Analysis of RAW samples at Fred Miranda show weak DR

[LonelyBoy]

Re: This Thread is Way Off Topic

The problem is that everyone knows the way to derail trollbait threads is with car analogies, or if that fails, with audiophile references. The whole Windows thing is a distant third.

Well it worked. You're welcome 8)

The important thing to walk away with, is the knowledge that the 6D2 does not have sufficient DR to take pictures of a dash stereo through the car windows, and as a result, Canon is doomed! If only someone would have posted this 60 pages ago, we would have saved a lot of time!

Or that people are still using Windows XP

I work on a financial website. This financial website is primarily used by very large organizations and institutions. We still have people - frequently - complaining that we aren't fixing issues on IE6.

 

[Khalai]

Re: This Thread is Way Off Topic

I work on a financial website. This financial website is primarily used by very large organizations and institutions. We still have people - frequently - complaining that we aren't fixing issues on IE6.

Now that's downright scary. Who the hell would still use IE6? That application has more security holes than sieve. Talk about safe browsing, especially financial website...

 

[LonelyBoy]

Re: This Thread is Way Off Topic

I work on a financial website. This financial website is primarily used by very large organizations and institutions. We still have people - frequently - complaining that we aren't fixing issues on IE6.

Now that's downright scary. Who the hell would still use IE6? That application has more security holes than sieve. Talk about safe browsing, especially financial website...

I don't get told which clients brings these complaints, fortunately or unfortunately. The part that I don't understand is ok, your IT department can't get the money for a Windows upgrade. Even accepting that (which beggars belief), why not run FireFox or Chrome? They're free, and clearly your IT department can't be THAT strict.

 

[Orangutan]

Re: This Thread is Way Off Topic

The problem is that everyone knows the way to derail trollbait threads is with car analogies, or if that fails, with audiophile references. The whole Windows thing is a distant third.

Well it worked. You're welcome 8)

The important thing to walk away with, is the knowledge that the 6D2 does not have sufficient DR to take pictures of a dash stereo through the car windows, and as a result, Canon is doomed! If only someone would have posted this 60 pages ago, we would have saved a lot of time!

Or that people are still using Windows XP

I work on a financial website. This financial website is primarily used by very large organizations and institutions. We still have people - frequently - complaining that we aren't fixing issues on IE6.

Those people are probably in violation of laws or contractual obligations regarding safe handling of data.

 

[Orangutan]

Re: This Thread is Way Off Topic

I work on a financial website. This financial website is primarily used by very large organizations and institutions. We still have people - frequently - complaining that we aren't fixing issues on IE6.

Now that's downright scary. Who the hell would still use IE6? That application has more security holes than sieve. Talk about safe browsing, especially financial website...

I don't get told which clients brings these complaints, fortunately or unfortunately. The part that I don't understand is ok, your IT department can't get the money for a Windows upgrade. Even accepting that (which beggars belief), why not run FireFox or Chrome? They're free, and clearly your IT department can't be THAT strict.

Can you propose having the software detect the user agent, and present a security warning screen to the user? You could include a reference to the appropriate best practices guide. Push it back in the face of the lazy IT department that can't be bothered to protect its users from ancient exploits.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Re: This Thread is Way Off Topic

I work on a financial website. This financial website is primarily used by very large organizations and institutions. We still have people - frequently - complaining that we aren't fixing issues on IE6.

Now that's downright scary. Who the hell would still use IE6? That application has more security holes than sieve. Talk about safe browsing, especially financial website...

I don't get told which clients brings these complaints, fortunately or unfortunately. The part that I don't understand is ok, your IT department can't get the money for a Windows upgrade. Even accepting that (which beggars belief), why not run FireFox or Chrome? They're free, and clearly your IT department can't be THAT strict.

Can you propose having the software detect the user agent, and present a security warning screen to the user? You could include a reference to the appropriate best practices guide. Push it back in the face of the lazy IT department that can't be bothered to protect its users from ancient exploits.

We do detect. However, the decision to do that sort of thing is far above my head, and is functionally a non-starter. It was a long, hard fight to give up support for even IE7, which had me counting down to the EOL for XP a few years ago. Prior to that we had to, essentially, beg TPTB for permission to stop supporting any given version of IE; the list of supported browsers was treated as set in stone and requiring formal changes to modify, even when new versions of IE appeared and old ones rolled off.

 

[stevelee]

I'm glad that books on HTML, CSS, etc., no long spend half of their contents giving work-arounds to try to make IE function.

 

[jeffa4444]

I thought this thread was about the Canon 6D MKII and its raw file output not computers and computer software?
Head over to Mac rumors or Windows World

 

[Jopa]

I thought this thread was about the Canon 6D MKII and its raw file output not computers and computer software?
Head over to Mac rumors or Windows World

Let's just keep going - the goal is to reach 100 pages.

 

[Syntho]

I don't know much about the technical numbers people are throwing around having to do with the dynamic range, but can someone tell me in plain English if the 6d is worth buying for a video guy? The 6d mk.ii was advertised as doing very well in low light, so is it that the 6d mk.ii sacrificed dynamic range in order to get better low light (high iso) shots?

