R6 vs. 1DX3 ISO Question

[TAF]

Folks;

Based on what I have read here on CR, the new R6 uses essentially the same sensor as the 1DX3. Yet the 1DX3 ISO (per the Canon website) is 102,400, expandable to 819,200. The R6 is 102,400, expandable to 'only' 204,800.

Any thoughts on why the 2 stop difference?

(my experience with the 5D3 suggests that the last two stops are not terribly useful - I find 25,600 useable, but 51,200 and 102,400 on the 5D3 too noisy...which might suggest that I would find 51,200 on the R6 useable, but perhaps 204,800 would be useable on the 1DX3, hence the question)

Thank you!

 

[Joules]

All those higher values are just digital aplification anyway. You'll get the same results shooting a lower ISO and pushing in software compared to shooting at those stupid high ISOs in camera - except when you push them yourself you may get a chance to save at least some highlights.

I'm sure the difference is purely marketing. If there were any practical difference between the 1DX III and R6 low light performance - where would that be coming from? All the data we have so far suggests they are identical.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

From the samples I've seen, in a pinch, you might be able to use 51,200 and get something that looked like a photo assuming the lighting is perfect and there are no bright highlights or deep shadows. Higher than that are ISO's to use for UFO pictures where you want all grain to hide the fact its a frisbee.

 

[SteveC]

From the samples I've seen, in a pinch, you might be able to use 51,200 and get something that looked like a photo assuming the lighting is perfect and there are no bright highlights or deep shadows. Higher than that are ISO's to use for UFO pictures where you want all grain to hide the fact its a frisbee.

You forgot Bigfoot. Iron law of photography, that cameras used to photograph Bigfoot MUST be set to maximum ISO.

 

[privatebydesign]

Any thoughts on why the 2 stop difference?

yes, marketing bullshit.

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

 

[TAF]

All those higher values are just digital aplification anyway. You'll get the same results shooting a lower ISO and pushing in software compared to shooting at those stupid high ISOs in camera - except when you push them yourself you may get a chance to save at least some highlights.

I'm sure the difference is purely marketing. If there were any practical difference between the 1DX III and R6 low light performance - where would that be coming from? All the data we have so far suggests they are identical.

So based on what we know at the moment, it would merely be a firmware change to increase the amplification (same sensor and DIGIC X chip).

Perhaps this is the long anticipated ‘Canon Cripple Hammer of Doom’ the naysayers were hoping for?

 

[TAF]

yes, marketing bullshit.

View attachment 191575

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

Blech. Thank you, that certainly clarifies things.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

You forgot Bigfoot. Iron law of photography, that cameras used to photograph Bigfoot MUST be set to maximum ISO.

Be nice to him, he lives out in the woods behind my house. We put food out for him and his wife. We respect his privacy and don't take unwanted photos. Shadowgraphs, maybe.

 

[privatebydesign]

Be nice to him, he lives out in the woods behind my house. We put food out for him and his wife. We respect his privacy and don't take unwanted photos. Shadowgraphs, maybe.

It interests me that so many areas have these 'missing' link style mystery residents. I heard about the Florida Skunk Ape for the first time the other week. Unfortunately I think the person telling me was disappointed at my too obvious skepticism, I mean Florida is big but pretty much every inch of it has been developed or farmed and even the Everglades have been changed out of all recognition.