ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Fluff > Shiny things
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 4 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 02-15-2013, 02:53 PM   #31
DriveShaft
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: May 2005
Oddometer: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by runpasthefence View Post
And that's why dxomark has lost credibility for me. In every test I've seen the 6D and 5DIII have been superior in high ISO performance. There seems to be over a 2 stop difference in what dxo assesses compared to what I've seen from image comparisons.

One example - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...00_noise.shtml
Kind of a moot point if dynamic range is your goal isn't it? No idiot would try for optimal dynamic range and pump the sensitivity up. What would you rather have? I think I'd rather have the improved low iso sensitivity and low iso detail vs. the high-iso stuff where I know I won't ever be hanging out around there with the motivation of best quality *anything*. Any time you wander up to the higher ISOs you do have to realize that your shot is going to get most of its character from the content, from the aperture choice, from the composition, not the technical aspects of image quality.

In any case, there is another important point to make here. Even if you do have an extra stop of dynamic range...it's not much when compared to the range of brightness you often face. To wit, if you point any of these cameras at a typical sunset scene, the scene will exceed the dynamic range the camera is capable of. How you expose that shot will have much more of an effect in retaining all the detail you would wish to keep than what the sensor's dynamic range is. And that has less to do with the specific dynamic range, and more to do with your familiarity of your camera & the due diligence with the scene (e.g.: metering for the darks & bright areas), which is why folks who're really into landscapes like to fiddle with filters/modifiers.
DriveShaft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 03:40 PM   #32
_cy_
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Oddometer: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvia View Post
Geez I dunno _cy_

Your first image looks like its flash blown and the second has the top of the image overexposed. Not great examples, imho.

A lot of mistakes however can be eliminated/reduced/corrected or even fixed on post.
fair enough

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grainbelt View Post
On a more relevant note, your comment that 'most monitors cannot display more than VGA anyway' so absurd that I feel I must address it. VGA is 640x480. Most cellular phones have that much resolution on their screens, and even small laptops are around full HD, which is 1920x1080. My midrange, three year old dell monitor is 1680x1050, fer the chrissakes.

I struggle to see how you are adding anything to this discussion.
what a load of BS! so what ... very little differences between VGA to slightly high monitor resolution ... BFD

Frank Lloyd Wright Tower

_cy_ screwed with this post 02-15-2013 at 03:47 PM
_cy_ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 04:41 PM   #33
Grainbelt
marginal adventurer
 
Grainbelt's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Location: Minnyhappiness
Oddometer: 26,698
How is thumbnail cropped size of an overexposed picture of a stop sign with a building behind it - speckled with sensor dust or lens grime - going to assist the OP with his decision?
Grainbelt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 06:50 PM   #34
maloryII
more north, more wet
 
maloryII's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Tacoma, WA
Oddometer: 3,692
please tell me _cy_ is trolling.
__________________
2006 KTM 950 Adventure

"The pen & sword, in accord."
"It's never over in a Rover."
maloryII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 07:08 PM   #35
FLYING EYEBALL
out of step
 
FLYING EYEBALL's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: southeast of seattle
Oddometer: 10,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by _cy_ View Post
fair enough



what a load of BS! so what ... very little differences between VGA to slightly high monitor resolution ... BFD

Frank Lloyd Wright Tower

snapshot
__________________
if you keep poor...the struggle is simple

my photos http://jskustoms.smugmug.com/

save yourself some $ with my smuggy discount code qvMaWy1bTFU7c
FLYING EYEBALL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 07:13 PM   #36
Lobby
Viel Spass, Vato!
 
Lobby's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Oddometer: 27,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by maloryII View Post
please tell me _cy_ is trolling.
I think he is BigSnowDog's fake n00b. Y'all remember BSD? He was trying to teach Sylvia about the benefits of zooms over primes in the D800 thread?

