DRones vs. anti-DRones: how to resolve the controversy
- Thread starter pierlux
- Start date
RLPhoto said:
I'd love to be proven wrong. dilbert has vowed to post images that makes Canon shooters envious once he switches to SoNikon. For his sake, hopefully that new camera will come in a bundle that includes a functioning ballhead and cable release.
Upvote
0
Improved dynamic range would be great. Improved shadow noise would be great.
Questions that still remain for me regarding advocates of DR and shadow noise improvement....does it consistently make your photos better? Will you be able to accomplish a whole lot more if those two areas are improved a little bit? Have you actually handled files from the Sony 36.3 MP sensor?
As I have stated previously, I have done the Sony experiment for several months. Taken as a whole, there is no real noticeable improvement in my photos on average. There may be several shots here and there that I appreciated the improved malleability of in post. But generally speaking, I didn't notice anything about the end products that led me to say to myself, "man, I love having this sensor because it makes my photos noticeably better all the time."
The truth of the matter is, I hardly ever noticed it. What I did notice though was that I hated the OOC colors when using AWB the most out of every camera that I own currently. I also noticed that I could zoom in a little further to look at things that no one ever looks at in my photos.
The few times I enjoyed having it:
-long exposure night time shooting
-poorly exposed captures
In essence, what resolved the issue for me was actually putting my money where my mouth was and just picking up the rig to use for an extended period. Others that are curious about it but have not handled it should go and do so for themselves. Most of the debating about theoretical improvements or lack thereof should cease.
Questions that still remain for me regarding advocates of DR and shadow noise improvement....does it consistently make your photos better? Will you be able to accomplish a whole lot more if those two areas are improved a little bit? Have you actually handled files from the Sony 36.3 MP sensor?
As I have stated previously, I have done the Sony experiment for several months. Taken as a whole, there is no real noticeable improvement in my photos on average. There may be several shots here and there that I appreciated the improved malleability of in post. But generally speaking, I didn't notice anything about the end products that led me to say to myself, "man, I love having this sensor because it makes my photos noticeably better all the time."
The truth of the matter is, I hardly ever noticed it. What I did notice though was that I hated the OOC colors when using AWB the most out of every camera that I own currently. I also noticed that I could zoom in a little further to look at things that no one ever looks at in my photos.
The few times I enjoyed having it:
-long exposure night time shooting
-poorly exposed captures
In essence, what resolved the issue for me was actually putting my money where my mouth was and just picking up the rig to use for an extended period. Others that are curious about it but have not handled it should go and do so for themselves. Most of the debating about theoretical improvements or lack thereof should cease.
Upvote
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:Maximilian said:Only two possibilities:pierlux said:
1. Canon designs or buys a sensor equal or better than exmor.
2. Canon to file for bankruptcy and will stop designing sensors and selling cameras.
I vote for "1."
PS.: And even if "1." would happen soon, the sensor wouldn't be good enough to them... I suppose.
When the G7 X came out, immediately the complainers started. Now that its revealed that its a Sony sensor, they look pretty dumb, having already said how poor it is.
Who was complaining? And wasn't it clear it had a SOny sensor from teh start? AFAIK, all the tech people who post about DR and so on, were 99% sure it was the sensor from the RX100 the moment they read the initial press release.
Upvote
0
9VIII said:Maximilian said:Only two possibilities:pierlux said:
1. Canon designs or buys a sensor equal or better than exmor.
2. Canon to file for bankruptcy and will stop designing sensors and selling cameras.
I vote for "1."
PS.: And even if "1." would happen soon, the sensor wouldn't be good enough to them... I suppose.
Option 1 wouldn't work, DRones are anti-Canon as much as anything. There is no possibility of Canon making something good enough to satisfy them.
And yet some years back some us were actually raving all over the net about how great Canon was and most us still rave about the lenses and UI. Some of us used to flat out recommend new buyers go with Canon.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto said:
Why do those who don't care about the issue always have to get personal and bring it down to such things?
You don't see those who care about the issue running around trying to subtly or not so subtly hint that the pics of those who don't care all stink do you?
Fact is that some of the DRoners shoot a lot more and have better portfolios than some who don't care. And that some who don't care have much better portfolios than those who do. And, most importantly, whatever the case, none of that has anything to do with anything.
