Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR

[snoke]

Erm, well I don't know about elsewhere in the world, but you have to enter your lens and camera serial numbers to prove to them you own the items you say (in order to register for CPS in the UK, at least).

CPS not market research.

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ).

You get Canon survey?

A few of Bieber's >30 million twitter followers might disagree with you. But I'm sure you're a better judge of 'good' than they are, right?

Bieber isn't "good", he product of market research. His song and video product of market research. In America everyone want Hershey chocolate, so it popular like Bieber. This make it good chocolate? Strawmen are fun because burn easily.

Use your logic then Rebel DSLR is Canon best DSLR because it most popular. Yes? This your logic?

Lol. If you're a liar, sure you can lie to Canon. In aggregate, most will be truthful and your self-aggrandizing lies will be irrelevant. Especially because, if you tick the box indicating you own a supertelephoto lens but have not registered any, Canon will have discovered your little lie

It form that go into database for bulk email and other things. Nobody care about lies, just numbers. If you want invite to free breakfast from company, when you fill out survey, say "secretary" or "manager"? If they think what you say true then lie become truth

First off, a stop of DR more or less is not the difference between good for landscape photography and not good for it.

So you mean landscape photography like noise?
And you say that landscape photography don't want less noise?

But, if a business decision results in a few less of one particular type of photographer buying Canon gear, but an overall increase in profit, Canon wins. Thanks for proving my point!

Cannot know yet if 6D Mark II is good or bad for Canon profit. Always initial sales good. In one year? In two year? 6D Mark II be long behind.

Exactly. Canon evidently feels the trade off will not adversely impact their bottom line.

If DR not a problem for Canon, why change in 80D and 5D Mark IV?
Why not Canon keep same DR if old sensor good enough?

 

[Pookie]

Wow 54 pages... what is called when a bunch of guys hang out in a circle and play like this?

 

[SecureGSM]

Hi Jeffa,
when you project images using that 4K projector, do you upscale them to the same 53ft screen size? if so, then 50 Mpix 5Ds/R images get upscaled to a lesser degree than, say 30 Mpix images of 5D IV. what it does mean is that when you view 5DsR images at the same screen size as 5D IV images you do get approx. 30% advantage (√50/30).
therefore even if at pixel level 5D IV images are 10% sharper, the projected / on screen viewed 5DsR images woul look sharper and not by a small ammount.

however, if you were to crop (not downscale) 50 Mpix 5DsR image to 30 Mpix size ( approx. 30% each side), and than project the resulting image and compare with uncropped 5D IV image, then you will notice a substantial sharpness advantage ov the 5D IV image over the 5DsR image.

to put this pixel sharpness difference into perspective:

An1850 Focal units sharp AFMA adjusted lens, would typicaly perform at 1700 unit sharpness level when is out of tune by +/- (5-7) AFMA points.

lets look at the bright side:

1. New generation Canon on-chip ADC sensors in 80D and 5D IV exibit improved sharpness at the pixel level. There is a very good chance that 7D III and 5DsR II sensor will be much, much shaper at pixel the level than their predecessors. that will result in even sharper on screen or large printed images. you should be able to print even larger or crop more whilst maintaining the same level of sharpness. what is not to like?

2. Canon 80D / 5D IV on-chip ADC sensors are equally sharp or slightly sharper at the pixel level than Sony flagship A9 or Nikon D750 (compared at ISO 100).

What is the point in pixel level sharpness reviews?
We shoot a CIPA high resolution chart using an even field illuminated sphere and project images using a 4K projector on a screen with a 53ft diagonal. Of DSLRs the 5DS / 5DSr give the sharpest images using a CN-E 85mm T1.3.
We will test the 6D MKII and see how it stacks up.

 

[jeffa4444]

Hi Jefa,
when you project images using that 4K projector, do you upscale them to the same 53ft screen size? if so, then 50 Mpix 5Ds/R images get upscaled to a lesser degree than, say 30 Mpix images of 5D IV. what it does mean is that when you view 5DsR images at the same screen size as 5D IV images you do get approx. 30% advantage (√50/30).
therefore even if at pixel level 5D IV images are 10% sharper, the projected / on screen viewed 5DsR images woul look sharper and not by a small ammount.

however, if you were to crop (not downscale) 50 Mpix 5DsR image to 30 Mpix size ( approx. 30% each side), and than project the resulting image and compare with uncropped 5D IV image, than you will notice a substantial sharpness advantage ov the 5D IV image over the 5DsR image.

to put this pixel sharpness difference into perspective:

An1850 Focal units sharp AFMA adjusted lens, would typicaly perform at 1700 unit sharpness level when is out of tune by +/- (5-7) AFMA points.

lets look at the bright side:

1. New generation Canon on-chip ADC sensors in 80D and 5D IV exibit improved sharpness at the pixel level. There is a very good chance that 7D III and 5DsR II sensor will be much, much shaper at pixel the level than their predecessors. that will result in even sharper on screen or large printed images. you should be able to print even larger or crop more whilst maintaining the same level of sharpness. what is not to like?