__________________
Gracie's Gold
Lobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 09:20 PM   #37
_cy_
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Oddometer: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by maloryII View Post
please tell me _cy_ is trolling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYING EYEBALL View Post
snapshot
of course it's a snapshot with a Sony dsc ... never claimed otherwise

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobby View Post
I think he is BigSnowDog's fake n00b. Y'all remember BSD? He was trying to teach Sylvia about the benefits of zooms over primes in the D800 thread?
yep .. I'm a noob trolling with a Hasselblad, loads of pro Nikon and Nikkor prime lens running out of my butt

_cy_ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 10:14 PM   #38
Sylvia
vir sapit qui pauca loqui
 
Sylvia's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2006
Location: taking pics
Oddometer: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by _cy_ View Post
of course it's a snapshot with a Sony dsc ... never claimed otherwise



yep .. I'm a noob trolling with a Hasselblad, loads of pro Nikon and Nikkor prime lens running out of my butt

Mate with all that gear we deserve 1 x correctly exposed, and interesting picture (I'd prefer an action motor cycle related pic, ie; I'd like the cycle moving, not parked.)

come on delver the goods.
__________________
Slightly Orange

Sylvia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 10:32 PM   #39
runpasthefence OP
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Charleston SC
Oddometer: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvia View Post
You have been brain washed. The camera / system will not make you better images, especially based on what you typically shoot. But you knew that, right.?

Go take some pics, post em up here, tell us what you don't like and what you need to achieve. Then you will get some value, in comments.

Quoting IXO and other performance specifications is a complete waste of time imho.

carry on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by _cy_ View Post
exactly !!!

that's why I posted pic's above shot at VGA resolution in jpg using dated cameras with lowly spec's compared to current models.

it's all about the glass and person shooting ... then followed by the camera.
I can't tell if you two are trolling or just thread-shitting.

It's simple, really. My camera broke. I'm buying a new one. I'd like to discuss some of the current options.

Maybe I'll just take _cy_'s advice and go rummage around for some old Nikon glass, look through it, and maybe if I blink real fuckin' hard it'll all work out. Clearly, the idea of buying a decent and modern camera body is so irrelevant.
runpasthefence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 10:41 PM   #40
NikonsAndVStroms
Beastly Photographer
 
NikonsAndVStroms's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Oddometer: 36,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by runpasthefence View Post
And that's why dxomark has lost credibility for me. In every test I've seen the 6D and 5DIII have been superior in high ISO performance. There seems to be over a 2 stop difference in what dxo assesses compared to what I've seen from image comparisons.

One example - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...00_noise.shtml

I'm going to dig deeper into the dynamic range stuff. If I'm honest, I rarely shoot over an ISO of 1600 anyway. If I can evidence of a profound difference in dynamic rang, I may sway back to Nikon.
What are the other tests checking? If it's 100% crops the D800 might not win. For example my D700 is close when that's the metric. But if you print them at the same size the D800 has a clear 1 stop advantage. I saw he did a down sample one but he used the camera's down sampling and didn't do it after the fact, not sure what this will do for the comparison. I haven't shot with the 5D III but I'd be surprised if it's much better (going to check for some other tests) because the baseline there is already a stop better than my D700 which in itself is better than the mk II, so that would be a huge jump.

Dynamic range can be huge, I'm doing a shoot tomorrow with a Fuji S5 Pro specifically for that. The images are mostly for web so the 6x6MP resolution will be fine.
__________________
Motorcycles save lives


"It's the game of life. Do I win or do I lose? One day they're gonna shut the game down. I gotta have as much fun and go around the board as many times as I can before it's my turn to leave."

NikonsAndVStroms screwed with this post 02-16-2013 at 06:38 AM
NikonsAndVStroms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 10:45 PM   #41
NikonsAndVStroms
Beastly Photographer
 
NikonsAndVStroms's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Oddometer: 36,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvia View Post
You have been brain washed. The camera / system will not make you better images, especially based on what you typically shoot. But you knew that, right.?

Go take some pics, post em up here, tell us what you don't like and what you need to achieve. Then you will get some value, in comments.

Quoting IXO and other performance specifications is a complete waste of time imho.

carry on.
Shoot a D300 and a Fuji S5 Pro side by side....that dynamic range is key especially in landscape or other high contrast shots. There are quirks like banding on some sensors or if it's good for recovering shadows or highlights but the DXO chart is a good overall tool.

