Ignorant Question #1 - 5D Mark IV is the only camera with Dual Pixel Raw?

[bclaff]

If so, why do you think that is?
If not, what other models offer Dual Pixel Raw?

 

[arbitrage]

Yes, so far it is the only one.

I tried it but once to see if it would allow me to shift DOF onto an eye if just off....it will shift but the picture goes very soft. Absolutely useless feature so far. Hopefully Canon is working on it more for future bodies. I have a feeling it may be something that we never hear about again but who knows.

 

[AronQZ]

IMO simply to have another headline feature to advertise that sounds nice on paper but is not very useful at all (a distraction in other words to make the video negatives less painful along with the price).

 

[AlephNull]

If so, why do you think that is?
If not, what other models offer Dual Pixel Raw?

 

[brightcolours]

If so, why do you think that is?
If not, what other models offer Dual Pixel Raw?

 

[GriffinClubMerv]

Duel Pixel RAW is little more than a by-product of the Duel Pixel Autofocus system that Canon has been rolling out across its product line. I suspect Canon realized after over-promoting the DP RAW function with the 5D Mk4 that there was little to be gained by integrating that manifestation of the DP autofocus system into other cameras.

 

[gossamer88]

The 70D was the first to feature DPAF.

 

[bclaff]

If so, why do you think that is?
If not, what other models offer Dual Pixel Raw?

It was the first body with Dual Pixel Raw. No idea what the next one will be.

It was the second body with Dual Pixel AutoFocus, though - the 80D was first, and the 6D Mark II is the third.

EOS M5, EOS M6, EOS 1D-X mk II, 200D?

As far as I know: 1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, 70D, 80D, 6D Mark II, M5, and M6 have Dual Pixel Auto Focus (DPAF). (70D was first).
My question was to confirm that of these only the 5D Mark IV offers Dual Pixel Raw.
I think we're pretty close to confirming that now.

Regards,

 

[ogniw]

Yes, so far it is the only one.

I tried it but once to see if it would allow me to shift DOF onto an eye if just off....it will shift but the picture goes very soft. Absolutely useless feature so far. Hopefully Canon is working on it more for future bodies. I have a feeling it may be something that we never hear about again but who knows.

IMHO Canon made one big fault with this feature: The first frame in the raw file is a+b while the second frame in the raw file is just b. That sounds not like a problem, but because both frames have the same bit depth a+b can clip at highlights and there's no possibility to completly recover a from a+b.

If they would have saved only a for the first frame and b for the second frame that would have been much better...

See also https://discuss.pixls.us/t/is-there...os-5d-mark-iv-dual-pixel-raw-files-in-rt/3732

 

[bclaff]

Yes, so far it is the only one.

I tried it but once to see if it would allow me to shift DOF onto an eye if just off....it will shift but the picture goes very soft. Absolutely useless feature so far. Hopefully Canon is working on it more for future bodies. I have a feeling it may be something that we never hear about again but who knows.

IMHO Canon made one big fault with this feature: The first frame in the raw file is a+b while the second frame in the raw file is just b. That sounds not like a problem, but because both frames have the same bit depth a+b can clip at highlights and there's no possibility to completly recover a from a+b.

If they would have saved only a for the first frame and b for the second frame that would have been much better...

See also https://discuss.pixls.us/t/is-there...os-5d-mark-iv-dual-pixel-raw-files-in-rt/3732

I agree that would have been a better approach (but would have broken every raw reader :-D )
At least the b frame can theoretically be used for 1 stop of highlight recovery.

So the question becomes ... why hasn't Canon continued with Dual Pixel Raw?

 

[ogniw]

At least the b frame can theoretically be used for 1 stop of highlight recovery.

Exactly that was the reason I tried to start a discussion here . But the interest was quite low

 

[gimp_dad]

If so, why do you think that is?
If not, what other models offer Dual Pixel Raw?

It was the first body with Dual Pixel Raw. No idea what the next one will be.

It was the second body with Dual Pixel AutoFocus, though - the 80D was first, and the 6D Mark II is the third.

EOS M5, EOS M6, EOS 1D-X mk II, 200D?

As far as I know: 1D X Mark II, 5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, 70D, 80D, 6D Mark II, M5, and M6 have Dual Pixel Auto Focus (DPAF). (70D was first).