If someone says 1+1=2 they are not wrong because their photos stink and if someone has amazing photos and says 1+1=3 that doesn't mean 1+1=3. You are conflating things that have nothing to do with each other.
Upvote
0
The best way to resolve the controversy is either:
1) Those unsatisfied with Canon's sensors should write, email, and correspond in any way possible TO CANON. Posting on this forum does nothing positive if you actually want Canon to improve their sensor technology.
2) Those unsatisfied with Canon's sensors should buy another camera that they think will be better if they can afford to.
If not - well, keep quiet, because it does no good. All it does is make Canon users annoyed - and even worse, may spoil their photographing experience. I was perfectly happy with my Canon camera and always have been. Why? Because even the earliest Digital Rebel produced better pics than my old film cameras. What today's cameras can do is incredible.
But now, this constant drum-beat of "more DR," "Are Canon sensors now two generations behind...", etc, etc, has me - and I'm sure many others - no longer satisfied, or at least wondering if we should get a different camera.
Well, Thanks you DR pushers. Congratulations on being spoil sports. You have done a remarkable job! Mind you, it does nothing to solve your problem with limited DR. You have accomplished nothing but making others as miserable as you are.
1) Those unsatisfied with Canon's sensors should write, email, and correspond in any way possible TO CANON. Posting on this forum does nothing positive if you actually want Canon to improve their sensor technology.
2) Those unsatisfied with Canon's sensors should buy another camera that they think will be better if they can afford to.
If not - well, keep quiet, because it does no good. All it does is make Canon users annoyed - and even worse, may spoil their photographing experience. I was perfectly happy with my Canon camera and always have been. Why? Because even the earliest Digital Rebel produced better pics than my old film cameras. What today's cameras can do is incredible.
But now, this constant drum-beat of "more DR," "Are Canon sensors now two generations behind...", etc, etc, has me - and I'm sure many others - no longer satisfied, or at least wondering if we should get a different camera.
Well, Thanks you DR pushers. Congratulations on being spoil sports. You have done a remarkable job! Mind you, it does nothing to solve your problem with limited DR. You have accomplished nothing but making others as miserable as you are.
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:
Of course you see that, constantly and in no way subtly. Not in a personal way, as in 'your photos stink'. But, if Canon sensors have "poor IQ", deliver "sub-par/unacceptable IQ", and/or just plain "suck" (all of which are quotes from 'those who care about the issue'), that's tantamount to saying pictures taken by those using Canon dSLRs are poor, sub-par, or just plain suck. Has it really not occurred to you that statements like 'Canon sensors deliver poor IQ' are a slam on the images of anyone using them, and how some people might just find that a little wee bit offensive?
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
Saying that the sensor is behind on low ISO DR is not at all the same as saying that anyone who uses a Canon has sucky portfolio!
And it's not even saying that all shots taken will be behind ones taken with other cameras even from a raw lowest level technical perspective. As I've said you can take billions of photos where it won't make any difference at all that matters. For those that just look at some overall DxO score and say the Canon sensors flat out all-around stink, maybe they imply that at the deepest technical level the images taken with them won't quite have the same noise/color or whatnot, but most of the people who post a ton about DR don't go to that extreme and again even for those very few who both do and post a lot, they are definitely not trying to say that any photo taken with a Canon is useless or stinks much less with zero artistic or technical merit.
I don't see what that has to do with comments like only photographic morons who can't take a shot, don't know how to step outside of a lab, don't know how to post-process care about DR or comments that a large majority of those who care about DR supposedly have terrible portfolios.
And I don't see what having a great or terrible portfolio has to do with a technical comment anyway. It's a false argument.
Nat Geo published a book a while back and many photos had bits of motion blur, OOF, tons of noise but they were still mostly all cool photos so I also don't say everything has to be technically perfect for a photo to not be junk either.
Mostly I just go out and have great fun and enjoy using my camera. But I certainly hit scenarios often enough where more DR would be really nice so I don't have any problem when on tech forums trying to push to get Canon to invest what they need to to move forward (or to get on them for silly games they play with AutoISO or microfocus in this body and then not the next and then back in again as a 'new' feature or not putting in basic usability features ML gives for video or not moving to a more natural video processor than the waxy, blurry one they keep using, perhaps to try to make their Cxx line and such look better, while other brands charge forward). I didn't even used to complain about little things, but after years of seeing some of the games they play and years of seeing anyone who ever dared bring up anything Canon was not perfect at get tarred and feathered and trashed and a lot of bogus technical claims being posted all over I probably became a lot more combative and started posting a ton more about such things.
