Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

[candyman]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Here is a Before/After, to me the IQ is looking pretty sterling. But then I am results driven not click driven....

What you do to this?

Edge of stone to water and water and the dog...

Yes, you clean up some noise but push down here, pop up there.. will download and try.

I just applied an adjustment brush to the darks. Global was WB and NR, nothing else.

I see why you need NR. Suit becomes bad. Don't notice noise so much on SRGB screen but AdobeRGB screen yes.

-100 Highlights, +50 shadow, noise gone. but too dark?

No just a 1.77 exposure reduction to the brush. This is a very easy file to get a usable and natural looking result from.

I tried downloading the RAW files and was not able to open any of them in LR. How were you able to do this?

Get the latest version of LR:
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/lightroom-downloads.html

 

[x-vision]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

That still doesn't make it an honest representation of what a skilled photographer can do with a 6D2 ...

Heh. Pretty sure that skilled photogs can deal with even worse dynamic range than what the 6DII has.

Ironically (?), it's the non-skilled photogs that benefit the most from extra DR, better ISO, etc..

 

[Khalai]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

+1. I'm a 99% of the time available light guy, and even I would bring a speedlite to portraiture like that.

No faux HDR shadow-lifted nonsense will balance the background without sucking the color/soul/feel of that moment out of the shot. It's a parlour trick for that application.

A working photographer friend of mine had a whale of time finding a wedding photographer for his own wedding. He knew the time/location of the ceremony would be a bright blowout of a scene to shoot, so he asked prospective wedding photogs he was interviewing how they'd manage the background lighting. Some actually told him to not sweat it -- 'this camera has such latitude that I can just lift the shadows and rein in the highlights. You'll look great.'

He then crossed that photographer's name off of his list and called the next one. 8)

- A

I've always received weird looks, why the hell am I using my 600EX unit in broad daylight around noon. Simple demonstration with on flash and off flash make those looks vanish in an instant. Or my wife helps me with holding up 3 ft reflector for me. Or both. Or just simply expose for the skin tones...

Attached photo - fooling with my Zeiss, straight against the sun, -0.5 EV in post, +40 shadows in post. Could not care less about DR...

 

[Sporgon]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

It's dead easy to make a perfectly decent camera look bad as far as noise / shadow recovery is concerned. The key is to under expose in already low light, when the light is "thin" - fewer photons flying about. Raise your image, then add plenty of saturation and vibrance. This is what I call "data abuse". There's a reason why that image has been processed to have a psychedelic, almost radio active glow, it's got nothing to do with the photographer's lack of taste or inability to post process, it's there to exaggerate the "problem".

Here's a shot from the Pentax K5II that has, according to DXO, 14.5 stops of DR. OK, it's a lot better than the off-chip ADC Canon's could do, but it still looks bad, but only because of how I have dealt with it. Given good light and sensible PP this camera can easily raise 5 stops.

 

[stevelee]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.

It is such an ugly, pointless picture, I don't know what I would expose for. The rocks?

(This was in response to the vertical section of the sunset picture. I had not seen the wedding scene it was taken from. Clearly, the original is still a bad picture, so there is no solution to the problem. At the very least, move the people and dog somewhere for better composition.)

 

[jmoya]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

I'm getting mine in tomorrow. I'll be doing a short unboxing and some file comparison at high ISO between the 5D III and new 6d mark II. Video will be up over the weekend on my youtube channel. Jorge moya. I plan on using it as my cinematic sequence camera on Malaysia and Bali vlogs in 3 weeks. Fingers crossed!!! I need dynamic range like most of you do.

 

[Sporgon]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.

It is such an ugly, pointless picture, I don't know what I would expose for. The rocks?

It's a perfect picture for DPR - it exaggerates a "weakness" in the 6DII

I'd have exposed to hold most of the sky, with just a natural blow out around the sun, and then filled with on camera flash bounced into a reflector held by my assistant. Failing that a guest, or catering staff, last resort direct fill. To try and use the camera's latitude to pull off a shot like that on their big day if you were being paid for it is just naff.

 

[stevelee]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.

It is such an ugly, pointless picture, I don't know what I would expose for. The rocks?

It's a perfect picture for DPR - it exaggerates a "weakness" in the 6DII

I'd have exposed to hold most of the sky, with just a natural blow out around the sun, and then filled with on camera flash bounced into a reflector held by my assistant. Failing that a guest, or catering staff, last resort direct fill. To try and use the camera's latitude to pull off a shot like that on their big day if you were being paid for it is just naff.

Good points. I think the gravel and the concrete bother me more than the exposure problems. If you fill in the light on the subjects, then maybe they can recede into obscurity. Even without those competing elements, just having the sunset and the people on opposite ends of the picture bothers me too. Where should I look? What is this picture about? No maybe good exposure would make up a little for the composition. But decent composition would have had a better shot at taking away from the exposure problems.

 

[Sporgon]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Agreed, or at least the exposure compromise has been too much towards the impossible highlights.

