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

[jrista]

And if you hit something beyond even exmor, well them you struggle in PP or skip the scene. But at least there are now less scenes you need to skip. Why fight so hard to make that seem like a bad thing??

Or you just bracket. However, you would have to bracket in far fewer situations. Which, for me, is a big bonus. I don't like to spend a ton of time on my images...not unless one of them is a gem and I know I can make it phenomenal (which usually has more to do with nature and the weather cooperating than anything else...you need the right sky, the right light, the right time of day...which is really NOT easy to get. At least with an Exmor, your more likely to get as much good, clean data as possible so you CAN make the most of it, even if your bracketing.)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

@zlatko: It's not about any of that. It's simply data. There are lots of debates that go on about DR. There aren't very many RAW files that people can download and play with themselves. That's all this is about. I'm not trying to push anything with this thread. I'm just trying to provide data. People make decisions. It's useful to have data to back up those decisions.

YES, this is an extreme example. It's not intended to be a totally realistic demonstration. All it is supposed to do is give people who may have questions about what it really means to have more DR the ability to see for themselves. To actually download RAW files that they can open up in their preferred editor, work with themselves, and...see what's what. If some people conclude that more DR does nothing for them, fine. I don't care.

I simply care about providing some concrete data. The DR debate is never going to end until the playing field is level. So it's going to rage on. At least I can provide something people can reference. That's all this is. I am hoping I'll have the opportunity of photographing some landscape scenes tomorrow to provide some more realistic and balanced examples than this. Personally, I'm impressed with how well the A7r holds up under a 5-stop push (especially given it's compression). I don't think that's a particularly common scenario...but the data held up very well, all things considered. For smaller prints, like an 8x10, it's entirely viable.

It won't be any surprise to me if most of the responses to this thread are like yours, this is a Canon community, so it makes sense that people will decry the value of having more DR, defend their preferred brand, and even get hostile. That seems to be the nature of this community (sadly). Well, so be it. There's the data. Shred it as you will.

Hi,
IMHO, I think a lot of Canon users know that DR of Canon camera is not the best and know the importance of DR, but they also try to point out that there is a lot of aspect that make up of a good camera not just DR... there is no perfect camera out there, so there is always some compromise when choosing a camera or camera system.... may be many user just don't put DR high in their priority list...

Also, IMHO, many users here get annoyed not because they want to defend their preferred brand (in this case Canon), but the fact that some of you keep bring up the same thing again and again in thread that are not related to DR.

Just my S$0.02 and enjoy your new toy... I mean camera...

Have a nice weekend.

even if you bring it up in a thread titled "DR differences between sensors" you still get pummeled and called a lens cap shooting dweeb, a photographic moron, etc. etc. that gets kind of tiresome and annoying after a while too and maybe some people just quit posting and other just starting posting and not giving anymore and start giving as good as they get

alreadt in this thread instead of people just accepting the difference jrista demonstrated and letting the thread end after 2 or 3 posts, they are trying to find every which way to discredit everything about his test

I meanit's fair enough to bring up other stuff, but then it should be fair enough in any thread where things are relevant.

 

[Aglet]

5D Mark III got the job done. I'm happy with my choice of "tools".
Mustang Sunrise Photo Tour CCA 2014 Sun1099 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr

Keith, those are some nice images but I'm gonna be tough on you here. Even to my old eyes the shadow tones in the mustang shot look full of canon chroma noise and stripes. Not in this little dinky downscaled shot within this thread, but the 2 & 3MP "large" version available on flikr.
And they are, you don't even have to push anything to see it, just look between the 2 photog's on the R side.

Sorry, tools like that do not meet my standards of image quality, not when they come with that kind of price tag.
If you're happy with them, great. But image quality like this is the reason I dumped Canon and went to ABC cameras.
Most people likely would not notice the noise, I sure do, much as I listen to the silence between the music.

A crop and 2x linear with some gamma shift to make it obvious for those who can't see it in the original.
Maybe I'm just getting spoiled looking at super clean ABC shadow tones for the last couple years, this now jumps out at me in some shots.

EDIT: typos fixed, minor change in wording

 

[jrista]

alreadt in this thread instead of people just accepting the difference jrista demonstrated and letting the thread end after 2 or 3 posts, they are trying to find every which way to discredit everything about his test

Oh, it probably hasn't even started yet. I never expected any less, though. It's a Canon forum.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

But if the 1dX is what is and 2,5 stops more range, would I not buy it or be even happier?

