Dynamic Range - Try it for yourself, conclude for yourself: 5D III vs. A7r

[jdramirez]

What was the dynamic range of film? I'm curious if digital has surpassed film in that regard.

 

[Loswr]

The conclusion of this particular subject is that the A7R files handles shadow recovery better than the 5D3 files at the ISO used. This is a fact, not a theory, no matter what the subject or conditions.

Sure. We've all known that for quite a while...years, in fact. So of course, jrista's conclusion was utterly banal. If you're a fan of entirely predictable 'experiments' perhaps you'd like to drop an object – tennis ball, apple, your camera – from a couple of meters above the ground, and verify the existence of gravity. Be sure to start a new forum topic to educate all of us on your findings.

 

[Sporgon]

I wasn't able to find any kind of landscapes on the first day that had high dynamic range (traffic held me up earlier in the day, when I finally got deep enough into the mountains, the sun had set before I found a scene.)

Hmmm......

My goal was to provide data.

There's a slight contradiction here; no one was asking for a pictorial masterpiece, simply a genuine but EV challenging landscape shot into, or across the sun. Any bright or sunlit landscape will do.

Fortunately mnm stepped into the breach with some real examples, and one of them is very pleasing to boot.

I reckon you found, not surprisingly, that you were unable to emulate the wonderful pictures that you linked to on 500px in a single exposure because those images were, of course, multiple exposures, even if only two.

 

[privatebydesign]

Do you really believe the goal was to "preserve the view out of the window".

The goal was to do a dynamic range test BY preserving the view out of the window.

Which would be fine if he had done that. But on what planet is this crop of the widow view considered "preserving the view out of the window"? It is unmitigated garbage.

As shot both images are completely unusable in any real context, the DR was too extreme for either sensor to get a usable image in one shot let alone preserve the view out of the window, nothing was demonstrated very well other than what has been said and agreed so many times, when an image is severely underexposed the Exmor sensor will give less shadow noise. We all know and agree with that. We now also know that when the DR exceeds both sensors capabilities the results are equally unusable.

The issues your seeing around the window blinds were because I ETTRed heavily (attempting to put things in the "best light" for the 5D III). This is something I've argued against, and you can see the reasons why. If I had underexposed more, to prevent the CA from occurring around the blinds, I'd have been lambasted for not being "optimal" with my 5D III exposures. It doesn't matter how the test was done, it doesn't matter that it WAS intentionally looking for a very high DR scene. It really doesn't matter, none of it matters. Those who disagree that Canon DR suffers from their read noise will always disagree. They will always find a flaw with a test. That's fine, everyone is free to draw their own conclusions.

Yes, it's a contrived test. It was meant to be, as the intent was to push both cameras to the limits within the limited capabilities I had that day (I couldn't just pick up and take off into the mountains for a week looking for beautiful high DR landscapes, I still have a day job that pays all the bills.) My goal was to provide data. The data is there, the RAW images are there, they are still there and they will remain there. If people want to see the differences for themselves, contrived scenario or not, they can. That was my goal. The rest? Well, I'm really sick and tired of debating this. The attitudes people portray over this very clinical subject is ridiculous, and I'm tired of being party to any of it. It's become degrading, to both sides.

Just like always, making shit up. Show me one person who has ever said that?

DR/shadow recovery is better with Exmor, well done, we have all known and agreed that for, well, ever. What we disagree on is how much difference that actually makes to most people most of the time in actual shooting scenarios, and your "test" did nothing to further that.

 

[moocowe]

If you're a fan of entirely predictable 'experiments' perhaps you'd like to drop an object – tennis ball, apple, your camera – from a couple of meters above the ground, and verify the existence of gravity. Be sure to start a new forum topic to educate all of us on your findings.

Are the derogatory remarks really necessary?
Perhaps the comparison is new to some people.
If the topic is so banal to you, then I don't see why you're wasting your time reading and replying, other than to attempt to belittle others and make yourself feel like a big boy.

I do hope your post made you feel a little bit better about yourself though.

 

[jdramirez]

The conclusion of this particular subject is that the A7R files handles shadow recovery better than the 5D3 files at the ISO used. This is a fact, not a theory, no matter what the subject or conditions.

Sure. We've all known that for quite a while...years, in fact. So of course, jrista's conclusion was utterly banal. If you're a fan of entirely predictable 'experiments' perhaps you'd like to drop an object – tennis ball, apple, your camera – from a couple of meters above the ground, and verify the existence of gravity. Be sure to start a new forum topic to educate all of us on your findings.

Yeah, but how do you explain a feather not falling straight down, but seemingly soaring above the clouds.

 

[Aglet]

..If you're a fan of entirely predictable 'experiments' perhaps you'd like to drop an object – tennis ball, apple, your camera – from a couple of meters above the ground, and verify the existence of gravity. Be sure to start a new forum topic to educate all of us on your findings.

Yes, I'm sure we' hear from a few anti-gravity types who will tell us that gravity is not really necessary or serves no practical purpose or that the experiments are contrived and have nothing to do with real life

 

[Eldar]

You guys do have stamina ...