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:
Saying that the sensor is behind on low ISO DR is not at all the same as saying the sensor is poor, sub-par, or sucks. But 'those who care about the issue' quite often state the latter. Poor, unacceptable IQ is tantamount to poor, unacceptable images.
Canon sensors having less low ISO DR is an objective, testable fact. 'Poor, unacceptable image quality' is a value judgement on the sensor and, by extension, the pictures it produces.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
Even the ones who say it's poor in general, just mean in relation to other current stuff and I hardly think they mean to imply than any images taken with it are of poor and unacceptable quality in general and even if one actually did it's still just talking about tech, not someone's composition or style or whatnot and not personally trashing them.
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:
When were you elected their spokesperson?
If you want to handwave around semantics, that's fine. "Canon sensors suck balls at low ISO, compared to the norm today...it's just the simple truth of the matter." Implication...anyone shooting with Canon sensors at low ISO who's pleased is happy with image quality that sucks balls. Nice.
Upvote
0
I managed to listen to radio bit this morning on the way to work
Worth listening to all of it, as there are sections pertinent to the various behaviors we see on forums, like this, scattered throughout the episode.
Accused troll Brenda Leyland's death sparks debate over how (or if) cyberbullies should be confronted
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/current_20141008_80336.mp3
It's a free download, courtesy of canadian taxpayers, i mean citizens, like me. Enjoy.
EDIT: ooops, forgot to include the episode title
Worth listening to all of it, as there are sections pertinent to the various behaviors we see on forums, like this, scattered throughout the episode.
Accused troll Brenda Leyland's death sparks debate over how (or if) cyberbullies should be confronted
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/current_20141008_80336.mp3
It's a free download, courtesy of canadian taxpayers, i mean citizens, like me. Enjoy.
EDIT: ooops, forgot to include the episode title
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
If you don't care then why did my personal observation offend you? I believe your conflating things beyond what they are. In the end, I bring things down to the end product, and unfortunately for most droners DR is the least of their problems with their pictures.LetTheRightLensIn said:
Edit: I'd like to add that jrista is considered a droner by most here but the stark difference is that Jon DID make the move to an A7R and Jon DOES shoot photos that are good.(IMHO) However I can't say the same for the likes of many many other droners.
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I don't mind talks about dynamic range, and how it can/should be improved. What I do mind is that it has had a habit of showing up in just about any kind of threads. No matter what they was about in the first place.
Occasional sidesteps, jokes and so forth is ok, but blindsidedly turning (just about) any topic into a matter of dynamic range is not benefiting the forum and its readers. With the lack of hard moderations from mods, it comes down to us to judge if what we post is placed in the correct topic.
Do we want to be a believable source of information, facts and rumours? Then it is up to us to make it worthy of people reading and visiting this site.
Do a search on "Dynamic range" or "DR", and then look at the result and ask yourself "Is that really posted in the right place?"
Too often I have seen I. Flungdung and I. Too sitting in opposite corners of the same sandbox tossing S___ at each others. None has acted their age.
Edit: I didn't censor the alternative wording for fecal matters. That was done by someone else.
Upvote
0
Yep... I think you hit it right on the head. What generally fires me up on these things is some goofball making a statement like "Canon needs to improve their IQ" as if there were a problem with Canon IQ in some general sense. If there were any truth in that statement at all it would be evident in every image out there, which it clearly is not. I really doubt that any one could distinguish which images were shot by which system given that they were well produced and presented in a proper blind test.neuroanatomist said:
Most of this DR stuff (not all of it but a great deal of it) is nothing more than hype.
Upvote
0
Canon does need to improve it's IQ and DR..... but then again, so does Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Fuji, Hasselbad, Red ....... and with any of these you can safely say that the current crop of cameras is better than those from 5 years ago, and the ones that will be out in 5 years will be better than todays.... and with none of crop or FF cameras is it the major limitation....David Hull said:
Lens choice has more effect on IQ than sensor choice....
Upvote
0
Apparently, now, theories and math and known facts are all useless and pointless...only the experience of a "handful of pros matters, and what a pro says goes. "
They're not pointless but this kind of stuff boils down to whether theory and facts show whether a measurable difference exists and then the next question after that is whether any difference found actually matters, ie is meaningful.