Of this list I own the 1DX2, 5D4, 7D2, 80D, M6. Only 5D4 supports DPRAW. There are no other Canon cameras that support DPRAW as of right now.

My question was to confirm that of these only the 5D Mark IV offers Dual Pixel Raw.
I think we're pretty close to confirming that now.

Regards,

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at http://www.photonstophotos.net )

 

[gimp_dad]

At least the b frame can theoretically be used for 1 stop of highlight recovery.

Same here, ogniw.

If the b frame truly gives a measurable improvement in highlight recovery then something is very wrong. Either

1. Canon knows this but doesn't mention it and doesn't care that most reviewers won't give Canon full benefit for the most important figure of merit that would improve their position against their competitors, or
2. Canon doesn't actually know that there is more DR (in the form of highlight recovery) available and therefore has failed to mention it so they can get credit for it.

Either scenario is highly disturbing in my mind. If there is useful information above 16383 in the raw data and it is being ignored, then the 5D4 should have a DR score more like that of the leader: the Sony A7R2! Is it really possible that Canon doesn't know about this or care about it? I find that hard to believe. Even though they are the market leader, they have given up share to Sony and Nikon because of this characteristic.

The alternative is that the b frame just allows the slider to move further (virtually speaking) but doesn't actually recover more information. I sure wish someone who knows how to dissect raw file information would do this analysis...

Exactly that was the reason I tried to start a discussion here . But the interest was quite low

 

[ogniw]

With Rawtherapee >= 5.1 you can view both frames of dual-pixel cr2 files. If you view them with neutral profile (which does not change exposure) you will clearly see that frame a is about one stop brighter than frame b. And you will be able to get highlights of frame b which are blown out in frame a.

 

[gimp_dad]

With Rawtherapee >= 5.1 you can view both frames of dual-pixel cr2 files. If you view them with neutral profile (which does not change exposure) you will clearly see that frame a is about one stop brighter than frame b.

Yea. I get that. It doesn't mean there is more information. It is just (approximately) frame b with each value divided by 2. If you divide a clipped value by 2 it didn't add any information even though the resulting number is half of the original number.

If there are values in frame a that are greater than 8192 and they represent actual values read from the corresponding half pixel, then there is meaningful data above 16384 when a and b are combined (which is being thrown away by the RAW file generation). Yet the RAW format they are using doesn't support values above 16384. If this is the case, it is a failure of epic proportions at Canon.

 

[DotCom Editor]

It is the FIRST to support Dual Pixel RAW. By definition, until a second model comes along that provides support, the 5D4 will indeed be the only camera to feature this capability.

 

[ogniw]

Take a look at this example. I made it is a poc:

https://discuss.pixls.us/t/is-there...5d-mark-iv-dual-pixel-raw-files-in-rt/3732/11

Edit: I have to get some sleep now. Will be here for further discussion tomorrow

 

[gimp_dad]

Take a look at this example. I made it is a poc:

https://discuss.pixls.us/t/is-there...5d-mark-iv-dual-pixel-raw-files-in-rt/3732/11

Edit: I have to get some sleep now. Will be here for further discussion tomorrow

Thanks. I saw another example on a thread in DPR a while back. It's hard to tell if the darker frame is actually giving new information or not. For the example shown here it would be interesting to see the highlights of the image on the left brought down another stop. Then, it would be slightly easier to guess at the clipping differences. Usually clipped regions that are reduced too far start to show as grey or some other color with a hard unnatural outline to the region.

Just in case there actually is a benefit I tend to shoot in DPRAW when I think about it and am shooting something that has very low FPS needs (amazing how slow bursts are with DPRAW). Unfortunately the custom settings don't save the DPRAW vs non-DPRAW parameter, otherwise this would be a lot easier to manage.

 

[charbsindxb]

Tony Northrup has a great video on it on YouTube illustrating what it does...which is essentially nothing.

It's useless at this stage and point in time.

 

[bclaff]

Tony Northrup has a great video on it on YouTube illustrating what it does...which is essentially nothing.

It's useless at this stage and point in time.

On the other hand, here's an example of what can be accomplished:

Normal image:



Image using Dual Pixel Raw information for highlight recover (note especially the sky):



Details:
Canon 5D Mark IV Dual Pixel Mode. Oh Yes, Highlights Are There!

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at http://www.photonstophotos.net )