Now there are other factors like the ease of use or speed of the camera (neither are the Fuji's strong points) but for dynamic range it wasn't till the D3x IIRC that anyone got up to that level.
__________________
Motorcycles save lives


"It's the game of life. Do I win or do I lose? One day they're gonna shut the game down. I gotta have as much fun and go around the board as many times as I can before it's my turn to leave."
NikonsAndVStroms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 10:46 PM   #42
runpasthefence OP
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Charleston SC
Oddometer: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by DriveShaft View Post
Kind of a moot point if dynamic range is your goal isn't it? No idiot would try for optimal dynamic range and pump the sensitivity up. What would you rather have? I think I'd rather have the improved low iso sensitivity and low iso detail vs. the high-iso stuff where I know I won't ever be hanging out around there with the motivation of best quality *anything*. Any time you wander up to the higher ISOs you do have to realize that your shot is going to get most of its character from the content, from the aperture choice, from the composition, not the technical aspects of image quality.

In any case, there is another important point to make here. Even if you do have an extra stop of dynamic range...it's not much when compared to the range of brightness you often face. To wit, if you point any of these cameras at a typical sunset scene, the scene will exceed the dynamic range the camera is capable of. How you expose that shot will have much more of an effect in retaining all the detail you would wish to keep than what the sensor's dynamic range is. And that has less to do with the specific dynamic range, and more to do with your familiarity of your camera & the due diligence with the scene (e.g.: metering for the darks & bright areas), which is why folks who're really into landscapes like to fiddle with filters/modifiers.
Lots of great points here. You're right, 90% of the time I'll appreciate the better dynamic range at ISO200 more than less noise at ISO3200 as I rarely shoot with under such conditions.
I think I just like the idea of that option being there in my back pocket. I haven't owned a body that wasn't excessively noisy at higher sensitivities.

On an even more realistic note, even if there is a one stop difference between the Canon and Nikon bodies, that one stop difference (at high enough ISO levels to distinguish between the brands) will probably only affect 1-5% of my totals shots in a year. Though, I do wonder if that could change as I delve into the astro stuff.
runpasthefence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 01:40 AM   #43
Sylvia
vir sapit qui pauca loqui
 
Sylvia's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2006
Location: taking pics
Oddometer: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by runpasthefence View Post
I can't tell if you two are trolling or just thread-shitting.

It's simple, really. My camera broke. I'm buying a new one. I'd like to discuss some of the current options.

Maybe I'll just take _cy_'s advice and go rummage around for some old Nikon glass, look through it, and maybe if I blink real fuckin' hard it'll all work out. Clearly, the idea of buying a decent and modern camera body is so irrelevant.
Don't stress dude. Asking for camera advice in a bike forum is akin to well you know what I mean..
__________________
Slightly Orange

Sylvia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 01:40 AM   #44
_cy_
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Oddometer: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by runpasthefence View Post
I can't tell if you two are trolling or just thread-shitting.

It's simple, really. My camera broke. I'm buying a new one. I'd like to discuss some of the current options.

Maybe I'll just take _cy_'s advice and go rummage around for some old Nikon glass, look through it, and maybe if I blink real fuckin' hard it'll all work out. Clearly, the idea of buying a decent and modern camera body is so irrelevant.
apologies for screwing up your thread ... I was not the one that start it.. just responded to the crap ..

never said a modern camera body is irrelevant ... just that the shooter and glass are more important.

to me your investment in glass is what counts. upgrades to your camera body should take advantage of that glass. this is assuming one has quality glass to begin with.

making a change from Nikon to Canon means starting all over again. which if one doesn't have much of an investment in glass... not a big deal...
_cy_ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 01:47 AM   #45
Sylvia
vir sapit qui pauca loqui
 
Sylvia's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2006
Location: taking pics
Oddometer: 3,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikonsAndVStroms View Post
Shoot a D300 and a Fuji S5 Pro side by side....that dynamic range is key especially in landscape or other high contrast shots. There are quirks like banding on some sensors or if it's good for recovering shadows or highlights but the DXO chart is a good overall tool.

Now there are other factors like the ease of use or speed of the camera (neither are the Fuji's strong points) but for dynamic range it wasn't till the D3x IIRC that anyone got up to that level.
Dear Nikons etc,
On the Nikon side I still own D40,D90,D300,D3,D3x,D4,D800e, lets not talk Canon right now.
What was it you were trying to tell me about that I wasn't hopefully across already?
__________________
Slightly Orange

Sylvia is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 02:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014