kphoto99 said:
For profit companies want customers to buy products with higher profit margin? No!
Upvote
0
PetaPixel poops on the 6D2 sensor
- Thread starter ahsanford
- Start date
For profit companies want customers to buy products with higher profit margin? No!
Mikehit said:
Your "they" is Adobe, not DPR. DPR use ACR. The "out of camera" raw file look is by Adobe, independent company.
Look at graph:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Ideal%20FF/FX
Perfect ISO invariant sensor is "ideal" line. Ideal sensor would produce same output with "ISO100,EV-1" as "ISO200,EV+0".
What this got to do with the price of fish? Everything and nothing.
Simplest way to think of it: when sensor graph match "ideal" line then sensor is perfect.
Difference between images of ISO100,EV-5" and "ISO3200,EV+0" because noise introduced inside the camera by the ADC/read circuit. This test show how good/bad ADC and circuit design in camera is.
Who cares about it? Photographer that want texture in shadow, not only black. To others, splitting hairs.
Of course picture by privatebydesign is too simple for noise - where is details? Just need black! Choose section have hair or fine detail/texture and see difference! Why nobody see this? Nobody here ever do much NR work????
Upvote
0
Orangutan said:
He can Google it rather than chew me out as an "apologist" without knowing what he is talking about.
I am very generous with my time and skillset inside and outside the forum, I have sent multiple people from here prints, videos and countless messages to help each and every one of them. All I was trying to do was point out this is not a "comparison" and I get pissed on because he has decided I have sold my soul to Canon and every word out of my mouth is an apology for anything they do.
If people are interested in learning I will take a lot of time and trouble to help them if I can. If they come out of their corner swinging they can piss off. If they come out of their corner swinging and it turns out they don't know what they are talking about and stop mid punch to actually ask for help ("educate me") they can Google it, my horses lean-to needs the roof fixing and she will appreciate it. ;D
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
Floating black point let Canon hide problem with sensor design. DPR find way to show problem. For old Canon sensor design. Not new sensor design in 80D or 5D Mark IV.
Floating black point is not unknown. It is not mystery nobody know about before:
http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/dcraw-float-c-code.html
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12280
Adobe know it. ACR can know it too.
Upvote
0
snoke said:
No. It is not hiding a problem it is different ways round the same problem.
DPR is not showing the problem in the sensor design, it is highlighting a problem in the way DPR does its testing. Nikon etc all all have fixed black point so you could validly argue that DRP is allowing for Nikon's fixed blackpoint in the way they have designed their standardised processing, but is not allowing for Canon's variable black point.
And if blackpoint is (as you surmise) well known, why have DPR and Adobe not allowed for it? That smacks of incompetence at DPR and Adobe, not incompetence at the way Canon have chosen to design their sensors.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:Orangutan said:
He can Google it rather than chew me out as an "apologist" without knowing what he is talking about.
I am very generous with my time and skillset inside and outside the forum, I have sent multiple people from here prints, videos and countless messages to help each and every one of them. All I was trying to do was point out this is not a "comparison" and I get pissed on because he has decided I have sold my soul to Canon and every word out of my mouth is an apology for anything they do.
If people are interested in learning I will take a lot of time and trouble to help them if I can. If they come out of their corner swinging they can piss off. If they come out of their corner swinging and it turns out they don't know what they are talking about and stop mid punch to actually ask for help ("educate me") they can Google it, my horses lean-to needs the roof fixing and she will appreciate it. ;D
So Canon now needs a special RAW editor? Can't fairly assess their sensors' DR and other IQ aspects in currently popular editors such as ACR, LR, On1, etc, etc?
Oy vey.
Upvote
0
Hector1970 said:
Not if that meant it was unprofitable. The assumption I think many people are making is that this has been done to cut costs - or to put it another way, to increase profits. We don't have the information to decide what putting the 5D4's sensor in would have made to that, but it's not unreasonable to assume it would cost more (if only because that camera costs more). If so, maybe they'd not make enough profit on the 6D2 to make it worth their while bothering to produce it, who knows. Just because it disappoints some people doesn't mean it's a bad business decision.
