photography in DSLR/DSLM would be welcome. But traditionally manufacturers of DSLR/DSLM have been very conservative in that aspect while mainly focusing on hardware/optics etc and not so much on SW. CP seems the domain of smart phone manufacturers. There is a good reason for it: Smart phones have far more computing power and main memory required by CP.
 
Upvote 0
This is my first comment but I wonder if Canon could be introducing computational photography tricks that we have seen on our phones over the past few years. Does anyone have thoughts on that? I keep waiting for a big camera manufacturer to attempt what Apple and Google are doing with their tiny little sensors.

I think it will creep in a little, gradually, but two important factors mitigating against it are - phones have much greater computer power, and there was a strong incentive to introduce it into phones to get around the limitations of tiny sensors and lenses.
 
Upvote 0

jdavidse

R5
CR Pro
Sep 13, 2012
141
179
I had to go research this one, and holy crap I can't believe it, they don't have it! Simple feature that EVERYONE ELSE HAS. And I'm starting to remember why I grew to hate Canon over the years. I hope the R5 is their redemption.

It's truly baffling why it didn't appear 7 years ago. You get the feeling that some engineer at Canon just really hates a useful spot metering mode...
 
Upvote 0
Nov 1, 2012
1,549
269
I understand the point, I just feel it is overly complicated as in no situation do you need more than three control inputs but generally you only need two. If you are in auto you drop one metric but gain EC, if you are in manual you don’t need EC.

I like the way when I am in P, Av or Tv my back dial becomes EC, easy muscle memory. I also like that when I am in ‘manual’ with auto iso I use the same fingers in practically the same place. I push ‘Set’ with my thumb and move the top front dial. The problem with more dials in more places is it becomes more difficult to use them universally, a top plate mounted EC dial on the left of the camera works great on the M5 with small lenses but on a full sized camera with big lenses your left hand is normally far away from the body, same with ‘control ring’ old fashioned aperture rings, they work great in some situations and really get in the way in others.

Personally I use my right index finger for the shutter button the top dial and the iso button, my right thumb for back dial ‘set’ button and focus joystick. I have seen more dexterous people than me use right index finger for iso and top dial and right middle finger for shutter button, this allows instant control of all four/three metrics instantly. Maybe that is why they don’t mess with 1 series ergonomics much.

Funny enough, I can use both my bodies (5D4, 1DX1) in pitch black without any problems. I know all buttons where they are and what they do. (hence I kinda mock the people who keep asking for illuminated button, like just learn the damn buttons, there's not that many of them).

But, I don't know where EC is on either of the bodies. I _think_ on 1DX is shared on the top with ISO. On 5D4 I have no clue, I'd guess it's one of the back panel top-right corner buttons.

So that kinda tells my feeling that we don't need more than 3 wheels.
 
Upvote 0
Video is the last frontier, and mirrorless is better for video



Apparently yes, but it's a strange feature to artificially withhold from "lower-end" cameras.
I've never found spot linked metering to be helpful for anything. I don't understand why so many people think it's a big deal. i must be missing something because it seems like a teriible way to meter a scene to me and will probably cause a lot more problems than it will solve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Aussie shooter

https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
Dec 6, 2016
1,183
1,817
brettguyphotography.picfair.com
I've never found spot linked metering to be helpful for anything. I don't understand why so many people think it's a big deal. i must be missing something because it seems like a teriible way to meter a scene to me nad will probably cause a lot more problems than it will solve.
Shoot wildlife. You will realise very quickly how good it is. And yes. Sometimes it means you blow the entire sky out. But often that is what is needed to expose the subject properly
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
Shoot wildlife. You will realise very quickly how good it is. And yes. Sometimes it means you blow the entire sky out. But often that is what is needed to expose the subject properly
I do shoot wildlife and I still think it's pointless. the second your spot AF point slips off of whatever you are trying to meter the exposure is shot. Guaranteed to happen at the worst possible time because that's just the way things go.
 
Upvote 0
On my SOny I use highlight metering so they are always protected and boost shadows as needed. Hoewver with highlight metering you add in about 07-1.3EV compensation while you're shooting so shadows anre clean when pushed. Canon needs highlight metering IMO and much more useful these days than AF point linked spot metering. With the histogram in the EVF you can adjust exposure on the fly in real time.
 
Upvote 0

Aussie shooter

https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
Dec 6, 2016
1,183
1,817
brettguyphotography.picfair.com
I do shoot wildlife and I still think it's pointless. the second your spot AF point slips off of whatever you are trying to meter the exposure is shot. Guaranteed to happen at the worst possible time because that's just the way things go.
Yes. But shooting a a dark bird etc against a bright background and if you use evaluative than your subject is blacked out. TBH I mostly use centre weighted average as the best compromise but when I really need to nail the subject then spot metering it is
 
Upvote 0
Nov 1, 2012
1,549
269
I've never found spot linked metering to be helpful for anything. I don't understand why so many people think it's a big deal. i must be missing something because it seems like a teriible way to meter a scene to me and will probably cause a lot more problems than it will solve.

Fashion show with semi-random spot lights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

CvH

CR Pro
Nov 19, 2014
199
96
At the risk of beating a freshly dead horse, I can see four dials in Fv mode quite readily. One for ISO, one for aperture, one for shutter speed, and one for exposure compensation. Why have an apparently redundant one for exposure compensation, when you can get the same result twiddling one or more of the other three parameters?

It's because in Fv mode there's a tendency to leave at least one of the other three in auto. So, say, you fix the shutter speed, and let the other two be in auto. But you find yourself with a dark exposure at some point, and rather than override an auto setting, you just crank the exposure comp. You can then set it back to zero and your other settings are unchanged, with aperture and ISO still on auto. This works with any combination of manually set/auto (as long as something remains auto). Yes, technically you could do it with fewer dials...for example some cameras when you're in Av a particular dial controls aperture, and a different dial controls exposure comp, when in Tv that first dial now controls shutter speed, and the second dial is EC, when in M, now suddenly the first dial controls shutter speed and the second dial controls aperture, or is it the other way around--the point being the two dials have different meanings depending on what mode you're in. And ISO is controlled yet somewhere different (hopefully not in a menu!!!) Having four dials that ALWAYS have the same meaning does mean one of the dials will be useless at any given time, but at least you don't have to think about "Now which dial is it that controls EC now? Whoops, never mind, I'm in manual mode, none of them do." or "Hmm, which one controls shutter speed? The answer differs between M and Tv."

Agree and this also applies to Manual mode hence the 4th dial.
 
Upvote 0

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,678
2,592
Agree and this also applies to Manual mode hence the 4th dial.

The way I see it EC is basically an ad-hoc override of other settings--ones that are left on Auto. Because if you change one of the things that is in auto, it has to be put back on auto without hosing the things you did set, so the quick "set everything to auto" button isn't the one to use. But it's easy enough to just use EC then recenter it when you're done with it.
 
Upvote 0
I get the fact that having the highest dynamic range isn’t the end-all be-all feature on the wishlist. But there is a lot of room for improvement for the color and contrast in lifted shadow areas. It’s not about how many stops I can lift the shadows, it’s about how close can I get to lifted shadows that look completely natural as if I exposed for them directly. That’s the holy grail of dynamic range as I see it.
yeah that's pretty much impossible. there simply isn't enough information in the shadows and never will be. ever. unless they go to photon counting.

Just the nature of it, the shadows without a tone curve applied have very little analog signal, that is translated into very small number of bits of information after conversion. when you raise that, you are not gaining precision. what you are asking for is to gain precision during a shadow lift.

There is a way to do what you want that most photographers still try to do with wide DR scenes. it's called bracketing ;)
 
Upvote 0