Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR

[Jopa]

Folks, is it true the 6dm2 is the first Canon's DSLR that offers AI Servo in LV for stills? If yes - need to file a mass petition to add this feature via a firmware update to all existing Canon models, at least to those with DPAF.

 

[ahsanford]

I think you may have missed this one page back: [...]

No, I've seen that. In fact, I've read every post on this thread ... The 6DII was the camera I was looking forward to forever as my first DSLR upgrade, so all this is fairly interesting to me. But I've burried my hopes of seeing any improvements there back when he first said that his images came from DPR, which is a few pages ago. That's why I said I don't want to get my hopes up for any improvements. Seems to me the case is pretty much settled. It doesn't really affect my shooting style, so it isn't terrible. But it's certainly not great either.

The 6D2 offers a ton and I'm sure everyone will be pleased with it. But for whatever reason, improving the DR was not a high priority for Canon. In this one metric, Canon's gonna party like it's 2012 . I don't think a soul here saw that coming -- it's a real needle scratch moment, IMHO.

For me, this is much less about being let down than it is about being surprised. I just presumed this was an advancement Canon would roll out across the line and the 6D2's turn was next. I guess not.

(Side note: does this read into other future product lines not getting the on-chip goodness? Why did the 80D get it? Will the 5DS2 or 7D3 also not get it? Surely they both will... right?)

- A

 

[BillB]

I think you may have missed this one page back: [...]

No, I've seen that. In fact, I've read every post on this thread ... The 6DII was the camera I was looking forward to forever as my first DSLR upgrade, so all this is fairly interesting to me. But I've burried my hopes of seeing any improvements there back when he first said that his images came from DPR, which is a few pages ago. That's why I said I don't want to get my hopes up for any improvements. Seems to me the case is pretty much settled. It doesn't really affect my shooting style, so it isn't terrible. But it's certainly not great either.

The 6D2 offers a ton and I'm sure everyone will be pleased with it. But for whatever reason, improving the DR was not a high priority for Canon. In this one metric, Canon's gonna party like it's 2012 . I don't think a soul here saw that coming -- it's a real needle scratch moment, IMHO.

For me, this is much less about being let down than it is about being surprised. I just presumed this was an advancement Canon would roll out across the line and the 6D2's turn was next. I guess not.

(Side note: does this read into other future product lines not getting the on-chip goodness? Why did the 80D get it? Will the 5DS2 or 7D3 also not get it? Surely they both will... right?)

- A

I was very sure that the 6DII would have ADC on the sensor. In fact, I assumed that every new sensor that Canon made would come with ADC on board. They sure fooled me.

So why did they do it? One possibility is that it was cost driven, and there is no question that the 6DII was designed to hit the $2000 price point, but who knows how the cost numbers on the sensor work out. Then there is the old "they nerfed it to protect the 5DIV" line of thought, for what that is worth.

I keep wondering whether Canon convinced itself that there were some performance advantages to leaving the ADC off the sensor, but I have no idea what the advantages might be.

 

[x-vision]

(Side note: does this read into other future product lines not getting the on-chip goodness? Why did the 80D get it? Will the 5DS2 or 7D3 also not get it? Surely they both will... right?)

As per DxO, the 80D not only has good DR but also has identical color response as the 5DIV.
That is to say, the 80D sensor is uncharacteristically good for a consumer-level camera from Canon.

This leads to me to speculate that the 80D sensor is probably a testbed for a 60mp (?) 5DS-II sensor.
If not that, I have no explanation why Canon put such a good sensor in the 80D.

As an 80D owner, though, I'm certainly not complaining .

 

[jeffa4444]

Yes, I can. Extreme shadow lifting/pushing business aside (not going to discuss this circus), properly exposed RAW images that came out of 6D and 6D II @iso 3200. will have similar if not identical noise levels and characteristics. Please refer to the chart in the post I linked above. That magenta high ISO cast of 6D I keep hearing about is only noticeable when shadows lifted by more than a stop at ISO 3200 and beyond. With my style of shooting ,I do not run into this issue much. Neither do anyone that cares to expose their images correctly.

I am sure that you have heard about the Placebo Effect before. I do not want to elaborate te point but in in a few words: there is no meaningful difference between _properly_ processed 6D II and 6D original RAW files.
Sadly, It is a wishful thinking and nothing else.

Sorry - can you explain how you come to that conclusion.

Have to disagree about the magenta cast Ive had it at 400ISO with flat grey skies. Ive truly enjoyed the performance of the 6D which Ive used consistently since early 2013 but equally it has limitations in certain situations including some low level banding so if Canon only improve this in the 6D MKII then its still a step forwards.
I am disappointed if they have not increased DR but will still likely buy as a second body if it is no worse than the 6D and fixes banding & the magenta cast issue.

 

[x-vision]

So why did they do it? One possibility is that it was cost driven, and there is no question that the 6DII was designed to hit the $2000 price point, but who knows how the cost numbers on the sensor work out.

That's exactly what I'm thinking too.

No just that. I feel that Canon chose this design as they are prepared to discount the 6DII just as they've been discounting the original 6D.
So, I wouldn't surprised one bit if the 6DII sells for $1600 by Christmas 2018.

Then there is the old "they nerfed it to protect the 5DIV" line of thought, for what that is worth.

Nah. If it costs them more money to use external ADCs, they surely wouldn't do it.
It's all money/business for them.

 

[jeffa4444]

When your pictures are viewed how many people will say "thats a compromised Canon 6D MKII"
Thats right none. The 6D was plagued with people damming the AF system but it made very little difference to sales and I suspect the same will happen to the 6D MKII.
Less technical more creative folks!

 

[x-vision]

Yes. I'm attaching a Sensor Heatmap visualization of Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN)at PhotonsToPhotos.
Note that the false coloration is simply to help emphasize patterns.
The 6D has a strong vertical FPN pattern whereas the 6D Mark II does not.

Thanks, Bill, for all your efforts.

Given the character of the 6DII noise, shadow-lifting should be less of an issue when compared to the original 6D (and 5DII/5DIII), as noise will clean up more easily and without much image degradation.

 

[bclaff]

Yes. I'm attaching a Sensor Heatmap visualization of Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN)at PhotonsToPhotos.
Note that the false coloration is simply to help emphasize patterns.
The 6D has a strong vertical FPN pattern whereas the 6D Mark II does not.

Thanks, Bill, for all your efforts.

Given the character of the 6DII noise, shadow-lifting should be less of an issue when compared to the original 6D (and 5DII/5DIII), as noise will clean up more easily and without much image degradation.

You are welcome.

And in case it's not obvious FPN is generally only an issue (when present) at the lowest ISO settings because once noise rises a bit it "drowns out" the FPN.

 

[ahsanford]

I was very sure that the 6DII would have ADC on the sensor. In fact, I assumed that every new sensor that Canon made would come with ADC on board. They sure fooled me.

In fairness, at this stage we can only presume the 6D2 is not on-chip because of the DR plots. We won't know until a tear-down happens and the absence of 'off' chip dedicated ADC components is confirmed, correct?

- A

 

[Isaacheus]

When your pictures are viewed how many people will say "thats a compromised Canon 6D MKII"
Thats right none. The 6D was plagued with people damming the AF system but it made very little difference to sales and I suspect the same will happen to the 6D MKII.
Less technical more creative folks!

Not trying to start an argument, but I have to disagree with this sentiment. While you are correct, there should be more emphasis on taking a good photo than the camera specs, I've often found I can't get around the limitations of my 6d, at least not practically. I go shooting with some friends who have d750 Nikon's, and they'll be able to catch the focus of moving wildlife much easier than I can, and a number of times I'll have images that aren't recoverable, ie landscapes, where they've been able to save them quite well. It's not much fun trying to but not being able to get the shot you want, due to limited tech.

