[Simen1]

Who said Canon is trying to catch up with Sony (on low ISO DR i assume)? I think Canon have are strategically aiming at high ISO performance metrics and never prioritized low ISO DR. For most people Canon low ISO DR are less of a problem if exposed correctly, then high ISO metrics are. The last decade Sony have been catching up with Canon on high ISO and just the few past years Sony have been quite even or surpassed Canon.

[reh321]

Who said Canon is trying to catch up with Sony (on low ISO DR i assume)? I think Canon have are strategically aiming at high ISO performance metrics and never prioritized low ISO DR. For most people Canon low ISO DR are less of a problem if exposed correctly, then high ISO metrics are. The last decade Sony have been catching up with Canon on high ISO and just the few past years Sony have been quite even or surpassed Canon.

How does the 5DS fit into this model? The higher ISO performance is so miserable that not even Canon recommends / allows going "really high".

I switched recently from Canon back to Pentax because, although I still respect Canon lenses (even the less expensive ones), I feel that their sensor development isn't keeping up.

[ogl]

Who said Canon is trying to catch up with Sony (on low ISO DR i assume)? I think Canon have are strategically aiming at high ISO performance metrics and never prioritized low ISO DR. For most people Canon low ISO DR are less of a problem if exposed correctly, then high ISO metrics are. The last decade Sony have been catching up with Canon on high ISO and just the few past years Sony have been quite even or surpassed Canon.

Is it a joke?
Canon's sensor technologies are far behind Sony. Look at DXO results. It's fact. Canon is not sensor's leader for many years. Sony has even the best MF sensor now. If we say about FF and APS-C - Canon has no any chances. Can't catch.

Remember 18 MP APS-C sensor from Canon - it's rather mediocre product for many years.

[cali92rs]

Look at DXO results. It's fact. Canon is not sensor's leader for many years. Sony has even the best MF sensor now. If we say about FF and APS-C - Canon has no any chances. Can't catch.

So no one shoots at ISOs higher than 400 huh?

Attached Images

 

[ogl]

D810 has 36 MP, 6D has 20 MP. Anyway, D810 is better than 6D in terms of noise.

[Simen1]

ogl, you tried to document that by DxO data that doesn't exist. Canons bad overall score is caused by low DR at low ISO, not by high ISO performance.

[cali92rs]

D810 has 36 MP, 6D has 20 MP. Anyway, D810 is better than 6D in terms of noise.

You mention DxO measurements in the prior post and you didn't even bother to look at what the DxO graphs show.
The SNRs are right on top of each other. Even at low ISOs they are close enough that you would not be able to tell which one is noisier.

This is how internet BS perpetuates...people like Ogl spout off misleading half truths, because he heard it from another message board (and obviously either didn't see the actual measurements or doesn't know how to interpret them) and it goes round and round until eventually it becomes "fact".
For example, Canon sensors are a joke. Well, if you only shoot at base ISO up to ~ISO 600, then yes the Nikon has better DR. But if you shoot anything that moves in a semi cloudy day, in shade, indoors etc you are going to be at ISO 800 really easily and the Canon has better DR at that point.
And the noise characteristics are very similar across the board.

Granted, DxO is misleading because their overall sensor score is a joke. But hopefully most consumers of goods with a price over $2000 are saavy enough to hit the measurements tab and not just look at the first thing that pops up.

---

Last edited by cali92rs; 09-01-2015 at 09:09 AM.

[osv]

some pretty big differences in pixel count there... look at the k5 vs. k3? after normalizing at print resolution, it's a tight battle in terms of noise: Pentax K-3 versus Pentax K-5 - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

so dxo charts don't tell the whole story, they can't for instance measure file latitude, which is where canon sensors fail miserably: Sony A7R teams up with Canon glass

"The burning question here though, for some, is how the 5DS cameras hold up to the competition. In a nutshell, these cameras can't compete with the impressive dynamic range, and therefore exposure latitude, of cameras like the Nikon D750, which is tolerant of even 4 to 6 EV pushes of base ISO shots that tend to show unacceptable levels of noise with the 5DS R. That said, the 5DS R does hold up well enough to more smaller pushes of 2 to 3 EV, although a close look at the pixel-level will show noise creeping into shadows that wouldn't be there in a camera with better sensor performance (lower read noise)."
Canon EOS 5DS / 5DS R First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review

i've seen some tech threads on dpr that go into canon sensor weaknesses in depth, it's pretty sad.

[ogl]

Ummm...are you even looking at the graphs?
At ISOs less than ~600, yes the D810 in terms of noise...At ISOs greater than 600, the 6D is better in terms of noise.

Canon is orange - it's lower than Nikon (red).
Right?

Right

SNR18%
ISO800
Canon 6D - SNR -36.2 dB
Nikon D810 - SNR- 36.8 dB

ISO1600
Canon 6D - 33.4 dB
Nikon D810 - 33.8 dB

ISO3200
Canon 6D - 30.3 dB
Nikon D810 - 30.8 dB

Close..but Nikon is better

Any questions?