Absolutely! And that is also why many push so hard for Canon to go to a new sensor fab. There is tons to like about CAnon so it would be way nicer if they got on the ball and we didn't have to change to other systems or shoot Frankenstein combinations.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

alreadt in this thread instead of people just accepting the difference jrista demonstrated and letting the thread end after 2 or 3 posts, they are trying to find every which way to discredit everything about his test

Oh, it probably hasn't even started yet. I never expected any less, though. It's a Canon forum.

and don't forget after they turn this thread, that could have been over with in 2 posts, into 30 pages, they will accuse you of being a "DRoner" who went on and on for 30 pages ;D

and even though this thread was specifically titled "DYNAMIC RANGE" they are bringing up but oh what about UI or AF or the great lenses, so they can bring up anything in any thread, but don't dare bring up DR even in a DR thread ;D

 

[jrista]

alreadt in this thread instead of people just accepting the difference jrista demonstrated and letting the thread end after 2 or 3 posts, they are trying to find every which way to discredit everything about his test

Oh, it probably hasn't even started yet. I never expected any less, though. It's a Canon forum.

and don't forget after they turn this thread, that could have been over with in 2 posts, into 30 pages, they will accuse you of being a "DRoner" who went on and on for 30 pages ;D

and even though this thread was specifically titled "DYNAMIC RANGE" they are bringing up but oh what about UI or AF or the great lenses, so they can bring up anything in any thread, but don't dare bring up DR even in a DR thread ;D

Yeah well, this is the thread where they can retaliate. Derail a DR thread for once with...whatever it is they want to talk about. It's the nature of these forums...petty. Fine, though. As I said, I primarily just wanted to provide some data. Give people something to base their arguments on, regardless of what their opinions are.

One argument in particular I do kind of want to crush, however, is the notion that Canon cameras have the same DR as Exmor cameras. One particular individual has been pushing that for years. That same individual demanded I back up my words with my own data. Well...here's my shared RAWs (hopefully the first of many...forecast for the mountains is starting to not look so good), as demanded. Maybe we can quell those claims once and for all, as they are completely fallacious.

 

[krisbell]

Yes...in a situation where it is not needed.

In fact, in all my years of shooting, I've never once come across a situation where I couldn't get enough DR from a Canon camera at base ISO. Well, except once, and in that case I needed around 30 stops or so, and I don't think even the lens could manage that due to flare.

I need more DR at high ISO all the time. Fortunately, Canon delivers there.

You have never come across a situation where you couldnt get enough DR from a Canon camera at base ISO??!! I come across this limitation almost every single time I go out shooting a sunrise/sunset scene. Either way, whether you are DR limited or not has no bearing on what jrista has produced here, which is nice, clear evidence of the greater DR of the a7r.

The suggestion to come back and shoot at another time, or with flash etc I'm sure is helpful or possible in some situations but sunsets generally don't afford you that luxury and my flash for some reason struggles to selectively lighten just the extreme darks across an entire wide-angle landscape scene - I would love to know what flash you use for this application. Regardless and as I mentioned in the first paragraph, this is a total irrelevance for what the OP was trying to show to those of us with an open mind.

Your comments are akin to someone demonstrating a sensors noise performance and you saying 'just shoot the scene when it is a little brighter' - it ain't always possible or desirable.

 

[Ruined]

I received my A7r rental from LensRentals today.

You should rent a 6D and do the same test vs the 5D3.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Yes...in a situation where it is not needed.

In fact, in all my years of shooting, I've never once come across a situation where I couldn't get enough DR from a Canon camera at base ISO. Well, except once, and in that case I needed around 30 stops or so, and I don't think even the lens could manage that due to flare.

I need more DR at high ISO all the time. Fortunately, Canon delivers there.

You have never come across a situation where you couldnt get enough DR from a Canon camera at base ISO??!! I come across this limitation almost every single time I go out shooting a sunrise/sunset scene. Either way, whether you are DR limited or not has no bearing on what jrista has produced here, which is nice, clear evidence of the greater DR of the a7r.

The suggestion to come back and shoot at another time, or with flash etc I'm sure is helpful or possible in some situations but sunsets generally don't afford you that luxury and my flash for some reason struggles to selectively lighten just the extreme darks across an entire wide-angle landscape scene - I would love to know what flash you use for this application. Regardless and as I mentioned in the first paragraph, this is a total irrelevance for what the OP was trying to show to those of us with an open mind.

Your comments are akin to someone demonstrating a sensors noise performance and you saying 'just shoot the scene when it is a little brighter' - it ain't always possible or desirable.

Just had to say, wow, you have a truly incredible Flickr collection!


(which I might add is yet more proof that it's not just some dweebs in a lab who shoot lens caps all day long who care about DR as some keep saying, in fact, I swear those who want more DR, often tend to have very extensive and impressive portfolios)

 

[jrista]

I received my A7r rental from LensRentals today.

You should rent a 6D and do the same test vs the 5D3.