2. Canon 80D / 5D IV on-chip ADC sensors are equally sharp or slightly sharper at the pixel level than Sony flagship A9 or Nikon D750 (compared at ISO 100).

What is the point in pixel level sharpness reviews?
We shoot a CIPA high resolution chart using an even field illuminated sphere and project images using a 4K projector on a screen with a 53ft diagonal. Of DSLRs the 5DS / 5DSr give the sharpest images using a CN-E 85mm T1.3.
We will test the 6D MKII and see how it stacks up.

All fair points and yes we do upscale to fit the screen primarily because thats exactly how the majority will treat their output even if were taking about say A2 prints (our customers are shooting billboards for example).
Its strange that Canon chose to continue with off sensor ADC for the 6D MKII because they could have played around with the AA filter if they wanted to "hobble" the sharpness / resolution at pixel level to favour the 5D MKIV and with the almost certainty that the 7D MKIII and the 5DSr MKII will get on sensor ADC the production volumes and therefor scale will shrink on the old fab line.
Canon clearly had an economic reason most of which we can only guess at, at a personal level the sharpness if within the bounds of the 6D is fine what I don't understand given the original was billed as a travel / landscape still camera is why the DR was not improved for me at times this has been an issue at dawn & dusk in certain conditions but as Ive stated elsewhere the plusses still outweigh the minuses if compared to the 6D.

 

[LonelyBoy]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

I really doubt anything north of "hobbyist" is. It's a FF Rebel for people who wanted a step up from their Rebel but didn't need the bells and whistles of a 7D or 5D.

That, I assume, was your point anyway.

 

[Khalai]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

I really doubt anything north of "hobbyist" is. It's a FF Rebel for people who wanted a step up from their Rebel but didn't need the bells and whistles of a 7D or 5D.

That, I assume, was your point anyway.

Well, I've done 20 weddings with my 6D, but I'm hardly professional. Any serious wedding photographer would be using either 5D III or IV anyway.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Wow 54 pages... what is called when a bunch of guys hang out in a circle and play like this?

Haha, sex! You're so clever.

 

[BillB]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

I really doubt anything north of "hobbyist" is. It's a FF Rebel for people who wanted a step up from their Rebel but didn't need the bells and whistles of a 7D or 5D.

That, I assume, was your point anyway.

A big part of the 6D market was defined by price, at least in comparison to other FF cameras, but the 6D market was also defined by people who didn't feel the need for various 5DIII features--ruggedness, sophisticated AF, joysticks etc. So, from a market point of view it was a super Rebel and a 5DIII lite. On CR, most of the focus has been on the 5DIII lite side of things as far as the 6DII is concerned, while Canon's emphasis in designing the 6DII seems to have been on the super Rebel side. Is there room between the 6DII and the 5DIV for another camera, maybe mirrorless?

 

[Don Haines]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

I really doubt anything north of "hobbyist" is. It's a FF Rebel for people who wanted a step up from their Rebel but didn't need the bells and whistles of a 7D or 5D.

That, I assume, was your point anyway.

Well, I've done 20 weddings with my 6D, but I'm hardly professional. Any serious wedding photographer would be using either 5D III or IV anyway.

It also works great for product photography in poor light..... you don't need a kick-ass AF system when you are dealing with inanimate objects in a lab..... but that's not really professional photography, it's only part of my job and I get paid to do it....

 

[LonelyBoy]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

I really doubt anything north of "hobbyist" is. It's a FF Rebel for people who wanted a step up from their Rebel but didn't need the bells and whistles of a 7D or 5D.

That, I assume, was your point anyway.

Well, I've done 20 weddings with my 6D, but I'm hardly professional. Any serious wedding photographer would be using either 5D III or IV anyway.

This is why I didn't say "the 6D2 cannot be used for weddings". Canon, though, I do not believe intended it for use for weddings, nor any other "serious professional" use. Which rather agrees with your second sentence, but is a point that bears repeating for all the people who said "why would Canon put just a single card slot on a professional camera?".

 

[Khalai]

This is why I didn't say "the 6D2 cannot be used for weddings". Canon, though, I do not believe intended it for use for weddings, nor any other "serious professional" use. Which rather agrees with your second sentence, but is a point that bears repeating for all the people who said "why would Canon put just a single card slot on a professional camera?".