The test of 'do the people demanding this actually seem to be ending up with better pictures when they have it' is trying to find a way to address the meaningful aspect. It isnt perfect, but nor is focussing on measurement alone.
They're not pointless but this kind of stuff boils down to whether theory and facts show whether a measurable difference exists and then the next question after that is whether any difference found actually matters, ie is meaningful.
The test of 'do the people demanding this actually seem to be ending up with better pictures when they have it' is trying to find a way to address the meaningful aspect. It isnt perfect, but nor is focussing on measurement alone.
Upvote
0
This is a serious question for those who use this forum to write about and champion for more DR from Canon sensors. Mind you, I have no doubt that your experiments and those tests done by others do indeed show that Canon's sensors do not measure up to the competition in terms of DR. So, I concur, Canon's sensors are not as good when it comes to DR (although this does not mean that Canon's sensors are lower in IQ or "worse" than any others. It just means in one area they are sub-par).
Certainly, when a new camera is discussed or released, pertinent factual information regarding the cameras specs (including DR) would be expected to be discussed.
But why do you come onto canon Rumors and complain? Why do you come onto Canon Rumors to demonstrate the lack of DR in sample photos? Why do you bring up the subject on Canon Rumors in thread after thread? What are you trying to prove? What is the purpose of your complaining, or demonstrating?
Why not take every minute and every word you write and send it to Canon in an email or a letter? Why waste your time debating here on this site - hammering the DR theme over and over again in multiple threads? Why not accept the fact that some folks will defend Canon in all cases. Why not accept the fact that not everyone thinks that DR range is the most important aspect of a sensor? Why not accept the fact that by pointing out Canon's sensor shortcomings, you make people feel more negatively about their photographing experience? Is that the goal - to make people feel less satisfied with the cameras they have spent their hard earned money on?
If you have a BMW and I have a Toyota, would you rub it in my face 10 times every day how my car could be better? Even if I am perfectly happy with my Toyota?
And then you wonder why people are upset with the constant hammering. Please, be smart enough to know that people are tired of the negativity. And smart enough to know that if you really want change, this forum is not the place where your message will reach the decision makers at Canon.
Certainly, when a new camera is discussed or released, pertinent factual information regarding the cameras specs (including DR) would be expected to be discussed.
But why do you come onto canon Rumors and complain? Why do you come onto Canon Rumors to demonstrate the lack of DR in sample photos? Why do you bring up the subject on Canon Rumors in thread after thread? What are you trying to prove? What is the purpose of your complaining, or demonstrating?
Why not take every minute and every word you write and send it to Canon in an email or a letter? Why waste your time debating here on this site - hammering the DR theme over and over again in multiple threads? Why not accept the fact that some folks will defend Canon in all cases. Why not accept the fact that not everyone thinks that DR range is the most important aspect of a sensor? Why not accept the fact that by pointing out Canon's sensor shortcomings, you make people feel more negatively about their photographing experience? Is that the goal - to make people feel less satisfied with the cameras they have spent their hard earned money on?
If you have a BMW and I have a Toyota, would you rub it in my face 10 times every day how my car could be better? Even if I am perfectly happy with my Toyota?
And then you wonder why people are upset with the constant hammering. Please, be smart enough to know that people are tired of the negativity. And smart enough to know that if you really want change, this forum is not the place where your message will reach the decision makers at Canon.
Upvote
0
As you might notice I didn't use the word "start" or "every" in the quoted passage and neither was my intention, but if you insist there is 165+ postings by you (jrista) that includes the phrase "dynamic range". I don't care much about who starts it, I care much more about who is smart enough to realize that this is not the right time and place to continue.jrista said:
And to be honest, yes, I have found a way to not be overly disturbed by a lot of the postings about DR - you, and a few others are on my block list. That way I can switch you on and off as I see fit. I'm sure that I miss out on a lot of knowledge that you have this way, but it's a lot easier to scroll through topics without having minor novels to wade through. If you are content with the way you have acted so far, I'm certain that you will continue in the same way. If that means I will read more or less of your future postings is something to ponder.
English might not be my first language, but at least give me the benefit of being at least twice as smart as you expect. Don't read anything into my posts that I haven't insinuated very clearly from the start. If I want you to feel like you are the target, you will know because it says so in clear text.
Upvote
0