 

[3kramd5]

I wasn't able to find any kind of landscapes on the first day that had high dynamic range (traffic held me up earlier in the day, when I finally got deep enough into the mountains, the sun had set before I found a scene.)

Hmmm......

My goal was to provide data.

There's a slight contradiction here; no one was asking for a pictorial masterpiece, simply a genuine but EV challenging landscape shot into, or across the sun.

Be that as it may, can you blame him for wanting to find something beautiful to shoot with short-term rented gear?

 

[privatebydesign]

..If you're a fan of entirely predictable 'experiments' perhaps you'd like to drop an object – tennis ball, apple, your camera – from a couple of meters above the ground, and verify the existence of gravity. Be sure to start a new forum topic to educate all of us on your findings.

Yes, I'm sure we' hear from a few anti-gravity types who will tell us that gravity is not really necessary or serves no practical purpose or that the experiments are contrived and have nothing to do with real life

And I am sure the people who conflate "anti" gravity with with practical applications of shadow recovery and the lack of tonality due to noise, or just because there is not much actual tonal value down there, will keep deliberately misrepresenting the views of the "anti" gravity crowd.

It seems the anti gravity crowds point is just to nuanced or subtle for the DRoners to comprehend.

 

[3kramd5]

I usually use the best practical hardware for the shot that gives me the results I want.
Sometimes I have to use what I've got available.

Thus impeaching the notion that you have higher standard of image quality than those who also use what is practically available despite of better equipment existing (e.g. using a D810 in the studio rather than an IQ180, or using a Sigma 50 Art rather than a Zeiss Otus).

 

[Loswr]

DR/shadow recovery is better with Exmor, well done, we have all known and agreed that for, well, ever. What we disagree on is how much difference that actually makes to most people most of the time in actual shooting scenarios, and your "test" did nothing to further that.

^^ This.

It sounds like jrista proved something to himself about actually using the a7R, so there was some utility to him I hope.

 

[I_Miss_Minolta]

I could take a picture of my ass with the A7 and there'd be "X" amount of dynamic range.

I could take a picture of a smiling baby with my 60D...not as much.

Which would you rather BEHOLD?

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE DAMN DATA!

 

[Sporgon]

I wasn't able to find any kind of landscapes on the first day that had high dynamic range (traffic held me up earlier in the day, when I finally got deep enough into the mountains, the sun had set before I found a scene.)

Hmmm......

My goal was to provide data.

There's a slight contradiction here; no one was asking for a pictorial masterpiece, simply a genuine but EV challenging landscape shot into, or across the sun.

Be that as it may, can you blame him for wanting to find something beautiful to shoot with short-term rented gear?

Not at all, and he was heading that way by the sound of it. But once it became clear that I was being beaten by time ( which happens to me sooo often !), in this case, and given his goal to provide data, I'd have pulled up and just got a sunlit landscape shot of something. And as you have read above, I think he probably did.

 

[Sporgon]

I could take a picture of my ass with the A7 and there'd be "X" amount of dynamic range.

I could take a picture of a smiling baby with my 60D...not as much.

Which would you rather BEHOLD?

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE DAMN DATA!

If you are Miss Minolta I think you should post some examples.

 

[jdramirez]

I could take a picture of my ass with the A7 and there'd be "X" amount of dynamic range.

I could take a picture of a smiling baby with my 60D...not as much.

Which would you rather BEHOLD?

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE DAMN DATA!

It all depends on whose ass...

 

[jdramirez]

While I'm asking dumb questions... why aren't we just using hdr multiple exposures to capture some of our missing dynamic range... sure if the subject is moving... but it was a living room.

 

[Orangutan]

DR/shadow recovery is better with Exmor, well done, we have all known and agreed that for, well, ever. What we disagree on is how much difference that actually makes to most people most of the time in actual shooting scenarios, and your "test" did nothing to further that.

^^ This.

It sounds like jrista proved something to himself about actually using the a7R, so there was some utility to him I hope.

Given your scientific background, perhaps you could propose such a test? It seems to me that any fair test will be contrived in much the same way that tests of similar lenses are contrived by use of test charts, which are not common "actual shooting scenarios." Just as we extrapolate test-chart performance to real-world performance, so, I would hope, we could have a contrived test that would provide some insight regarding real-world performance.

 

[privatebydesign]

While I'm asking dumb questions... why aren't we just using hdr multiple exposures to capture some of our missing dynamic range... sure if the subject is moving... but it was a living room.

Because, as the example broke down and failed equally, it became about more than the room, it was about the lifting capability of an Exmor file, something we have all agreed on for a long time never disagreed about.

 

[Lee Jay]

Okay, I'll provide an image from a high DR scene, that's actually a picture I wanted, not just a test. This was taken at ISO 100 on a Rebel T2i and it was exposed such as to reduce, but not eliminate, blow out of the raw data on the bright pixels at the top of the image. In other words, this was about as much exposure as I could give it without further blowing out the raw data on the top of the frame.

See what you think of the technical performance here, by seeing what you can make of the image.

http://tinyurl.com/neof9y4