Guess the change from the 80D http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 80D,Canon EOS 90D
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...
A. Might want to check what you wrote.Then again, the Sony 7Dmk3 has a 1 to 2 stops advantage all through the ISO range.
Then again, the Sony 7Dmk3 has a 1 to 2 stops advantage all through the ISO range.
Didn't realize Canon outsourced the production of the 7Dmk2 successor to Sony
In case you meant the Sony a7mk3, what 1 to 2 stop advantage?
Yes, the alpha 7, my bad. You picked the APS-C option, rather than the FF version.
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/Char... APS-C/DX,Sony ILCE-6500,Sony ILCE-7M3(APS-C)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.
I thought so too. Made my totally rethink smaller sensors. Sony still has no idea how to make a decent camera though.That's definitely impressive!
I don't see much difference at all among the for cameras in the photonstophotos graph.I have been looking at both Oly and Fuji. For all the hype Sony gets, the 6500 is right on top of the 80/90D. But the Oly and Fuji...better...and the Oly is 4/3rds. That is something I am taking note of as I evaluate whether to get the M6 II or scrap the M series.
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.I don't see much difference at all among the for cameras in the photonstophotos graph.
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/Com...us-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II___1072_1076_1136Exactly. 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/Com...us-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II___1072_1076_1136