And for those feeling 'bewildered' by decisions like this, this is not a defence, it's an attempt to understand them so we are less bewildered
Hector1970 said:
This is quite an assertion, and requires some evidence imho. It could be that a generalist, being exposed to a wider range of conditions, learns how to get the best results out of their device because they are tested more (than, say, people who shoot mostly under controlled conditions, be that in a studio, using flash, or only at certain times of day or year).
Upvote
0
Is the new sensor better than the original 6D? If so, I'm sold. Though the 5DSR tempts me a little.
Upvote
0
No I take it back, you are displaying all the characteristics of an idiot.YuengLinger said:privatebydesign said:Orangutan said:
He can Google it rather than chew me out as an "apologist" without knowing what he is talking about.
I am very generous with my time and skillset inside and outside the forum, I have sent multiple people from here prints, videos and countless messages to help each and every one of them. All I was trying to do was point out this is not a "comparison" and I get pissed on because he has decided I have sold my soul to Canon and every word out of my mouth is an apology for anything they do.
If people are interested in learning I will take a lot of time and trouble to help them if I can. If they come out of their corner swinging they can piss off. If they come out of their corner swinging and it turns out they don't know what they are talking about and stop mid punch to actually ask for help ("educate me") they can Google it, my horses lean-to needs the roof fixing and she will appreciate it. ;D
So Canon now needs a special RAW editor? Can't fairly assess their sensors' DR and other IQ aspects in currently popular editors such as ACR, LR, On1, etc, etc?
Oy vey.
Just move the slider by the arrow, until the stuff in the circle isn't clipped. You can do other stuff too, but that one thing accomplishes the heavy lifting.
I did my edit 100% in LR in under 5 mins.
Attachments
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:No I take it back, you are displaying all the characteristics of an idiot.YuengLinger said:privatebydesign said:Orangutan said:
He can Google it rather than chew me out as an "apologist" without knowing what he is talking about.
I am very generous with my time and skillset inside and outside the forum, I have sent multiple people from here prints, videos and countless messages to help each and every one of them. All I was trying to do was point out this is not a "comparison" and I get pissed on because he has decided I have sold my soul to Canon and every word out of my mouth is an apology for anything they do.
If people are interested in learning I will take a lot of time and trouble to help them if I can. If they come out of their corner swinging they can piss off. If they come out of their corner swinging and it turns out they don't know what they are talking about and stop mid punch to actually ask for help ("educate me") they can Google it, my horses lean-to needs the roof fixing and she will appreciate it. ;D
So Canon now needs a special RAW editor? Can't fairly assess their sensors' DR and other IQ aspects in currently popular editors such as ACR, LR, On1, etc, etc?
Oy vey.
Just move the slider by the arrow, until the stuff in the circle isn't clipped. You can do other stuff too, but that one thing accomplishes the heavy lifting.
I did my edit 100% in LR in under 5 mins.
Again you're playing ping-pong with the topic. We try to talk about a baseline comparison of sensor IQ, and you go back to how you can salvage a poorly exposed image. Misdirection?
I thought your point was that we can't use the same editor to judge what lifting shadows looks like. Now I guess you mean we can't use the same editor unless we somehow massage the Canon image, while simply adding +5EV to a Nikon image?
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Actually, it would be nice if some of the more skilled folks on this forum (PBD, etc.) would start a thread providing some tips and guidance on their workflow in Lightroom/Camera Raw. I've been using Camera Raw for almost a decade (and Photoshop long before that) and still learn new things all the time.
I suspect that a lot of the people who worry obsessively over Dynamic Range just aren't very good at post processing. Too many people have this idea that images should be perfect coming right off the camera. In the film days, no one would have expected that (Well, yeah, you had to have it pretty much perfect if you were shooting transparencies, but that just meant you had to do a lot more work before you took the exposure and accept that under certain conditions, you weren't going to be able get acceptable results).
I suspect that a lot of the people who worry obsessively over Dynamic Range just aren't very good at post processing. Too many people have this idea that images should be perfect coming right off the camera. In the film days, no one would have expected that (Well, yeah, you had to have it pretty much perfect if you were shooting transparencies, but that just meant you had to do a lot more work before you took the exposure and accept that under certain conditions, you weren't going to be able get acceptable results).
Upvote
0
Similar threads
