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

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
278
243
Well, that would prove the RP wholly inadequate with the 50mm f/1.2, for example - 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. And if you are shooting a scene that isn't flat or perfectly lit, or miss your exposure by a couple of stops, forget it - you'll either have to live with the vignetting or the noise.
Are you also mounting Michelin Pilot Sport tyres on a Tata Nano?:D
 

Kharan

I'm New Here
Nov 9, 2018
17
6
What do you really expect buying a top of the range lens to put on an entry level body?
I don’t know with Canon, but with other manufacturers I expect this stuff to work right out of the box. I don’t expect automatic lens corrections to eat all the available DR from the get go, even with a basic body. Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, Pentax and Panasonic all give you competitive DR even with their entry-level stuff. If Canon can’t provide that, the least I would expect is for them to leverage their oh-so-amazing throat diameter in RF to reduce vignetting to a manageable level.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
4,667
1,173
I don’t know with Canon, but with other manufacturers I expect this stuff to work right out of the box. I don’t expect automatic lens corrections to eat all the available DR from the get go, even with a basic body. Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, Pentax and Panasonic all give you competitive DR even with their entry-level stuff. If Canon can’t provide that, the least I would expect is for them to leverage their oh-so-amazing throat diameter in RF to reduce vignetting to a manageable level.
The throat diameter in RF is the same as in EF, so it is hardly "oh-so amazing".
 

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
739
148
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.
On my RF 50L I see some vignetting at f1.2, but I cannot imagine it being 4 stops. The vignetting is also very smooth and I prefer having it there. Actually, I have opted not to do vignetting correction in any of my RF 50L photos, because I prefer it being there. And yes, I have tried clicking the correction box in Lightroom several times, and undo it because it didn’t make the photo any better.
 

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
739
148
I don’t know with Canon, but with other manufacturers I expect this stuff to work right out of the box. I don’t expect automatic lens corrections to eat all the available DR from the get go, even with a basic body. Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, Pentax and Panasonic all give you competitive DR even with their entry-level stuff. If Canon can’t provide that, the least I would expect is for them to leverage their oh-so-amazing throat diameter in RF to reduce vignetting to a manageable level.
What planet did you fall off from? Are you not aware that Sony, Fujifilm and Panasonic use lens corrections to correct the horrible distortion and vignetting most of their lenses have?

Which RF lens has unmanageable vignetting? I can tell you that the RF50L does not.
 
Reactions: Del Paso and AlanF

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,812
369
On my RF 50L I see some vignetting at f1.2, but I cannot imagine it being 4 stops. The vignetting is also very smooth and I prefer having it there. Actually, I have opted not to do vignetting correction in any of my RF 50L photos, because I prefer it being there. And yes, I have tried clicking the correction box in Lightroom several times, and undo it because it didn’t make the photo any better.
Wait, what, “clicking the correction box” ? Last I checked Adobe still doesn’t have a profile for the RF50, no?
 

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
739
148
Wait, what, “clicking the correction box” ? Last I checked Adobe still doesn’t have a profile for the RF50, no?
Hmm.. I must have mixed it up with another lens. Sorry! However, two days ago I turned on the JPG engine in the R, shooting RAw+JPG, because my father is interested in the R and he doesn’t want to use raw. All corrections were on in camera. Yesterday I edited the raws switching between the raw and the in camera produces JPG, and for one, I didn’t see anything near a three or four stop difference. Second, I preferred the files without vignetting correction.
 
Reactions: Viggo

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,812
369
Hmm.. I must have mixed it up with another lens. Sorry! However, two days ago I turned on the JPG engine in the R, shooting RAw+JPG, because my father is interested in the R and he doesn’t want to use raw. All corrections were on in camera. Yesterday I edited the raws switching between the raw and the in camera produces JPG, and for one, I didn’t see anything near a three or four stop difference. Second, I preferred the files without vignetting correction.
I agree! The four stops is only at infinity focus and worst case scenario set up in studio. I also correct manually, then pull back because I preferred it’s vignetting
 
Reactions: Larsskv
Not looking to pull 5 stops, but I've been frustrated with blown out skies with all my Canon cameras. This is disappointing.
Do you not use the histogram? Shoot in manual ideally and never an issue.. Shoot in AV and adjust the eV to make the histogram right and its not an issue either. Shoot in AV or auto modes and you are going to get unpredictable results.
 
Reactions: Viggo

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,812
369
Do you not use the histogram? Shoot in manual ideally and never an issue.. Shoot in AV and adjust the eV to make the histogram right and its not an issue either. Shoot in AV or auto modes and you are going to get unpredictable results.
Exactly, expose correctly to get the best possible starting point for editing, ETTR and I seriously don’t get how to get it wrong.