It is such an ugly, pointless picture, I don't know what I would expose for. The rocks?

It's a perfect picture for DPR - it exaggerates a "weakness" in the 6DII

I'd have exposed to hold most of the sky, with just a natural blow out around the sun, and then filled with on camera flash bounced into a reflector held by my assistant. Failing that a guest, or catering staff, last resort direct fill. To try and use the camera's latitude to pull off a shot like that on their big day if you were being paid for it is just naff.

Good points. I think the gravel and the concrete bother me more than the exposure problems. If you fill in the light on the subjects, then maybe they can recede into obscurity. Even without those competing elements, just having the sunset and the people on opposite ends of the picture bothers me too. Where should I look? What is this picture about? No maybe good exposure would make up a little for the composition. But decent composition would have had a better shot at taking away from the exposure problems.

You are right, the composition is about on par with the exposure

 

[riker]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

WAAAAAIT wait wait. So I'm an ex-Canon-fanboy, using Canon digital since D60 (2002 or 2003?) 5d3 now. I always respected Sony for their innovation and great cameras, but as a whole system I felt it pretty lacking and was convinced that people changing from Canon to A7 and using adapters are simply retards. Still think so.
BUT!!! The other day I just ended up on DPR checking out Sony lenses. Have you guys noticed what stuff they were releasing the past 2 years?!?!?! 16-35/2.8 24-70/2.8 12-14/4 50/1.8 50/1.4 85/1.8 85/1.4 100-400, etc...they have released as much as Canon does in like 15 years!!! You can't name one among the 10 most popular lens models of which Sony does not have several years newer than Canon!!
----->>
Not surprisingly if u check DXOmark site (u can find sh*t there too but as a general reference it's not bad), and compare there lenses on A7RII vs 5D4, u will find that A7RII+Sony lenses beat the crap out of 5D4+Canon lenses especially in regards of sharpness (resolution) which is by far the most important value imho.

So instead of upgrading to 5D4 I think I'll just wait and see. 5D4 and A7RII are kinda equal right now with pros and cons. My 16-35/2.8L II, 70-200/4L IS and 180 macro are outdated anyway. With this pace Sony will have A7RIII in 1 year and who knows what lenses while we can't expect a thing from Canon.

We use A7rii and Canon 5div and no, I don't agree in general, only in parts. It will always be so, that a lens on a higher MP body without AA filter will give higher acuity curves (I hope you don't look at overall scores). Older lenses will oftentimes look worse than newer ones, too. If required, one could use the 5dsr to increase the acuity, too. In real life, however, you will be hard pressed to even see a difference, unless you know the combination and watch at 100% on a 5k monitor. We often see that after a wedding when going through the images.

The 35/1.4ii is excellent and better imo than the 35/1.4 on the Sony. An excellent lens. As Canon's 50 and 85mm versions are a bit older already, we use the 50 and 85 1.4 Sigma Art lenses. No L-lenses, of course, but one advantage of the Canon body is that you can use Sigma's lenses natively (and if you specifically compare those, yes, their resolution wide open is showing the age of these lenses). The Sigmas, however, are in every aspect a match for the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4GM, which we own, too. The Sigma Art 85/1.4 is even a bit sharper than the 85 GM and focusses faster.
I compared the 70-200ii and the Sony 70-200GM at Photokina and did test images and both are similar in real life performance. Lensrentals optical bench tests seem to agree. The "old" Canon 24-70/2.8ii is the equal of Sony's 24-70, too, lensrentals.com sees it even a tiny bit better, if I remember. Canon new 16-35/2.8iii is currently one of the best WA-zooms (again optical bench measurments). I am sure the new Sony is similar, however. The 16-35/4 and 11-24 are very similar to the Sony counterparts, too. So your "beat the crap out" is just nonsense. You can't go wrong with either system right now, in my opinion.

Thanks, appreciate ur answer, at least someone with experience.

1) Pls remember that I never said the Sony system is better than Canon, I said that till now Canon was clearly better (one reason was the huge lack of Sony lenses), but have come to a point where Sony kinda making it equal and the _progress_ their lens department did the last 2-3 years is HUGE. (So at the and u seemed to be opposing me and then concluded the same.)

2A) Taking DXOmark sharpness numbers and comparing popular lenses (especially ones I use) with 5D4 and A7R2 (they are the competing models, not 5DsR which btw sucks in DR, sensitivity, nosie, etc.), I see the following:
5D4 | A7R2
50/1.8 20 | 26
85/1.8 21 | 40
70-200/2.8 26 | 38
70-200/4 21 | 35
Unfortunately there are no Sony numbers yet for 16-35/2.8, 100-400 and 300/2.8 which I would love to see.
Those are big differences I believe. If you tell me you don't see real life differences between say 21 and 35 in case of the 70-200/4...well...what can I say...hard to believe but can't prove otherwise.

