I Think its Time for Canon to Start Using Sony Sensors...

Started Nov 23, 2012 | Discussions thread
Sdaniella
Regular MemberPosts: 307Gear list
Like?
You expect US to give up Canon Superiority in Low Light (Sony/Nikon/All Others Lag) No Thx!!!
In reply to R Johns, Nov 25, 2012

You expect US to give up Canon Superiority in Low Light (Sony/Nikon/All Others Lag) No Thx!!!

Canon is pushing so far ahead in Low Light to nose bleed levels, no mfr can keep up, all the rest can do is make sensors so people can play in brighter/contrastier conditions where they are perpetually pp their RAW images just to make their contrast shots flatter with a HDR type of taming of extreme DR inherent in brighter conditions.

That compromise of merely playing in the brighter conditions is UNREMARKABLE because even WEB/CELLPHONES have had this capability for at least 10+ years, it's OLD TECH, just carried over to dSLRs, and 'improved' here and there for low light, in Sony/Nikon and other mfr sensors; but nowhere close to where Canon is at right now.

If you are a Canon shooter, and still play in good bright/contrasty light scenarios where there is inherently higher DR, and love to pp for a HDR 'fixed' look (natural dynamic range), you can opt for Sony gear. But those of us who know Sony falters heavily (as do Nikons that use their sensors) in low light, mushy obscuring NR at higher ISOs in extreme low light, will stay far away from them, and stick to Class Leading Canon sensored EOS dSLRs.

DxOMark's scores literally bear ZERO correlation to IQ when it comes to LOW LIGHT shooting.

Anyone who thinks 'baseline' ISO is 100 or 200 still has their head in the limiting/restricted film era, and completely forgot how ISO 800-1600 (even in FILM) pushed the bar higher. Many of us who mastered ISO 400-1600+ in the film era expect much more in digital. But it was slow coming for all digital mfr till much later. For me, it wasn't till the 5DMkII, did ISO 800 become the new 'base' ISO for me. No reason to ever shoot lower ISOs at all because any gains are negligible, and not much less noise. Sony/Nikon shooters have consistently shown pp RAW ISO 100/200 that are as noisy/noisier than ISO 1600-3200 on Canons, so why bother at all to shoot unusually low ISOs in low light and 'fix it' later with only worse looking IQ? NO THX.

The less one goes off to DIY-Jpeg generation via 3rd party RAW processors, the better.

All the tweaking in RAW will only give you significant gains relative to In-Camera Jpegs if done incompetently. No sense showing us comparisons of your own RAW vs JPEGs if the JPEGs are NOT optimally captured to begin with. Too many who are 'master pp of RAW' are newbs in Jpegs (not optimally exposed); and their own comparisons are proof of it. Fail. Get over it. You have a lot to learn before you even know how to utilize Canon sensors for Jpegs optimally straight out of the camera. Minor pp for presentation size or type light display (projection/computer) or opaque (print/paper-ink)

Here is a perfect NEUTRAL observer (Bill Claff, a Nikoner) of the Canon/Nikon(Sony) sensor strengths:

Photographic Dynamic Range Shadow Improvement versus ISO

DSC RX100 vs OM-D E-M5 vs EOS 50D/7D/5D vs 5DMkII/5DMkIII vs 1DX vs D3/x/s/D4 vs D800/E/600

You can custom STRETCH the graph, and move the slider on the right to uncover many other dSLR models to CHOOSE from for inclusion/exclusion on the graph.

You can SEE that the 1DX and 5DMkIII are way ahead of the pack in low light, anything beyond base ISO of 800+, nothing else can keep up. THIS IS WHY WE LIKE CANON, NOT SONY/NIKON or others. We like to play in 'difficult' light, not 'easy bright' light. We don't mind sacrificing 'fix-it pp RAW' to subdue high contrast scenarios in bright conditions (we most likely know how to shoot jpegs exposed optimally straight out of the camera than others do, because we push the limits in and master Extreme LOW LIGHT)

To ask Canon to stuff Sony sensors in their EOS dSLRs is to knock them down to Sony's level of low light weakness and unremarkable HDR/bright light strength which none of us are interested in. If it does interest you, go for Sony/Nikon, and be satisfied with their gear options.

Bill Claff doesn't even bother with Sony NEX/SLTs, and most of us know their sensor capabilities are garbage for IQ in low light, and the RX100 shows this too, albeit with slight 'improvements'. No doubt Sony is innovative in other areas, like 'sweeping panorama' but that's about it, nothing more. As of late, Sony has come out with 'global shutter' on one of their new upcoming videocams, which is not easy to do for any mfr.

I'd LOVE to see where Canon's PowerShot G1 X compares wrt 5DMkIII and 1DX on his chart; as it now rivals MOST competitors APS-C sensored dSLRs/NEX/SLTs, never mind it's own 60D/650D and EOS M. This means that there is plenty to look forward to in the 70D/750D/EOS M 'Pro' next time round.  Maybe even a PowerShot Pro1 X will one up the G1 X, for integrated compact prosumer shooters; nothing else comes close for digicams.

 Sdaniella's gear list:Sdaniella's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
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