why is the dpi 350. probably a noob question...but my 1dx and 5dsr pics are both 300 dpi
Upvote
0
brianftpc said:why is the dpi 350. probably a noob question...but my 1dx and 5dsr pics are both 300 dpi
scyrene said:ehouli said:I don't see this very promising, a friend tried while ina trip a Nikon D750 that has more resolution and is not a just released camera and has better quality even at 51.200 on a less than ideal light.
With more light, the 1Dx mk II should have better noise handling than what I am seeing here, if Canon doesn't develop better sensores, I think they should state their cameras are only for "Daylight" photography.
Got some samples/comparisons to back that up? If you think these results are useless for anything other than daylight photography, then you can't have done much photography in poor light.
ehouli said:scyrene said:ehouli said:I don't see this very promising, a friend tried while ina trip a Nikon D750 that has more resolution and is not a just released camera and has better quality even at 51.200 on a less than ideal light.
With more light, the 1Dx mk II should have better noise handling than what I am seeing here, if Canon doesn't develop better sensores, I think they should state their cameras are only for "Daylight" photography.
Got some samples/comparisons to back that up? If you think these results are useless for anything other than daylight photography, then you can't have done much photography in poor light.
I'll give you something more useful: The original NEF files so you can open them in ACR and see it yourself
Link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2y6xa325si5ck87/AAAJ0iHiKzNHUPQH1Up3nuNwa?dl=0
Nice troll. No way 7D2 has so much noise at ISO 2000/2500.TommyLee said:25,000 iso looks like 4000 or 5000 .. on the 5D3...
ehouli said:scyrene said:ehouli said:I don't see this very promising, a friend tried while ina trip a Nikon D750 that has more resolution and is not a just released camera and has better quality even at 51.200 on a less than ideal light.
With more light, the 1Dx mk II should have better noise handling than what I am seeing here, if Canon doesn't develop better sensores, I think they should state their cameras are only for "Daylight" photography.
Got some samples/comparisons to back that up? If you think these results are useless for anything other than daylight photography, then you can't have done much photography in poor light.
I'll give you something more useful: The original NEF files so you can open them in ACR and see it yourself
Link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2y6xa325si5ck87/AAAJ0iHiKzNHUPQH1Up3nuNwa?dl=0
BRunner said:ehouli said:scyrene said:ehouli said:I don't see this very promising, a friend tried while ina trip a Nikon D750 that has more resolution and is not a just released camera and has better quality even at 51.200 on a less than ideal light.
With more light, the 1Dx mk II should have better noise handling than what I am seeing here, if Canon doesn't develop better sensores, I think they should state their cameras are only for "Daylight" photography.
Got some samples/comparisons to back that up? If you think these results are useless for anything other than daylight photography, then you can't have done much photography in poor light.
I'll give you something more useful: The original NEF files so you can open them in ACR and see it yourself
Link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2y6xa325si5ck87/AAAJ0iHiKzNHUPQH1Up3nuNwa?dl=0
Well, still worse than even plain1DX...try harder
cazza132 said:Those bragging about the D750 - well from what I see here, even the 5DSR handles ISO12800 better than the lot. Not even it's native ISO :/ Actually, the D750 is the worst of the lot. Bit disappointed with the A7RII actually. And I think the 5DSR nudges out the 6D. Nothing retains the details in the greens like the 5DSR. All a close call all round though.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_1=sony_a7rii&attr13_2=canon_eos6d&attr13_3=nikon_d750&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr171_0=off&attr171_1=off&normalization=compare&widget=227&x=0.7397947275730029&y=0.49156699537227466
Comparable D750 and 1DX RAWs from production cameras are free to download on imaging-resources.com... and preproduction 1DXII seems to be even better I don't want to start any brand wars, I just think, that D750 is not in the same league with 1DX, D4s, D5 and A7S in terms of high ISO performance....ehouli said:Nope, you should try harder, upload some RAWs and let's see
cgc said:Many thanks for your files!.
If you manage to upload a single ISO 100 CR2 file (I don't know if you are allowed to) I could quickly analize the low ISO dynamic range, using the same method applied to the 80D on this thread http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1419472. Likely the 1DX2 is even better than the 80D. We all are a lot of impatient to know how much Canon has improved.
ehouli said:Nope, you should try harder, upload some RAWs and let's see