Photons to photos has posted 90D DR

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,788
876
119
Yeh I saw that earlier. Interesting, even more so when you compare the actual numbers to the Sony A6500 and the difference you'd guess there was by the constant comments about how bad Canon DR is...
 

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,034
531
Turku, Finland
Yes, the alpha 7, my bad. You picked the APS-C option, rather than the FF version.
My point was that of frigging course a FF sensor has 1+ stops more DR than an equivalent-tech APS-C size sensor! That's the whole point of having a bigger sensor in the first place! 2.5x the surface area means 2.5x the photons means 2.5x the DR means 1⅓ stops more DR, all else being equal. You can't compare apples to oranges unless you want to show that a FF sensor collects more light than an APS-C sensor, which should be obvious to anyone.

Here's the APS-C comparison again, with the "ideal" theoretical sensor response curve added. You can see that there's simply no room for a 1EV improvement without increasing the surface area of the sensor.

Here's an apples to apples comparison between the a73 and the 5D4. The jump at ISO 640 is an actual technological difference between the two cameras; modern Sony sensors use dual stage amps to improve high-ISO DR a bit. But the difference is at most ⅔ stops or so; here again modern sensors are less than a stop away from theoretical limits.
 

Graphic.Artifacts

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 1, 2017
426
244
My point was that of frigging course a FF sensor has 1+ stops more DR than an equivalent-tech APS-C size sensor! That's the whole point of having a bigger sensor in the first place! 2.5x the surface area means 2.5x the photons means 2.5x the DR means 1⅓ stops more DR, all else being equal. You can't compare apples to oranges unless you want to show that a FF sensor collects more light than an APS-C sensor, which should be obvious to anyone.

Here's the APS-C comparison again, with the "ideal" theoretical sensor response curve added. You can see that there's simply no room for a 1EV improvement without increasing the surface area of the sensor.

Here's an apples to apples comparison between the a73 and the 5D4. The jump at ISO 640 is an actual technological difference between the two cameras; modern Sony sensors use dual stage amps to improve high-ISO DR a bit. But the difference is at most ⅔ stops or so; here again modern sensors are less than a stop away from theoretical limits.
Your chart with the FujiFIlm XT-30 added for some perspective. I think that sensor is a better representation of modern Sony sensors. They haven't updated the sensors in the A 6XOO series for several years. As a result of the dual gain the XT-30 appears to exceed the theoretical max at higher ISO's. http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 90D,FujiFilm X-T30,Ideal APS-C/DX,Sony ILCE-6500,Sony ILCE-7M3(APS-C)
 

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,034
531
Turku, Finland
Your chart with the FujiFIlm XT-30 added for some perspective. I think that sensor is a better representation of modern Sony sensors. They haven't updated the sensors in the A 6XOO series for several years. As a result of the dual gain the XT-30 appears to exceed the theoretical max at higher ISO's.
That's definitely impressive!
 

Graphic.Artifacts

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 1, 2017
426
244
That's definitely impressive!
I thought so too. Made my totally rethink smaller sensors. Sony still has no idea how to make a decent camera though.
To be fair: Sony DX sensors are only a 1.5x crop so I suppose they have a natural advantage due to their larger surface area.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sharlin

docsmith

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 17, 2010
859
236
I don't see much difference at all among the for cameras in the photonstophotos graph.
Exactly. For all the hype Sony gets FF, the Sony is right on top of the 80D/90D. The only two that separate themselves are the Fuji XT-3 (APS-C) and the Oly. What makes the Oly impressive is that is a mirco-4/3 sensor.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,655
2,898
Exactly. For all the hype Sony gets FF, the Sony is right on top of the 80D/90D. The only two that separate themselves are the Fuji XT-3 (APS-C) and the Oly. What makes the Oly impressive is that is a mirco-4/3 sensor.
There is something odd about the Oly results. Photonstophotos uses the manufacturers stated isos in their graphs and not the measured ones for their charts. Oly overstates their isos by about 2/3rds stops relative to the measured ones for Canon and Sony, so Oly looks better than it really is, though they are very good. https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A6300-versus-Canon-EOS-80D-versus-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II___1072_1076_1136
 

docsmith

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 17, 2010
859
236
There is something odd about the Oly results. Photonstophotos uses the manufacturers stated isos in their graphs and not the measured ones for their charts. Oly overstates their isos by about 2/3rds stops relative to the measured ones for Canon and Sony, so Oly looks better than it really is, though they are very good. https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A6300-versus-Canon-EOS-80D-versus-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II___1072_1076_1136
Thanks...I just canceled my order for an Oly ;)

Ok...so I've yet to have one in my shopping cart...but I had started looking at them a bit more after Andy Rouse's posts and seeing their data. I'll have to use a bit more skeptical eye. Thanks.