D600 RAW is not much better than A900

Started Sep 27, 2012 | Discussions thread
Fraxinus excelsior
Regular MemberPosts: 348
Like?
Re: Look in the darker areas
In reply to rhlpetrus, Sep 30, 2012

rhlpetrus wrote:

Fraxinus excelsior wrote:

Yes but look at the lower ISO's there the D600 has more luminance noise than a900 in some of the blue colors and the reds render way better on the a900 where the reds in D600 looks blotchy!!

It depends usually on the profile used. And this is ACR still in beta version, so I would not read too much into these samples.

Well its same comparing D800 with a900 and Canon 5D MKII / III. The a900 are obviously better in some aspects.

I think it's so marginal a difference that it makes sense to jump oveyr this geneation sensors for me. Ok if Sony makes a 36 MP FF I would be tempted if I had the money.

These sensors are much better than the previous one, in all aspects, especially in low ISO DR.

No they are not munch better. They are marginally better. And compare the 5D MKIII sensor to the a900. In lower ISOs the a900 are better regarding shadow noise and DR. Thats a fact. I think thats remarkable good for a 4 year old construction and wont call the new cameras much better. Maybe we should call the Canons marginally worse than a900;-)

I must admit that I also used the word much quitr often but has realised its not true it really is marginally.

Kind regards

D

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow