1DX Mark II underexposed and pushed 5 stops from RAW image

[jebrady03]

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57265121

User got ahold of a demo unit and used Raw Therapee to open the RAW files. User also has a 1DX. He used the same settings on both. Pretty dramatic difference in noise.

EDIT: Hey everyone, the original poster of this picture asked me to remove it, per his relationship with Canon. I'd never want to jeopardize that for someone else, it's not my place, so I'm happy to remove it. Besides, I think everyone who wanted to see it, has seen it. And if there are any that haven't, they can certainly simply read the comments posted and understand the image. Hope you all understand. Thanks!

 

[jebrady03]

He said later that the underexposed image that was pushed to ISO 3200 looked more like ISO 6400 properly exposed. So, a 5 stop push results in 6 stop noise. If I'm not mistaken, that's about a 2-3 stop improvement as previously, a 2-3 stop push looked like 5-6 stops of noise. Right? And it was even worse with the sensors that band (7D, 5D Mark III, for example).

 

[frankchn]

Well, if this holds up across various lighting conditions, then hopefully there won't be any more discussion about (the lack of) DR in Canon sensors any more.

I am surprised that Canon didn't mention the improvement in its press releases though.

 

[Loswr]

Yay!!!!! I've been waiting soooooooooo long for Canon to have sensors that I can drastically underexpose then push 5-stops in post. I'm dumbfounded that I've been able to take any pictures at all until now. I'm going to preorder the 1D X II immediately!!!









Or not.

Seriously, if a 5-stop push is your thing, guess you're feeling happy as long as you have $6K to burn.

 

[jebrady03]

Neuro... the way I see it is that Canon has improved the image quality of their sensors. For me that means lower noise at low ISO, at a minimum. For others it may mean pushing shadows. For others it could be something different, who knows. But shouldn't we all be excited that the sensors to come in future Canon bodies will produce better image quality?

 

[tpatana]

This sounds good. Still not sure if I get one, but quite often my sport shoots I have dark figures in brighter environment. Usually I expose the darks quite well, which means the other areas get quite blown. This case I might shoot one stop faster ISO and push the shadows one stop up.

So I see benefit in this improvement, although it's not as huge deal as SoNikon try to claim it is.

 

[Loswr]

Sure, I think it's great. But I have no issues with noise at low ISO currently, nor issues with low ISO DR that can be solved by two more stops of it. Those who do are clearly a very small minority of users. But if this helps them, wonderful.

 

[jebrady03]

Oh, and Neuro. The fewer threads about dynamic range, the better. Right? This should go a long way towards that utopic notion

 

[frankchn]

Sure, I think it's great. But I have no issues with noise at low ISO currently, nor issues with low ISO DR that can be solved by two more stops of it. Those who do are clearly a very small minority of users. But if this helps them, wonderful.

And hopefully it stops all the conversations that go round-and-round about how Canon sensors lack low-ISO DR and we can move on to others things to talk about

 

[captainkanji]

Silly me. I've been trying to get the proper exposure when I could have been underexposing and recovering in post. Not sure why someone would do this on purpose, even with landscapes. Is Canon's DR really that bad?

 

[Loswr]

Oh, and Neuro. The fewer threads about dynamic range, the better. Right? This should go a long way towards that utopic notion

But Canon is forcing us to pay $6000 for that extra DR and forcing us use a massive, heavy brick for that extra DR.

I do admire your optimism!

 

[dak723]

Sure, I think it's great. But I have no issues with noise at low ISO currently, nor issues with low ISO DR that can be solved by two more stops of it. Those who do are clearly a very small minority of users. But if this helps them, wonderful.

And hopefully it stops all the conversations that go round-and-round about how Canon sensors lack low-ISO DR and we can move on to others things to talk about

Dream on! The Canon bashers will continue to bash and the Sony lovers will continue to promote Sony as if it were the only camera that is capable of taking a good pic! Because it never had anything to do with actual picture taking and it won't now!

 

[jthomson]

Guess your friend never read that book by Bryan Peterson ! ;D

Maybe a good book on flash would also be appropriate.

Was listening to the grid yesterday . Scott Kelby had two pro's that shot the superbowl with the 1DXII (is that 412 in Roman Numerals?) and they both said that the noise is and colour of the files has improved. They reported shooting at higher iso as a result, not shooting at low iso and pushing in post. Just sayin'.

Hopefully the new technology will make its way into a camera us mere mortals can afford. Not really bitchin', I love the results I get from my 5D3 and 7D2.

 

[jebrady03]

Oh, and Neuro. The fewer threads about dynamic range, the better. Right? This should go a long way towards that utopic notion

But Canon is forcing us to pay $6000 for that extra DR and forcing us use a massive, heavy brick for that extra DR.

I do admire your optimism!

Wow... There's simply no pleasing you. Apparently in your world, entire product portfolios are replaced on the same day.

Have a good one.

 

[Loswr]

Oh, and Neuro. The fewer threads about dynamic range, the better. Right? This should go a long way towards that utopic notion

But Canon is forcing us to pay $6000 for that extra DR and forcing us use a massive, heavy brick for that extra DR.

I do admire your optimism!

Wow... There's simply no pleasing you. Apparently in your world, entire product portfolios are replaced on the same day.

Have a good one.

Silly me, forgot the <sarcasm> tags again. My bad.

 

[ritholtz]

Oh, and Neuro. The fewer threads about dynamic range, the better. Right? This should go a long way towards that utopic notion

But Canon is forcing us to pay $6000 for that extra DR and forcing us use a massive, heavy brick for that extra DR.

I do admire your optimism!

You forgot about not as good as 3D tracking for tracking eyes of players during super bowl. ;D

 

[cpsico]

Hardly ever shoot at ISO 100, but looks great.

 

[RGF]

Sure, I think it's great. But I have no issues with noise at low ISO currently, nor issues with low ISO DR that can be solved by two more stops of it. Those who do are clearly a very small minority of users. But if this helps them, wonderful.

Sarcasm aside, the ability to pull up dark shades without noise is useful. Granted this type of DR would be more beneficial in a 5D series body.

 

[3kramd5]

Sure, I think it's great. But I have no issues with noise at low ISO currently, nor issues with low ISO DR that can be solved by two more stops of it. Those who do are clearly a very small minority of users. But if this helps them, wonderful.

Granted this type of DR would be more beneficial in a 5D series body.

Why?

 

[Orangutan]

Sure, I think it's great. But I have no issues with noise at low ISO currently, nor issues with low ISO DR that can be solved by two more stops of it. Those who do are clearly a very small minority of users. But if this helps them, wonderful.

Sarcasm aside, the ability to pull up dark shades without noise is useful. Granted this type of DR would be more beneficial in a 5D series body.

Yes, but five stops? I can see two, even unto three, but five is right out. I'd like someone to show me a real-world scene for which you'd want to pull shadows five stops, or even four.