If what you guys are saying is essentially that the 6d mk.ii doesn't look any better and doesn't perform any more well in low light than the original 6d, then I may reconsider my purchase. I don't see how the mk.ii couldn't be any better though.

 

[Don Haines]

I don't know much about the technical numbers people are throwing around having to do with the dynamic range, but can someone tell me in plain English if the 6d is worth buying for a video guy? The 6d mk.ii was advertised as doing very well in low light, so is it that the 6d mk.ii sacrificed dynamic range in order to get better low light (high iso) shots?

If what you guys are saying is essentially that the 6d mk.ii doesn't look any better and doesn't perform any more well in low light than the original 6d, then I may reconsider my purchase. I don't see how the mk.ii couldn't be any better though.

Image Stabilization!

That is probably THE! killer function to have on a video camera. That would make the 6D2 the best DSLR that Canon makes for video, despite the lack of 4K. Personally, I would rather have stable 2K instead of jerky 4K.....

 

[x-vision]

... can someone tell me in plain English if the 6d is worth buying for a video guy?

In addition to image stabilization, the 6DII also has touch-screen auto-focus, which is very fast and accurate.
This is a great usability feature for video.

OTOH, the 6DII doesn't have 4K video.

 

[Syntho]

But as far as image quality goes, is the 6d mk.ii any better than the original 6d at all? From reports, people are saying the dynamic range is lacking, but I've also heard that that's because the tradeoff is that it performs better in low light. Is that true?

 

[Deleted member 379512]

... can someone tell me in plain English if the 6d is worth buying for a video guy?

In addition to image stabilization, the 6DII also has touch-screen auto-focus, which is very fast and accurate.
This is a great usability feature for video.

OTOH, the 6DII doesn't have 4K video.

I don't think it has ALL-l video codec either, which might limit the editing ability. Happy to be proven wrong on this though. I think the first 6d did have this

 

[Deleted member 379512]

I don't know much about the technical numbers people are throwing around having to do with the dynamic range, but can someone tell me in plain English if the 6d is worth buying for a video guy? The 6d mk.ii was advertised as doing very well in low light, so is it that the 6d mk.ii sacrificed dynamic range in order to get better low light (high iso) shots?

If what you guys are saying is essentially that the 6d mk.ii doesn't look any better and doesn't perform any more well in low light than the original 6d, then I may reconsider my purchase. I don't see how the mk.ii couldn't be any better though.

Image Stabilization!

That is probably THE! killer function to have on a video camera. That would make the 6D2 the best DSLR that Canon makes for video, despite the lack of 4K. Personally, I would rather have stable 2K instead of jerky 4K.....

Isn't it just electronic stabilization though? So just using a crop? I would have thought 4k and using stabilizing in post would be better overall still

 

[Khalai]

... can someone tell me in plain English if the 6d is worth buying for a video guy?

In addition to image stabilization, the 6DII also has touch-screen auto-focus, which is very fast and accurate.
This is a great usability feature for video.

OTOH, the 6DII doesn't have 4K video.

I don't think it has ALL-l video codec either, which might limit the editing ability. Happy to be proven wrong on this though. I think the first 6d did have this

Just IPB IIRC. ALL-I was omitted, which is a bit shame, considering all other video friendly features like swiveling screen, touch controlled DPAF or electronic IS...

 

[Syntho]

Let me ask again to clarify: is the low light/high iso grain thing better on the 6d mk.ii, or is the overall image quality better? That's the main thing I want to know.

 

[Mikehit]

Better than what?
We don't know because we haven't seen the tests yet and it was only released yesterday.

 

[MayaTlab]

But as far as image quality goes, is the 6d mk.ii any better than the original 6d at all? From reports, people are saying the dynamic range is lacking, but I've also heard that that's because the tradeoff is that it performs better in low light. Is that true?

So far there is no evidence that there exist a trade-off between low ISO DR and high ISO performances in general.
It's better to wait for DPreview's full test scene results, as they are the only ones to control a number of variables such as shutter speed and provide files under two types of lighting, but if we take the 6D and 6DII's ISO-invariance ISO 6400 files, so far the conclusion is that at best the 6DII is a tiny bit worse than the 6D at higher ISOs under daylight lighting. Personally I'm expecting the difference to increase in the 6D's favour under tungsten light, but that's speculation on my part.

 

[LonelyBoy]

But as far as image quality goes, is the 6d mk.ii any better than the original 6d at all? From reports, people are saying the dynamic range is lacking, but I've also heard that that's because the tradeoff is that it performs better in low light. Is that true?

So far there is no evidence that there exist a trade-off between low ISO DR and high ISO performances in general.
It's better to wait for DPreview's full test scene results, as they are the only ones to control a number of variables such as shutter speed and provide files under two types of lighting, but if we take the 6D and 6DII's ISO-invariance ISO 6400 files, so far the conclusion is that at best the 6DII is a tiny bit worse than the 6D at higher ISOs under daylight lighting. Personally I'm expecting the difference to increase in the 6D's favour under tungsten light, but that's speculation on my part.

So what's the explanation for the D5, then?