We do a fair bit of timelapse, so bracketing and blended images are not an option. Not saying the 6d is a terrible camera, but there are many shots I haven't been able to take, where the person next to me has been able to get usable shots

 

[sebasan]

When your pictures are viewed how many people will say "thats a compromised Canon 6D MKII"
Thats right none. The 6D was plagued with people damming the AF system but it made very little difference to sales and I suspect the same will happen to the 6D MKII.
Less technical more creative folks!

Not trying to start an argument, but I have to disagree with this sentiment. While you are correct, there should be more emphasis on taking a good photo than the camera specs, I've often found I can't get around the limitations of my 6d, at least not practically. I go shooting with some friends who have d750 Nikon's, and they'll be able to catch the focus of moving wildlife much easier than I can, and a number of times I'll have images that aren't recoverable, ie landscapes, where they've been able to save them quite well. It's not much fun trying to but not being able to get the shot you want, due to limited tech.

We do a fair bit of timelapse, so bracketing and blended images are not an option. Not saying the 6d is a terrible camera, but there are many shots I haven't been able to take, where the person next to me has been able to get usable shots

Show us the images from your 6d and from the d750. By the way, the d750 was more expensive on release than the 6d

 

[Orangutan]

Not saying the 6d is a terrible camera, but there are many shots I haven't been able to take, where the person next to me has been able to get usable shots

For AF I have no trouble believing the D750 does better than the 6D. For recovery, the number of landscape shots where DR / FPN makes a differences should be very small. As Neuro has repeatedly pointed out, typical landscapes have much more than 14 stops of DR, so even SoNikon at base ISO will not get the full range. Metering/exposure would be more likely to cause perceptible differences.

That said, I think we can agree that more DR is better, all else being equal. Inherent sensor IQ is important, but how much so depends on many variables.

 

[BillB]

I was very sure that the 6DII would have ADC on the sensor. In fact, I assumed that every new sensor that Canon made would come with ADC on board. They sure fooled me.

In fairness, at this stage we can only presume the 6D2 is not on-chip because of the DR plots. We won't know until a tear-down happens and the absence of 'off' chip dedicated ADC components is confirmed, correct?

- A

True enough. On the other hand, do we know for sure that all of the 24mp crop cameras have on board ADC? If there really is a cost advantage to not putting the ADC on the sensor, you would think that Canon would go the cheaper route with the less expensive crop cameras if they did it anywhere. Or maybe there is something about FF sensor production that makes a difference in the cost equation.

I believe that the 6DII is the only FF camera with the DIGIC 7 chip. Wonder if that has anything to do with what is going on?

 

[Alejandro]

I was very sure that the 6DII would have ADC on the sensor. In fact, I assumed that every new sensor that Canon made would come with ADC on board. They sure fooled me.

In fairness, at this stage we can only presume the 6D2 is not on-chip because of the DR plots. We won't know until a tear-down happens and the absence of 'off' chip dedicated ADC components is confirmed, correct?

- A

True enough. On the other hand, do we know for sure that all of the 24mp crop cameras have on board ADC? If there really is a cost advantage to not putting the ADC on the sensor, you would think that Canon would go the cheaper route with the less expensive crop cameras if they did it anywhere. Or maybe there is something about FF sensor production that makes a difference in the cost equation.

I believe that the 6DII is the only FF camera with the DIGIC 7 chip. Wonder if that has anything to do with what is going on?

Meaning that the moment they see their sales hurting they could just release a firmware upgrade with 4K Video. Among other things.

 

[Cthulhu]

I was very sure that the 6DII would have ADC on the sensor. In fact, I assumed that every new sensor that Canon made would come with ADC on board. They sure fooled me.

In fairness, at this stage we can only presume the 6D2 is not on-chip because of the DR plots. We won't know until a tear-down happens and the absence of 'off' chip dedicated ADC components is confirmed, correct?

- A

True enough. On the other hand, do we know for sure that all of the 24mp crop cameras have on board ADC? If there really is a cost advantage to not putting the ADC on the sensor, you would think that Canon would go the cheaper route with the less expensive crop cameras if they did it anywhere. Or maybe there is something about FF sensor production that makes a difference in the cost equation.

