1DX new all-time low-light king?

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Then again for 2x the price, i would HOPE the 1dx would have a better sensor/high ISO than the 5d3... but but but, any quesses on DR LetTheRightLensIn?

I'd be surprised if it can match D800 DR. I doubt that is possible.

Other than that it's hard to say but the fact that it appears, assuming that guys test with the flower shots didn't have any hidden gotchas, that the high iso is so amazing that they must be using something totally new for the 1DX sensor so I think it's now certainly quite possible that it could be say a solid 1.5 stops better DR than the 5D2 and somewhere around D4 level DR, i.e. no match for any Exmor, but a nice step up from anything Canon has done before and match for the best non-Exmor DR. But who knows. Anyway I'd be slightly surprised if it it is not within the range of 0.5 to 2 stops better DR than the 5D2, at this point.

People have posted raw frames, but all anyone posts is supr high iso raws so I have nothing but guesses to go on.

You are right - the D800 will always beat the 5DIII DR figure fromDxO because of the way they calculate it, where mps plays a significant part

It's only fair to compare them on a normalized basis. Funny how nobody in Canon-land cried about normalization when the Canon cameras had way more MP....

Anyway, 1DX dynamic range results are in. As a 5D3 owner I am relieved ;D. As a Canon DSLR system user I am worried :'(.

After the stunning high iso performance levels I'd started to think they really had some new magic through and through, but only in terms of light collection and not read noise as it turns out.

They appear to have improved banding so it's not as nasty as the 5D2/7D/50D/1D4 or even 5D3 in the low ISO shadows, that is good, it's more on order of the 1Ds3/1D3/40D. So it was looking good.

But then I measured the read noise and it's absolutely nothing special at all. It's better per photosite than for the 5D3 and even, just barely, after normalization but it appears to be set to peg in only around 11.8 on DxO's normalized to 8MP chart. So it's a little disappointing they didn't get it to D4-levels of 13.1 (D4 does not use Exmor patents) or even many older Nikons at 12.2 level. Exmor levels were, of course, not expected.

Anyway it rules at high ISO but, for high DR scenes, it's very old news in terms of ISO100-200 shooting, oh well.

I am a little worried now about whether Canon will ever be able to get close to Nikon for lower ISO shooting. I really, really hope they can pull it off, at least to D4-like levels by the next round of 5D4s and all. I really don't want to switch to Nikon, but if Nikon is going to be like 3-4 stops better by then at low ISO or something....

But since this thread is about low light king, yeah the 1DX just utterly kicks ass there, I'm astounded how well it appears to do.

 

[Loswr]

Anyway, 1DX dynamic range results are in.

Who's results are in? Anyone's but yours?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Anyway, 1DX dynamic range results are in.

Who's results are in? Anyone's but yours?

Nobody else's but mine at this point but no I am not going into ten pages to defend and explain, you can just wait and see and believe it for now or not.

If you do recall though, despite all the nonsense and heaps of abuse tossed my way about how my 5D3 results (and others as well in that case) were so ridiculous, lo and behold but when DxO put out their results and someone else on here also carried it out, my results were like DxO's (and there's) to the tenth! just sayin'. But that is all I will say this time. I'm staying out of the argument. If you want to on for 30 pages about or not, whatever.

Anyway this is basically a PJ cam and it brings the AF and speed in spades along with, what seems likely to be, world-class high iso performance.

 

[briansquibb]

It's only fair to compare them on a normalized basis. Funny how nobody in Canon-land cried about normalization when the Canon cameras had way more MP....

Like comparing the 5DII against the D3X??

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It's only fair to compare them on a normalized basis. Funny how nobody in Canon-land cried about normalization when the Canon cameras had way more MP....

Like comparing the 5DII against the D3X??

5D2 vs D700 etc. :

 

[nightbreath]

After the stunning high iso performance levels I'd started to think they really had some new magic through and through, but only in terms of light collection and not read noise as it turns out.

Just curious, what's about the read-noise? Is it on the same level as 5D Mark III has?
Did you have a completely black RAW picture to perform your test?

 

[wockawocka]

The 1Dx is ever so slightly less than two stops better than the 5D3, as soon as mine arrives I'll be proving it.

 

[briansquibb]

The 1Dx is ever so slightly less than two stops better than the 5D3, as soon as mine arrives I'll be proving it.

As this is stated as the replacement for the 1DS3 would you test the low iso against the 1DS3 for me? Thanks in anticipation

 

[wockawocka]

Sure thing Brian. TBH, I'm thinking of pulling someone in from Model Mayhem and doing comparison shots between the 5d2, 5d3, 1ds3 and h3dII-39.

If it's one thing that annoys me it's the lack of shots with people in. It's what these cameras are geared up to shoot in the mainstream. I intend to do some nice big ass portrait shots like on my site www.booheads.co.uk

 

[briansquibb]

Sure thing Brian. TBH, I'm thinking of pulling someone in from Model Mayhem and doing comparison shots between the 5d2, 5d3, 1ds3 and h3dII-39.