Yeah, that would be interesting. I know the 6D is gaining a good reputation among photographers for having the best signal of any Canon camera. I haven't heard anyone call it "CCD-like", as they are with Nikon Exmor cameras, but it's definitely better than other popular Canon cameras in the astro world.

While I know many others don't, I trust the theory, so I figure the 6D wouldn't have more than a half-stop advantage over the 5D III in terms of read noise/DR. What would be most interesting would be to see how the banding noise compares. The 6D is supposed to have very little, like the 70D and hopefully the 7D II.

 

[fragilesi]

It's an interesting test, and a useful comparison.

I'm also happy that there's balance here. The A7R gives you these impressive and useful for some DR characteristics. But as jrista says it's coming at a big cost, AF, EVF etc are much poorer.

And this is the only point I would make. The DR difference which isn't an issue for everyone but is for some is being given such prominence and some people are describing Canon as not being innovative, lagging behind and so on. Sony are going for headlines and making a splash with DR but are miles behind Canon on other things.

So, I like this thread because the recognition is there that while the A7R has produced these results it's not a "better" camera overall even if it does excel in this DR area. So those who need the DR may go for the Sony but Canon remains better overall for others.

 

[jrista]

Aye, the A7r has it's flaws. Some of em are pretty big. I never expected otherwise. Jury is still out on the full consequences of their compression...I'll probably have to rent a D810 to really get a handle on that.

Even though the A7r has it's flaws, it does have one big strength: The ability to adapt to many lens systems. You don't have to buy a whole 'nother kit. You can simply add the A7r to your existing kit. That's a big selling point, despite the flaws. Sony could really capitalize on that (will be interesting to see if they do.)

I think Sony will continue to improve, and relatively rapidly at that, too, if they do things right. They have already made some significant improvements to their AF system. It now has full multi-point subject tracking capabilities, which was once the hallmark of high end Canon and Nikon AF systems. I don't know how well the Sony Lock-On AF tracking works compared to Canon or Nikon system in the heat of the moment for sports or other action, but I don't think it will sit still either. I think it will be iterated over and improved fairly quickly, like some other Sony cameras and features (particularly their sensors...Exmor has already come a long way since the release of the D800, and it came a long way before that since it first found it's way into the K-5.)

The big question is whether they will actually go in the right direction with their iterating. They have made a lot of mistakes with their current system. Sony almost seems to make cameras as an afterthought, so you have to wonder whether they will really improve things, or drunkenly wander around no-man's land for a while until they finally stumble across an ideal balance between ergonomics, camera size, functionality and interactivity. They could really skyrocket the A7 series forward in a couple of years...or they could waste five years giving Canon plenty of time to catch up. I'm hoping it's the former, it would put more competitive heat on Canon...but I suspect things may end up more like the latter, with Sony meandering about for a bit before they figure out how to dial in on customer feedback and improve their system, as sensors seems to be Sony's real focus.

 

[fragilesi]

Aye, the A7r has it's flaws. Some of em are pretty big. I never expected otherwise. Jury is still out on the full consequences of their compression...I'll probably have to rent a D810 to really get a handle on that.

Even though the A7r has it's flaws, it does have one big strength: The ability to adapt to many lens systems. You don't have to buy a whole 'nother kit. You can simply add the A7r to your existing kit. That's a big selling point, despite the flaws. Sony could really capitalize on that (will be interesting to see if they do.)

Yes, it's all a balance, and if you don't mind me saying so is one reason I like Canon's approach. I feel as if they are trying to deliver an all-round better system. For someone like myself who has specific photographic interests but also likes to "dabble" a lot this is the right approach.

The point about lens interchange makes it interesting. It could mean that with this cherry picking approach to features they could cleverly target at certain audiences. I wonder for example if instead of the 6d I sometimes think about to supplement my 70d for landscape and gig photography I'd be even better off with the A7r.

Maybe food for thought

 

[msm]

Yes...in a situation where it is not needed.

In fact, in all my years of shooting, I've never once come across a situation where I couldn't get enough DR from a Canon camera at base ISO. Well, except once, and in that case I needed around 30 stops or so, and I don't think even the lens could manage that due to flare.

I need more DR at high ISO all the time. Fortunately, Canon delivers there.

You have never come across a situation where you couldnt get enough DR from a Canon camera at base ISO??!! I come across this limitation almost every single time I go out shooting a sunrise/sunset scene. Either way, whether you are DR limited or not has no bearing on what jrista has produced here, which is nice, clear evidence of the greater DR of the a7r.

The suggestion to come back and shoot at another time, or with flash etc I'm sure is helpful or possible in some situations but sunsets generally don't afford you that luxury and my flash for some reason struggles to selectively lighten just the extreme darks across an entire wide-angle landscape scene - I would love to know what flash you use for this application. Regardless and as I mentioned in the first paragraph, this is a total irrelevance for what the OP was trying to show to those of us with an open mind.