But they did put two slots in their professional cameras. 6D II is not one of professionals camera

 

[LonelyBoy]

This is why I didn't say "the 6D2 cannot be used for weddings". Canon, though, I do not believe intended it for use for weddings, nor any other "serious professional" use. Which rather agrees with your second sentence, but is a point that bears repeating for all the people who said "why would Canon put just a single card slot on a professional camera?".

But they did put two slots in their professional cameras. 6D II is not one of professionals camera

That was the point I was making, yes.

 

[jeffa4444]

This is why I didn't say "the 6D2 cannot be used for weddings". Canon, though, I do not believe intended it for use for weddings, nor any other "serious professional" use. Which rather agrees with your second sentence, but is a point that bears repeating for all the people who said "why would Canon put just a single card slot on a professional camera?".

But they did put two slots in their professional cameras. 6D II is not one of professionals camera

Plenty of professionals have used the 6D and plenty will use the 6D MKII

 

[Khalai]

This is why I didn't say "the 6D2 cannot be used for weddings". Canon, though, I do not believe intended it for use for weddings, nor any other "serious professional" use. Which rather agrees with your second sentence, but is a point that bears repeating for all the people who said "why would Canon put just a single card slot on a professional camera?".

But they did put two slots in their professional cameras. 6D II is not one of professionals camera

Plenty of professionals have used the 6D and plenty will use the 6D MKII

Sure, but they will still be professionals using a camera, which is not intended for professional use. It's up to them obviously and marketing segmentation is rather arteficial, but the point is still valid.

 

[mistaspeedy]

I feel rather happy that my 80D can still beat Canon's latest full frame DSLR in low ISO!

As you probably know, at low ISO, it is only in this single metric 'dynamic range' that the 80D beats the original 6D (6D II is still unknown).
In other areas such as SNR, tonal range and color sensitivity (the areas that dxomark tests), the 6D easily beats the 80D, even at low ISO.

 

[Cthulhu]

Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share.

This is false. He (and others) object to bad criticisms of Canon gear. You might wonder what's the difference between good and bad criticisms, so here's a simple rule of thumb: if you talk about your particular needs, wants, budget, hopes, etc. then it's generally legitimate. If you try to assert that you are representative of the full market for DSLR gear then that's not legitimate criticism. So if you limit your criticisms to your own situation I'll bet the Canon poltergeist Neuro will leave you alone.

Oh, thanks for informing me of what is "legitimate criticism" SMH...

 

[Orangutan]

Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share.

This is false. He (and others) object to bad criticisms of Canon gear. You might wonder what's the difference between good and bad criticisms, so here's a simple rule of thumb: if you talk about your particular needs, wants, budget, hopes, etc. then it's generally legitimate. If you try to assert that you are representative of the full market for DSLR gear then that's not legitimate criticism. So if you limit your criticisms to your own situation I'll bet the Canon poltergeist Neuro will leave you alone.

Oh, thanks for informing me of what is "legitimate criticism" SMH...

Do you think it's legitimate for you to speak on behalf of other people whom you've never met? If so, then I SMH...

 

[Don Haines]

This is why I didn't say "the 6D2 cannot be used for weddings". Canon, though, I do not believe intended it for use for weddings, nor any other "serious professional" use. Which rather agrees with your second sentence, but is a point that bears repeating for all the people who said "why would Canon put just a single card slot on a professional camera?".

But they did put two slots in their professional cameras. 6D II is not one of professionals camera

Plenty of professionals have used the 6D and plenty will use the 6D MKII

Sure, but they will still be professionals using a camera, which is not intended for professional use. It's up to them obviously and marketing segmentation is rather arteficial, but the point is still valid.

A pro uses the appropriate tool for the task(s) at hand.... it does not always mean that the most expensive camera is the right tool. Sometimes you use a tool like a GoPro because of its superior sealing or tiny size, sometimes you use a camera that is disposable ( Ford does not mount a series of 1DX2s in a car for crash testing) Sometimes budget constraints restrict your choices....

Pro designation is marketing.....

 

[stevelee]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

I doubt it. If people were consistently paying money to photograph their weddings, I'd already be using something better than a 6D2, probably two or more.

As a DR challenge, though, I wonder how much shadow detail anybody would really want in the black tuxes. I know you'd want some, so that they look natural and have some sense of form and maybe even texture, but not fifty shades of gray.

 

[dak723]

As primarily a landscape photographer, I find the connection between DR and landscape rather odd, since I have always found my 6D to have enough DR for any landscape shot I have ever taken (yes, I realize others may differ). On the other hand, I would expect wedding photographers - who are dealing with white dresses, black suits and tuxes, and more extreme indoor lighting - to be the target market for more DR.

But...are wedding photographers the target market for the 6D?

No they are not, which was obviously my point. Not sure what your point is.