With the R and having the RGB histogram in the VF makes it impossible not to get the optimal exposure always. Fast’n easy..
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
4,667
1,173
I don’t know with Canon, but with other manufacturers I expect this stuff to work right out of the box. I don’t expect automatic lens corrections to eat all the available DR from the get go, even with a basic body. Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, Pentax and Panasonic all give you competitive DR even with their entry-level stuff. If Canon can’t provide that, the least I would expect is for them to leverage their oh-so-amazing throat diameter in RF to reduce vignetting to a manageable level.
By the way, the Sony 24-105 f/4 has 5.4ev of vignetting https://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/1034-sony24105f4goss?start=1 compared with 2.6ev for the Canon 24-105mm RF https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1056-canonrf24105f4is?start=1 ("it's not excessive and it's much better than on the Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS. says opticalimits). 5.4ev eats up rather a lot of DR, if DR concerns you!
 
Reactions: Del Paso

koenkooi

EOS 80D
Feb 25, 2015
178
62
Exactly, expose correctly to get the best possible starting point for editing, ETTR and I seriously don’t get how to get it wrong.

With the R and having the RGB histogram in the VF makes it impossible not to get the optimal exposure always. Fast’n easy..
In older Canon cameras the histogram was created from jpeg data and hence not showing the full DR, is that still the case? Has anyone compared the EVF/LV histogram with the resulting raw image histogram?
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,812
369
In older Canon cameras the histogram was created from jpeg data and hence not showing the full DR, is that still the case? Has anyone compared the EVF/LV histogram with the resulting raw image histogram?
Not many cameras do raw histogram, Leica Mono is the only one I know of.

I always use a very flat jpeg Picture Style and know how much the raw can take compared to the preview, it’s not hard to learn.
 

Equinox

I'm New Here
Jun 29, 2017
10
15
Not looking to pull 5 stops, but I've been frustrated with blown out skies with all my Canon cameras. This is disappointing.
There's alot of techniques that you can use to ensure you don't blow out the skies using all of the cameras you state you own. I recommend always using a tripod.

1) Use graduated ND filters, this allows for an even exposure across the whole sensor. Meaning your sky and ground will be correctly exposed.
2) bracket your exposure, ie take multiple shots and blend them in LR/PS. For example -3 stops, 0 and +3 stops. this will drastically increase the dynamic range you are able to capture.
3) Expose for the sky and raise the shadows / exposure of the ground in LR/PS.

Employing these techniques will allow you to capture the detail in the sky you want.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,751
988
Canada
There's alot of techniques that you can use to ensure you don't blow out the skies using all of the cameras you state you own. I recommend always using a tripod.

1) Use graduated ND filters, this allows for an even exposure across the whole sensor. Meaning your sky and ground will be correctly exposed.
2) bracket your exposure, ie take multiple shots and blend them in LR/PS. For example -3 stops, 0 and +3 stops. this will drastically increase the dynamic range you are able to capture.
3) Expose for the sky and raise the shadows / exposure of the ground in LR/PS.

Employing these techniques will allow you to capture the detail in the sky you want.
but I don't want to have skill! I want the camera to do the impossible instead!
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,110
445
but I don't want to have skill! I want the camera to do the impossible instead!
But, many people prefer a do your own rather than have software do it for you based on a aogorithm that does a goof job or a average job or even a poor job depending on the image. As processing gets better, we get better results from the processing algorithms, but they can still produce some really ugly exposures.

At some point, the number of errors will be so low that the automated approach will be preferred.

Because of the improved auto tone algorithy in Photoshop, I now apply it automatically to incoming photos, only about 10-15% end up looking bad and must be fixed manually by clicking reset anf doing your own post processing.
 
Feb 24, 2016
5
4
Honestly, most of the "dynamic range" BS is just that -- BS. Shooting professionally since 1976, digitally since 2000, I can safely say that DR in Canons are significantly better than, say, the 1Ds. But in the past 5 years, at least, I've never had an issue on a shoot where I said to myself, "Gee, I wish my Canon xxx had more dynamic range!". I have never had an issue where a shot was "lesser" because of a perceived lack of DR. It's a non-issue.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,751
988
Canada
But, many people prefer a do your own rather than have software do it for you based on a aogorithm that does a goof job or a average job or even a poor job depending on the image. As processing gets better, we get better results from the processing algorithms, but they can still produce some really ugly exposures.

At some point, the number of errors will be so low that the automated approach will be preferred.

Because of the improved auto tone algorithy in Photoshop, I now apply it automatically to incoming photos, only about 10-15% end up looking bad and must be fixed manually by clicking reset anf doing your own post processing.
Your sarcasm detector may have glitched :)