Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR

[scyrene]

Do you believe 'landscape photographers' comprise a significant fraction of the 6D / 6DII market? If so, do you have any data to back up that claim? It's ok if you don't, I'm sure that Canon does have exactly that sort of data.

How Canon get this data on how many have 6D for landscape?

They ask their customers, i.e., market research.

I'm quite positive that nobody asked me. And I've been in the CPS program for years, subscribed to CPS newsletter as well. So I'm honestly asking, where did they ask? I've never stumbled upon any Canon questionnaire or survey...

Market research doesn't usually involve asking the entire customer base. Personally, I've received two online survey invitations from Canon in the past few years. One question I recall from the last one presented a list of ~20 features, e.g., more MP, faster frame rate, more DR, more AF points, longer battery life, etc., and respondents were asked to pick their top three features from that list.

As for nobody asking you, at least here in the US, Canon collects a ton data from a survey taken every single time a product is registered.

This assume people register and give right informations. If I register and want Canon to think I important, I say I have many big white lenses. How Canon know if true or not? No registration card for lens on craigslist or ebay!

If Canon do this and Canon products are recognized as not as good at landscape then fewer owners do landscape so Canon do less for them.

Market research direct Canon and buyers directed by Canon too. Less people buy Canon for landscape, not so many respond with landscape needs, Canon does less for them.

Et voila, 6D Mark II and it has old sensor design.

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).

 

[jeffa4444]

my 12 y.o. son believes that there is a fingerprint scanner inbuilt in the shutter button of my 6D. He has all the evidence that supports his theory as the camera refused to focus on the subject at the press of the shutter button for him no matter how hard he tried. It does for me though. hint: Back Button AF.

So here's a review of the Canon 6D MKII from a UK camera store, she says (in the comments) that she reviewed the camera without reading any internet bias... even though the MKII appears to have less DR than the original and more recent Canon offerings, she seems to think that it has more than her 6D??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gkmqh3T1jc

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.

 

[neuroanatomist]

This assume people register and give right informations. If I register and want Canon to think I important, I say I have many big white lenses. How Canon know if true or not? No registration card for lens on craigslist or ebay!

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 ( and if you bought one secondhand, that's irrelevant to Canon anyway).

If Canon do this and Canon products are recognized as not as good at landscape then fewer owners do landscape so Canon do less for them.

Market research direct Canon and buyers directed by Canon too. Less people buy Canon for landscape, not so many respond with landscape needs, Canon does less for them.

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

Et voila, 6D Mark II and it has old sensor design.

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

 

[stevelee]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gkmqh3T1jc

Thanks for that link. It certainly highlights reasons that I am considering buying this camera, and it adds some that I hadn't thought about, so it might expand the sorts of pictures that I regularly take.

The macro shots were especially interesting to me, since she was apparently using a lens that I own. FF at 1:1 obviously covers more territory that on my Rebel.

DR is surely better than on my current cameras, and I don't have problems now except in extreme circumstances that no current camera can come close to, such as stained glass windows in a dark church, as I posted some pages back. Not achieving my life-long ambition of having on-chip ADC may be the headline of my obituary, but I'll run that risk for now.

I hadn't thought about the advantages of having both a real viewfinder and a flippy touch screen on the same camera. My G7X II has a tilty touch screen, but no viewfinder; and my T3i has a flippy non-touch screen as well as a real viewfinder. So I do have some experience with all these things, just not on the same camera.

 

[EdB]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

 

[bdunbar79]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

 

[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.

 

[EdB]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

 

[neuroanatomist]

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?

 

[bdunbar79]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

Justin Beiber isn't good to YOU. He's damn to good to million and millions of people world-wide. Now are you starting to see why what you say is completely wrong?

 

[neuroanatomist]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

No, I don't. If you're annoyed, that's your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore my posts.

If someone criticizes Canon, that's fine. If someone concludes that their criticism has any consequence for Canon, they are being ridiculous and thus inviting ridicule.

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? A smart guy like you, I guess you get to pick the best camera for everyone, the best music for everyone, probably the best car, food, and their favorite color, too. Gee, you're a pretty special guy, aren't ya? :

 

[Cthulhu]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

No, I don't. If you're annoyed, that's your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore my posts.

If someone criticizes Canon, that's fine. If someone concludes that their criticism has any consequence for Canon, they are being ridiculous and thus inviting ridicule.

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? A smart guy like you, I guess you get to pick the best camera for everyone, the best music for everyone, probably the best car, food, and their favorite color, too. Gee, you're a pretty special guy, aren't ya? :

Yeah you do. No one can say anything remotely critical of a canon product without you fuming in your basement and rushing to your keyboard.
You'll go to the extreme length of defending justin bieber's musical quality (!!!!!!!) without realizing how ridiculous that notion is. So 30 million teenage girls think he's cute? That must mean his music is good? Have you ever heard about logic?
You seriously need to leave your basement more often.

 

[bdunbar79]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

No, I don't. If you're annoyed, that's your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore my posts.

If someone criticizes Canon, that's fine. If someone concludes that their criticism has any consequence for Canon, they are being ridiculous and thus inviting ridicule.

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? A smart guy like you, I guess you get to pick the best camera for everyone, the best music for everyone, probably the best car, food, and their favorite color, too. Gee, you're a pretty special guy, aren't ya? :

Yeah you do. No one can say anything remotely critical of a canon product without you fuming in your basement and rushing to your keyboard.
You'll go to the extreme length of defending justin bieber's musical quality (!!!!!!!) without realizing how ridiculous that notion is. So 30 million teenage girls think he's cute? That must mean his music is good? Have you ever heard about logic?
You seriously need to leave your basement more often.