---------- Post added 09-01-2015 at 09:15 AM ----------

Dynamic range (Nikon has also ISO64 - 14.76EV)

ISO100
Canon 6D - 12.11 EV
Nikon D810 - 14.36 EV


ISO400
11.9 EV vs 12.63EV

ISO800
11.55 EV vs 11.67 EV

ISO1600
11.12 EV vs 10.72 EV

ISO3200
10.44 vs 10.03


But who cares about DR at ISO3200 and higher??? The difference smaller than 0.5EV.

[cali92rs]

Canon is orange - it's lower than Nikon (red).
Right?

Right

SNR18%
ISO800
Canon 6D - SNR -36.2 dB
Nikon D810 - SNR- 36.8 dB

ISO1600
Canon 6D - 33.4 dB
Nikon D810 - 33.8 dB

ISO3200
Canon 6D - 30.3 dB
Nikon D810 - 30.8 dB

Close..but Nikon is better

Any questions?

Hah...so it goes from being a "joke" to "close" in the span of a day.
And good luck trying to see the noise difference between 30.3 db and 30.8 db

---------- Post added 09-01-15 at 09:22 AM ----------

Canon is orange - it's lower than Nikon (red).
Right?

Right

SNR18%
ISO800
Canon 6D - SNR -36.2 dB
Nikon D810 - SNR- 36.8 dB

ISO1600
Canon 6D - 33.4 dB
Nikon D810 - 33.8 dB

ISO3200
Canon 6D - 30.3 dB
Nikon D810 - 30.8 dB

Close..but Nikon is better

Any questions?

---------- Post added 09-01-2015 at 09:15 AM ----------

Dynamic range (Nikon has also ISO64 - 14.76EV)

ISO100
Canon 6D - 12.11 EV
Nikon D810 - 14.36 EV


ISO400
11.9 EV vs 12.63EV

ISO800
11.55 EV vs 11.67 EV

ISO1600
11.12 EV vs 10.72 EV

ISO3200
10.44 vs 10.03


But who cares about DR at ISO3200 and higher??? The difference smaller than 0.5EV.

You are making my point and you don't realize it.
They are close except at base ISO...so if you are landscape shooter you should probably go with the Nikon. But if you shoot anything that moves, the Canon would be better.
To say one is a "joke" is a misleading generalization.

[ogl]

Lets compare 36 MP FF sensor from Canon with 36 MP sensor from Nikon.

[osv]

compare 50mp canon with everything else, it's so weak that canon won't even let you go over 12800iso on the camera:

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

[Nicolas06]

The problem is what you are trying to achieve... You usually don't need to push you shadows 5-6EV. The Canon sensor is good enough. You don't need usually 50MP neither or even FF so you could be on that K5 or whatever equivalent in your brand.

If you are a good photographer, you are going to get great photos anyway.

Now for people that listen to marketing and care of tech spes depending of the brand they'll explain the key is how much more details you'll get out of 50MP with fantastics L glass from Canon or how much dynamic range you'll get from that fantastic D810...

Funny that if you really care you can get both from a 645Z and even more. But honestly that not a camera you'll use at 12800 isos or to heavily correct exposure you completely messed up even if it will work better than with the others. No you'll want a perfect picture at iso 100 from it and ge the benefit of bigger lenses with better rendering characteristics. But that's another type of marketing... That's seems to be quite innexpensive as the thing sell itself without much effort.

Anyway, all of this depend where you want to put the priority and even through I also think that Canon sensor are nothing to rave about it doesn't prevent them to be worldwide leader and even to have increased their market share recently. People don't buy DxO specs apparently. Honestly, due to market share and quantity of pro gear in Canon ecosystem I would bet that many of the best picture being taken theses years are from Canon... Well when they are not taken by Smartphones that is.

Fully depend of what will be the most important in the picture... The technical quality of it or the content like a war report, the bare ass of some celebrity or simply the emotion of peoples. Sure technique help a lot like shallow deph of field to isolate subject or decent high iso performance in low light but other technique can be as important... Many studio shoots are done with quite some deph of field and flashes are comonly used to craft the light and improve it.

[JimmyDranox]

Lab test, SNR, DxO, etc. They are all done on new cameras. But I have seen how quickly Sony sensors are aging, giving more and more noise even at very low ISO, so I really hope that Pentax will change to other sensor maker. And DR is the easiest thing to enhance in PP, not like noise.

[Simen1]

Lab test, SNR, DxO, etc. They are all done on new cameras. But I have seen how quickly Sony sensors are aging, giving more and more noise even at very low ISO, so I really hope that Pentax will change to other sensor maker. And DR is the easiest thing to enhance in PP, not like noise.

- Are sensors aging in terms of noise? How? What? How much?
- Enhancing DR in PP presupposes the DR are in the raw file in the first place.