Why you shouldn't be worried about DR
- Thread starter duydaniel
- Start date
- Status
DR is better on my Sony but My lens focus better on my Canon 
The only time I ever realized it made a difference was when I was taking pictures of our cows. We have black cows with white caves. Black cows end up as featureless black cow shape. If exposed properly for the Black cow then the white cave will be a featureless blown out white calf shape and the whole seen will be blown out. Properly exposed ETTR they both lack detail and I spent tons of time in post pushing down mid tone pushing up highlight and pushing up shadow then adjusting black level/white level. Then I have to add contrast and saturation lost in slightly over exposing back to the picture. Real solution wait until more favorable time of day to take the picture.
Sony take the picture jpeg is good enough.
The problem is not really one of DR it is the inability of Canon to capture detail in dark areas or on dark objects without introducing noise. If you know your camera you can compensate ETTR but it is not optimal. So if you need to take picture of black objects and capture detail in bright scene then Canon may not be the brand for you. I do not know many user that have this as a priority.
If you ever have a seen with truly stark DR issues there is no camera on the market that will have sufficient DR. HDR is the only option.
For all you D800 users here is a Challenge. Go to Sunset Crater in Arizona and take pictures at Noon that render the whole scene on a sunny day. I dare you.
The only time I ever realized it made a difference was when I was taking pictures of our cows. We have black cows with white caves. Black cows end up as featureless black cow shape. If exposed properly for the Black cow then the white cave will be a featureless blown out white calf shape and the whole seen will be blown out. Properly exposed ETTR they both lack detail and I spent tons of time in post pushing down mid tone pushing up highlight and pushing up shadow then adjusting black level/white level. Then I have to add contrast and saturation lost in slightly over exposing back to the picture. Real solution wait until more favorable time of day to take the picture.
Sony take the picture jpeg is good enough.
The problem is not really one of DR it is the inability of Canon to capture detail in dark areas or on dark objects without introducing noise. If you know your camera you can compensate ETTR but it is not optimal. So if you need to take picture of black objects and capture detail in bright scene then Canon may not be the brand for you. I do not know many user that have this as a priority.
If you ever have a seen with truly stark DR issues there is no camera on the market that will have sufficient DR. HDR is the only option.
For all you D800 users here is a Challenge. Go to Sunset Crater in Arizona and take pictures at Noon that render the whole scene on a sunny day. I dare you.
Upvote
0
I am not here to bash Nikon because I love it
but it drives me nut seeing people rampaging about the 70D dxo mark.
There is no such things as perfect camera for example
D800 has left focus and green color cast issue
D600 dust oil
5D3 doesn't have good DR as D800
There is no perfection. Live with it
but it drives me nut seeing people rampaging about the 70D dxo mark.
There is no such things as perfect camera for example
D800 has left focus and green color cast issue
D600 dust oil
5D3 doesn't have good DR as D800
There is no perfection. Live with it
Upvote
0
Marsu42 said:
+1
Also, a high DR sensor is HDR done with one shot. This is like saying that you can still use your old and noisy 10D in low light, you just have to blend exposures.
Upvote
0
For all the talk about inaccurate colors, I wonder if anyone has done a simple color calibration?
1.)Buy a MacBeth test chart http://www.adorama.com/GHCCC.html
2.)Download Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor
-------Windows:http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5494&fileID=5490
-------Mac: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5493
3.)Take a picture of the chart, convert to DNG
4.)Open DNG file in Profile Editor
5.)Click the Chart tab, and follow the instructions.
6.)Open Lightroom (or restart if it was already open) and the color profile is available in the Develop module under Calibration.
Congrats, you have just made a custom color profile for your camera.
The chart isn't cheap, but every photographer should own one.
1.)Buy a MacBeth test chart http://www.adorama.com/GHCCC.html
2.)Download Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor
-------Windows:http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5494&fileID=5490
-------Mac: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5493
3.)Take a picture of the chart, convert to DNG
4.)Open DNG file in Profile Editor
5.)Click the Chart tab, and follow the instructions.
6.)Open Lightroom (or restart if it was already open) and the color profile is available in the Develop module under Calibration.
Congrats, you have just made a custom color profile for your camera.
The chart isn't cheap, but every photographer should own one.
Upvote
0
duydaniel said:
It is more complicated than that. CPLs alter drastically the spectral balance, among the rest. This messes up the colors, at least with the Hoya CPL I own and an older CPL I used. It is like shooting Nikon.
You cannot fix that with WB tweaks - you can make it a bit better but the colors are still weird, and you can get visible noise even at ISO 100 (in addition to the high read noise which Canon adds to each of your shots but this time in the midtones and the highlights as well).
Upvote
0
duydaniel said:
I've probably over simplified. What I described is a good way to create a baseline. However, if you are doing a shoot where color accuracy is really important, you should take a picture of that chart under the exact lighting conditions of the shoot...have the model hold it for a shot in a fashion shoot, lean it against the product for a shot in a product shoot, etc.
Think of it as taking it a step beyond grey card white balance.
Upvote
0
I don't think DR is as crazy important as people make it out to be. Photographers have been making epic images for many years now with the "limited DR" of the Canon system and Nikon previous to the D800. Honestly, I find the D800 images looking a bit "flat" compared to the 5D3 because of the extra DR.
I don't care one bit, honestly. I would take higher ISO ability over DR, and the 5D3 wins against the D800. All they need to correct is the low ISO banding in shadows and I would be perfectly happy with the DR we have.
I don't care one bit, honestly. I would take higher ISO ability over DR, and the 5D3 wins against the D800. All they need to correct is the low ISO banding in shadows and I would be perfectly happy with the DR we have.
Upvote
0
Ewinter said:
Agreed. That's why I say that complaining about shadow noise is like complaining about the grain in 8x10 sheet film. It's measurable, but not that important.
Also, all across the net people pine about the loss of Kodachrome. Kodachrome, like other slide films, was all about limited DR. Today's cameras have much more exposure latitude.
Upvote
0
LOL...I pretty much only read this topic because I knew you know who would find the carcass of the dead hourse, which is almost a skeleton now, and beat it some more...
It's all about compromise, more DR at the expense of (Fill in the blank issue here), or the flip of that. At the end of the day though, are people hiring you because of your images, or because you can put a badge on your web site saying I have 14 stops of DR???
Or more extreme, are people buying your fine art images without looking at the image ---all they need to know is it has 14 stops of DR.
This brings me back to my joke for weddings...instead of a proof gallery, I will send my clients DXO lab analysis of their photos - they can just pick from the highest scores....
It's all about compromise, more DR at the expense of (Fill in the blank issue here), or the flip of that. At the end of the day though, are people hiring you because of your images, or because you can put a badge on your web site saying I have 14 stops of DR???
Or more extreme, are people buying your fine art images without looking at the image ---all they need to know is it has 14 stops of DR.
This brings me back to my joke for weddings...instead of a proof gallery, I will send my clients DXO lab analysis of their photos - they can just pick from the highest scores....
Upvote
0
Sporgon said:
yea exactly. moreover, and I hope this doesnt degenerate into another set of awning pictures, because most of us get that the extra couple of stops is not a bad thing. When certain conditions prevail, namely:
* you must shoot at low ISO, where the D800 DR advantage would be available (which it is not, at high ISO)
* the scene is noteworthy
* you must capture the shot with one exposure
* the required shutter speeds are too slow, or the requried resolution precludes handheld IS
* the scene contains detail that is important to the meaning and effectiveness of the photo, that is beyond the DR capability of your sensor
...when all of the above converge, having the extra two stops of DR in-camera capabilty is a benefit for sure. This may apply to some 'togs all the time and it may rarely, or never, apply to others. however, it is also worth pointing out that when the above situations all come together, or the photographer makes them come together to get the photo, that a tripod and/or other suitable support is not out of the question! in which case one can indeed blend exposures and capture a great deal more DR than a D800 single frame is capable of.
I am not trying to sell popcorn here, believe me, or bring out the awning wars again. I'm just pointing out that one really needs to determine the extent to which the DR advantage is really important to the situation.
Upvote
0
Sporgon said:
But yes, when 2+ stops is all you need. Also, pattern noise is not reflected in that difference, and it is very hard to clean.
Upvote
0
dlleno said:
To me, blown highlights (unless intended by the photog) always look bad, not matter if this part would contain "important detail" - but of course that's just perception.
I'd like to add that of course no sensor in the near or mid-term future will allow you to capture sunset with a dr of 18-20 stops, but unfortunately I'm often just missing a little bit, so I'm positive that even a little gain in dr would help a lot.
dlleno said:
That's mutually exclusive with your points containing "you must capture the shot with one exposure" - my main problem with hdr outside are moving grass & leaves, and if these are in a high dr area of the shot even manual blending in postprocessing doesn't help.
I also agree that many might never encounter that problem, the real question is what tradeoff a higher dr would produce, i.e. as far as I understand it filling a higher dr range with low dr data produces worse gradients, this tradeoff could only be fixed by a 15/16bit resolution?
Upvote
0
- Status