Do you have any evidence to support that they also do not think his music is good? How do you know they don't like his music or don't think it's good?

You don't. You don't even know what you're arguing really.

And you continue to miss the whole point. At which point, it's fairly certain you're never going to understand how any of this works. Just keep takin' perty pitchers ok.

 

[Orangutan]

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.

Good point. My DR bane is male wood ducks in full light.

 

[Cthulhu]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

No, I don't. If you're annoyed, that's your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore my posts.

If someone criticizes Canon, that's fine. If someone concludes that their criticism has any consequence for Canon, they are being ridiculous and thus inviting ridicule.

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? A smart guy like you, I guess you get to pick the best camera for everyone, the best music for everyone, probably the best car, food, and their favorite color, too. Gee, you're a pretty special guy, aren't ya? :

Yeah you do. No one can say anything remotely critical of a canon product without you fuming in your basement and rushing to your keyboard.
You'll go to the extreme length of defending justin bieber's musical quality (!!!!!!!) without realizing how ridiculous that notion is. So 30 million teenage girls think he's cute? That must mean his music is good? Have you ever heard about logic?
You seriously need to leave your basement more often.

Do you have any evidence to support that they also do not think his music is good? How do you know they don't like his music or don't think it's good?

You don't. You don't even know what you're arguing really.

And you continue to miss the whole point. At which point, it's fairly certain you're never going to understand how any of this works. Just keep takin' perty pitchers ok.

Do you have any evidence I ever claimed said teenagers think the music is bad? Would that mean the music is actually bad? Please take a second to learn how to read, the internet is full of basic lessons in logic thought.

 

[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.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Seriously, are you people dumb?

Clearly, the answer to that is a resounding yes.

 

[Orangutan]

You'll go to the extreme length of defending justin bieber's musical quality (!!!!!!!) without realizing how ridiculous that notion is. So 30 million teenage girls think he's cute? That must mean his music is good?

So what do you think of Arnold Schoenberg's atonal works?

 

[bdunbar79]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

No, I don't. If you're annoyed, that's your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore my posts.

If someone criticizes Canon, that's fine. If someone concludes that their criticism has any consequence for Canon, they are being ridiculous and thus inviting ridicule.

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? A smart guy like you, I guess you get to pick the best camera for everyone, the best music for everyone, probably the best car, food, and their favorite color, too. Gee, you're a pretty special guy, aren't ya? :

Yeah you do. No one can say anything remotely critical of a canon product without you fuming in your basement and rushing to your keyboard.
You'll go to the extreme length of defending justin bieber's musical quality (!!!!!!!) without realizing how ridiculous that notion is. So 30 million teenage girls think he's cute? That must mean his music is good? Have you ever heard about logic?
You seriously need to leave your basement more often.

Do you have any evidence to support that they also do not think his music is good? How do you know they don't like his music or don't think it's good?

You don't. You don't even know what you're arguing really.

And you continue to miss the whole point. At which point, it's fairly certain you're never going to understand how any of this works. Just keep takin' perty pitchers ok.

Do you have any evidence I ever claimed said teenagers think the music is bad? Would that mean the music is actually bad? Please take a second to learn how to read, the internet is full of basic lessons in logic thought.

Well considering you said just that, then yeah I do have evidence. Either way you lose because lots and lots of people think his music is good whether you do or not.

 

[Cthulhu]

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

How much Canon stock do you own?

Seriously, are you people dumb? He has never said he agreed with the off-die ADC's on the sensor. He's just telling you WHY they did. Can you not grasp that? What difference in the universe would it make if he owned stock in Canon or not? It won't change any facts. Do you seriously think that if Canon believed the trade-off WOULD impact bottom line, they would have made that trade-off?

What the heck is wrong with people?

He defends Canon no matter what they do and it's annoying. Whenever someone criticizes Canon he always there with his market arguments that Canon must be doing something right since they have market share. Justin Beiber has market share, doesn't mean it's good.

No, I don't. If you're annoyed, that's your problem, not mine. Feel free to ignore my posts.

If someone criticizes Canon, that's fine. If someone concludes that their criticism has any consequence for Canon, they are being ridiculous and thus inviting ridicule.

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? A smart guy like you, I guess you get to pick the best camera for everyone, the best music for everyone, probably the best car, food, and their favorite color, too. Gee, you're a pretty special guy, aren't ya? :

Yeah you do. No one can say anything remotely critical of a canon product without you fuming in your basement and rushing to your keyboard.
You'll go to the extreme length of defending justin bieber's musical quality (!!!!!!!) without realizing how ridiculous that notion is. So 30 million teenage girls think he's cute? That must mean his music is good? Have you ever heard about logic?
You seriously need to leave your basement more often.

Do you have any evidence to support that they also do not think his music is good? How do you know they don't like his music or don't think it's good?

You don't. You don't even know what you're arguing really.

And you continue to miss the whole point. At which point, it's fairly certain you're never going to understand how any of this works. Just keep takin' perty pitchers ok.

Do you have any evidence I ever claimed said teenagers think the music is bad? Would that mean the music is actually bad? Please take a second to learn how to read, the internet is full of basic lessons in logic thought.

Well considering you said just that, then yeah I do have evidence. Either way you lose because lots and lots of people think his music is good whether you do or not.

Do yourself a favor and take a free course in logic and reading comprehension