I believe that the 6DII is the only FF camera with the DIGIC 7 chip. Wonder if that has anything to do with what is going on?

Meaning that the moment they see their sales hurting they could just release a firmware upgrade with 4K Video. Among other things.

I doubt they'll be able to do that with a UHS-1 card slot.

 

[Isaacheus]

Not saying the 6d is a terrible camera, but there are many shots I haven't been able to take, where the person next to me has been able to get usable shots

For AF I have no trouble believing the D750 does better than the 6D. For recovery, the number of landscape shots where DR / FPN makes a differences should be very small. As Neuro has repeatedly pointed out, typical landscapes have much more than 14 stops of DR, so even SoNikon at base ISO will not get the full range. Metering/exposure would be more likely to cause perceptible differences.

That said, I think we can agree that more DR is better, all else being equal. Inherent sensor IQ is important, but how much so depends on many variables.

Totally agree on that: dynamic range isn't everything, and a lot of situations are going to be more than even the best will allow currently, more is better though.

Does dynamic range pair with iso invariant, or are these different?
I'll see if I can get some of the d750 files to compare at some point. I know the d750 was more expensive, but I don't know anyone well enough with a d610 to make that comparison

 

[sebasan]

Not saying the 6d is a terrible camera, but there are many shots I haven't been able to take, where the person next to me has been able to get usable shots

For AF I have no trouble believing the D750 does better than the 6D. For recovery, the number of landscape shots where DR / FPN makes a differences should be very small. As Neuro has repeatedly pointed out, typical landscapes have much more than 14 stops of DR, so even SoNikon at base ISO will not get the full range. Metering/exposure would be more likely to cause perceptible differences.

That said, I think we can agree that more DR is better, all else being equal. Inherent sensor IQ is important, but how much so depends on many variables.

Totally agree on that: dynamic range isn't everything, and a lot of situations are going to be more than even the best will allow currently, more is better though.

Does dynamic range pair with iso invariant, or are these different?
I'll see if I can get some of the d750 files to compare at some point. I know the d750 was more expensive, but I don't know anyone well enough with a d610 to make that comparison

Yes, the d610 is in the category of the 6d. The d750 in the category of 5d and the d810 in the category of the 5ds. Of course, the prices are not in the same category, but canon is the leader of the market, and for the moment they can put the price they want.
Be aware the people who use nikon, maybe in the future they have to change the name of nikonrumors to fujirumors...

 

[Isaacheus]

[

Yes, the d610 is in the category of the 6d. The d750 in the category of 5d and the d810 in the category of the 5ds. Of course, the prices are not in the same category, but canon is the leader of the market, and for the moment they can put the price they want.
Be aware the people who use nikon, maybe in the future they have to change the name of nikonrumors to fujirumors...

I don't know much about the d610, where I am, the d750 is the same price as the 6d, and much cheaper than the 5d mk3. The new 6d is more expensive than the d750 also. What price did the d750 start at though?

 

[squarepants]

"People wanted an 80D with a FF sensor. That is what they have got (image wise) but because that is all it was, it is not worth upgrading. Odd, really."

But - if improved base ISO DR was your priority - then they haven't delivered a FF 80D have they?

It's not "wrong" or the hallmark of an inferior photographer to have hoped for more in this regard, just a reasonable expectation of the progress of technology, incl. Canon's own recent body releases.

I agree with many here that the DR "issue" is grossly overstated and that it can be a recipe for some pretty cringe-worthy/bad HDR looking results if misused, but 1) it doesn't hurt to have more than less - it does have it's uses, and 2) given the expectation level around this particular model (and the aspirations it represents) this was one for Canon to get right, instead of leaving themselves wide open for a massive broadside.

And of course it's still going to be a good camera and of course there are workarounds in genuinely high DR situations and of course it'll sell by the truckload... it could just have been better in this one metric than it is, even at slightly higher cost.