2B) I'm also mentioning that looking at the innovation curve and the past few years, we can easily see Sony numbers getting better, A7R3 is probably not that far away, while 5D5 is very far away, 70-200/4II is not even on the horizon, nextgen small and light 85/1.8 is nowhere, etc. (I'm sure the 85/1.4 will rock tho but that's gonna be an expensive and heavy lens.) Sony launched 50/1.4 AND 50/1.8, 85/1.4 AND 85/1.8 within 12 months!!! How awesome is that alone not mentioning all the other lenses?! (and they do perform)
(Sony will start launching super telephoto lenses and attack the sports segment long before Canon surprises us with anything big. A9 is shooting 24MP@20FPS while 1Dx2 20MP@16FPS. Just saying but this is a different topic.)

3) I forgot

Riker

 

[snoke]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

The optimal way to capture all detail in such scene is exposure bracketing and then exposure blending in post.

Hah! Say this like easy. Not here. Need soft reflector.

GND filter is not an option here for obvious reasons. They shoul've capture same scene with e.g. A7r II, so we could play with both files alongside each other. My guess is that even Sony would have crumbled upon heavier edits as that scene is simply too much for any sensor currently out there...

What limit edit is noise on man clothes. Sony have cleaner shadows. Better for edit like this.

 

[snoke]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

I tried downloading the RAW files and was not able to open any of them in LR. How were you able to do this?

Convert CR2 to DNG. Adobe DNG Converter FTW.

 

[snoke]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

+1. I'm a 99% of the time available light guy, and even I would bring a speedlite to portraiture like that.

Ha! I want see what you can do with speedlite for photo.

You can do test shoot like this for compare?

Lake, sea, bay close to you?

You know people can be models for you? Dog optional

 

[Khalai]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

What limit edit is noise on man clothes. Sony have cleaner shadows. Better for edit like this.

Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd

 

[snoke]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd

Picture interesting. Almost exact to rules.

Sun near top left thirds corner. Sky/water close to top third. Rising angle from bottom right to left third. People close to right third line. Lead eye from people to sun. People looking left. Technically photo good.

But you think turd. ok.

Maybe photographer walk in surprise from dog so take this?

 

[privatebydesign]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd

Picture interesting. Almost exact to rules.

Sun near top left thirds corner. Sky/water close to top third. Rising angle from bottom right to left third. People close to right third line. Lead eye from people to sun. People looking left. Technically photo good.

But you think turd. ok.

Maybe photographer walk in surprise from dog so take this?

Just goes to show what 'rules' do for your photography. I agree, it is a turd.

 

[Luds34]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd

Picture interesting. Almost exact to rules.

Sun near top left thirds corner. Sky/water close to top third. Rising angle from bottom right to left third. People close to right third line. Lead eye from people to sun. People looking left. Technically photo good.

But you think turd. ok.

Maybe photographer walk in surprise from dog so take this?

Just goes to show what 'rules' do for your photography. I agree, it is a turd.

While I don't like the composition, I think calling it "awful" is a bit harsh. It's better than 95% of the photos one sees just browsing social networks. And that's just from a composition standpoint. That's leaving out motion blur or harsh direct flash, poor white balance... the list goes on.

With that said, here's my constructive critique. I don't like how the guy's face overlaps the woman. In fact I don't like how much the guy dominates the portrait (blocks a lot of the bride). Another big distractor to me is the lines from the horizon and the concrete land. They make this natural arrow the points to the left. My eyes naturally follow them as they converge.

To me, if the photographer's shooting position is just rotated to his/her left in the realm of 30 to 45 degrees it becomes a much better picture. Sure you lose the sun, but you still get the sky (and you help alleviate your DR issues to boot) and now the concrete land line becomes more level, you separate the bride and groom faces, the guy and dog are actually looking more towards the camera, and you get rid of the grooms chest literally chopping the bride in half.

Besides the rotation, I might add to pan down just a bit, push the horizon closer to the top third line and give some breathing room to the feet, heaven forbid they print the photo and want to frame it and NOT cut of their legs in a real picture frame.

It's all subjective and hindsight is 20/20. But I think "awful" is too harsh and I couldn't in good conscience say that to the photographer. Even the portrait session of a wedding day is very much run and gun because of the limited time.

 

[stevelee]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Losing the sun would be a good thing, no longer having dueling subjects.

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Sure, result will be still abysmal photo with a bit cleaner shadows. Polish a turd, it's still a turd

Picture interesting. Almost exact to rules.

Sun near top left thirds corner. Sky/water close to top third. Rising angle from bottom right to left third. People close to right third line. Lead eye from people to sun. People looking left. Technically photo good.

But you think turd. ok.

Maybe photographer walk in surprise from dog so take this?

Just goes to show what 'rules' do for your photography. I agree, it is a turd.

Is that the rule of turds?

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Canon EOS 6D Mark II Dynamic Range Talk & Sample Images

Losing the sun would be a good thing, no longer having dueling subjects.

But how would you know it was a sunset?