If it's one thing that annoys me it's the lack of shots with people in. It's what these cameras are geared up to shoot in the mainstream. I intend to do some nice big ass portrait shots like on my site www.booheads.co.uk

Many thanks

Looks like we have similar styles for portraits

 

[bdunbar79]

Sure thing Brian. TBH, I'm thinking of pulling someone in from Model Mayhem and doing comparison shots between the 5d2, 5d3, 1ds3 and h3dII-39.

If it's one thing that annoys me it's the lack of shots with people in. It's what these cameras are geared up to shoot in the mainstream. I intend to do some nice big ass portrait shots like on my site www.booheads.co.uk

I too would like to see that comparison. Since I have two 5D Mark III's I would be especially interested. Also maybe down the road there will be a good 1D X vs. 1D Mark IV comparions, seperate from this comparison (different needs test) for sports shots.

 

[Kernuak]

I intend to do some nice big ass portrait shots

Is that with a wide angle? 8)

 

[briansquibb]

I intend to do some nice big ass portrait shots

Is that with a wide angle? 8)

Not a macro thanks

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

After the stunning high iso performance levels I'd started to think they really had some new magic through and through, but only in terms of light collection and not read noise as it turns out.

Just curious, what's about the read-noise? Is it on the same level as 5D Mark III has?
Did you have a completely black RAW picture to perform your test?

It's a little better read noise per photosite than the 5D3, but only a trace, after normalizing 18MP vs 22MP. There is less banding though so even though it probably won't measure any better for DR and won't really have any practical advantage in the random read noise itself, it has much less vertical pattern banding and that should make the files more pliable than the 5D3 and 5D2 files, probably getting closer to the 1Ds3. It has a touch more horizontal banding than 5D3, which has none, but not too much at all, and much less vertical.

Yeah, total black frame.

It's more read noise per photosite than the 1D4 and, by a trace, the 1Ds3 but seems to have a lot less ugly pattern junk than the 1D4 so it may be a little better than the 1D4 in terms of actual real world usable DR.

 

[Yasmin]

Other than 1 stop over 5d-iii, don't forget 1Dx has 400k shutter life vs 150k of 5D-iii.

 

[briansquibb]

It is interesting that the benchmark (Canon) for low noise at low iso is the 2007 1DS3.

Eyeballing the 2004 1DS2 I would say that is very close to the 1DS3, just of course that it is only 16mp. I would say the 1DS2 is a little better IQ than the 1D4 and looks like less noise (through DFINE).

Like everything, put an image through pp and the difference pretty much disappears on a 16x12 print

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

OK, so the read noise is slightly lower than I stated. It turns out the test files had a fast lens mounted and all the DSLRs cook the RAW gain books when they sense a lens faster than f/2.8 to make up for micro-lens losses from extreme angles (as fast glass provides).

So with a real, normal ISO100 black frame, no lens the actual true read noise at ISO100 on 1DX is 5.29 not 5.79 and the 8MP normalized DR (as per DxO) is then not 11.75 but 11.9 +/- about 0.1 depending on exact well depth (which I don't have recorded yet, and maybe +/- 0.2 if you also add copy variation into the mix).

OTOH the banding characteristics appear to be slightly worse than I had thought since this frame didn't lift past them quite as much. That said, the banding is still better than for all the recent banding messes from Canon of the last 3-4 years, better than 5D2,5D3,7D,1D4 but it's probably not quite as good as the 1Ds3, I'd need to go compare directly again though, so it's hard to say for sure, from I remember I think the 1Ds3 had less banding than the true 1DX ISO100 file. But as I said, I can say the 1DX, for sure, does have less banding than 5D3,5D2,7D,1D4 though so it's workable DR should be the best from Canon other than the 1Ds3 at slightly better.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

OK, so the read noise is slightly lower than I stated. It turns out the test files had a fast lens mounted and all the DSLRs cook the RAW gain books when they sense a lens faster than f/2.8 to make up for micro-lens losses from extreme angles (as fast glass provides).

So with a real, normal ISO100 black frame, no lens the actual true read noise at ISO100 on 1DX is 5.29 not 5.79 and the 8MP normalized DR (as per DxO) is then not 11.75 but 11.9 +/- about 0.1 depending on exact well depth (which I don't have recorded yet, and maybe +/- 0.2 if you also add copy variation into the mix). Not that anyone will particularly notice a 0.15 stop difference in DR. ;D but just to be legit about. It's about 1/3 stop more than my 5D3 and with less banding it probably has a solid 2/3 stop advantage usable DR ISO100 compared to my 5D3, hard to say, depends how much banding bothers you.

OTOH the banding characteristics appear to be slightly worse than I had thought since this frame didn't lift past them quite as much. That said, the banding is still better than for all the recent banding messes from Canon of the last 3-4 years, better than 5D2,5D3,7D,1D4 but it's probably not quite as good as the 1Ds3, I'd need to go compare directly again though, so it's hard to say for sure, from I remember I think the 1Ds3 had less banding than the true 1DX ISO100 file. But as I said, I can say the 1DX, for sure, does have less banding than 5D3,5D2,7D,1D4 though so it's workable DR should be the best from Canon other than the 1Ds3 at slightly better.

 

[nightbreath]

Taking into account all posts in this discussion, can someone make a picture with 1D X and 1Ds III in the same conditions for us to make a comparison?

 

[wockawocka]

Believe me, as soon as mine arrives you'll have it.