Your comments are akin to someone demonstrating a sensors noise performance and you saying 'just shoot the scene when it is a little brighter' - it ain't always possible or desirable.

Just had to say, wow, you have a truly incredible Flickr collection!
...

+1 on that, awesome stuff. Didn't even see it before I noticed this comment.

 

[Khalai]

I'm about to get a little philosophical here:

Now, before any ranting is going to ensue - I'm not disputing DR advantage of Exmor (I've never did actually), but...

We are here evaluating cameras with as 12 EV (6D and 5D3) vs 14+ EV (Exmor) on monitors right? Is there any magical, yet affordable monitor with as wide as 15 EV of DR? And even more, is there any mythical photopaper, capable of using that DR?

Just food for thought, I think many here from both sides of the DR camp went over their heads, comparing numbers, histograms, ratios and forgot about the vastly severe limitation of the displaying devices or printing media...

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Jrista.
Thank you for your efforts, it amazes me that peoples first reaction was oh no Canon is under attack, circle the wagons!
I think the fact that you have gone to the effort to post and make available comparable images Data from the two cameras (and are promising more real world images) is a credit to you. I don't go hunting for comparisons, but so often they seem to use different images, different times, processed and that's all your getting!
Your approach means that people can fiddle, play, see what they can do with them, then perhaps make an informed decision on a purchase.
It was enlightening to have some feedback on the body as a whole system too, especially what many seem to think is "the" way forwards, being the EVF.

Cheers, Graham.

 

[jrista]

@Khalai: No, there are no screens that can natively display 14 or more stops at once. However, it is for that very reason that we push shadows. A RAW is rendered to the screen with a tone curve. That tone curve compresses the information in a RAW, crushing the blacks and bleeding out the highlights. The middle part of the image fits on the screen...the middle 8 stops.

The purpose of shadow recovery is to bring back the shadows that were crushed and the highlights that were bleed out. The highlights aren't clipped, they are just rendered such that they appear clipped. The shadows aren't pure black...they are just rendered such that they appear pure black or nearly so. In the actual RAW file, in linear space, all that information is decidedly NOT black or white. It's all non-zero/non-clipped information that can be utilized.

Having more dynamic range, such as you get with an Exmor, means that more of that information that falls outside the display range of your computer screen is recoverable. Canon sensors are eating away at a large chunk of that information, then scattering banding (a semi-random or non-random factor) into the signal that reaches right up into the lower midtones, which are already displayed on the screen.

So, no, there are no screens that can natively display 14 stops of DR, which is the very reason we push shadows. I took some photographs of what appears to be a dark room. In reality, the room was not dark at all, it was much more like the second set of photos I shared. The information all those "blacks" as rendered in the first set of photos was all there, in the raw. My 8-bit screen, your 8-bit screen, most people's screens, cannot display the entire range of information found within the RAW, so I had to push the shadows up to make it fit. I compressed a wider dynamic range into a narrower dynamic range. In the third set of photos, I compressed the data even more, bringing in another stop of recoverable information in the A7r file that simply wasn't there in the 5D III file. (Hell, the 5D III file doesn't even have three stops of recoverable data, let alone four or five.)

It's actually because of the limitations of display devices and print media that we push and pull the digital signals of our RAW images around. Even when 10-bit computer screens become common, and 12-bit screens start hitting the marketplace, we will still be pushing shadows for print.

 

[jrista]

Hi Jrista.
Thank you for your efforts, it amazes me that peoples first reaction was oh no Canon is under attack, circle the wagons!
I think the fact that you have gone to the effort to post and make available comparable images Data from the two cameras (and are promising more real world images) is a credit to you. I don't go hunting for comparisons, but so often they seem to use different images, different times, processed and that's all your getting!
Your approach means that people can fiddle, play, see what they can do with them, then perhaps make an informed decision on a purchase.
It was enlightening to have some feedback on the body as a whole system too, especially what many seem to think is "the" way forwards, being the EVF.

Cheers, Graham.

Thanks. I am hoping that I can find some time to be artistic tomorrow, too...between juggling camera systems and taking comparison photos. Last chance for fall photos...

 

[Faaier]

Jrista, I get your point, but you don't have to try to convince everybody. I think plenty of us would agree Exmor is quite something. To be jealous about even... but some people simply don't want to hear this because they are in some kind of brainlock because their *!#@& camera costed so much. Others know exactly how to work around this DR "disadvantage".... and even others won't even see it, when you show the pictures. ???

Good to have Sony sensors so this sets a line in the sand for others, but I'm sure Canon has quite a few lines in the sand also, where other brands are looking at (sometimes from a distance).