Reading mode: Light Dark

Has 30D more dynamic range than the 40D?

Go to last post
1st he compared ISO1600 vs. DPs ISO 100 tests

2nd he forgot that the ISO between the 30D and 40D are not comparable, canon used to also be like ISO x + at least 1/3 stop that's why he sees so much more in the shadows, he didn't actually take the same exposure.
Lupti said:
Look at this:

http://www.jerrykooyman.com/reviews/canon-30d-40d/

I really ask myself how this can be. Has anyone done a similar
comparison?

--
You made a picture...fine!
Click to expand...
--
http://skibum4.smugmug.com
(work in progress, a few galleries up, many more to come)
 
First and foremost, Phil reported the differences at ISO 100. The higher ISOs give narrower dynamic rates.

The tester used ISO 1600 and does not show us dynamic range. At best he only shows that the exposure from the same settings between the two cameras produce different exposures. That's nothing shocking. It's a known fact.

Olga
 
namely
Lupti said:
the dynamic range test of the 40D is not right
Click to expand...
For examples see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=28875220

Regarding the 40D: DPReview states

@ ISO 200: 9.1 EV

@ ISO 400, 800 and 1600: 8.9 EV - this is unserious. According to my measurement (based on non-demosaiced raw data) the useful gain in the shadows from 200 to 1600 is only about 0.5 EV, i.e. the loss is about 2.5 EV, not 0.2 EV

@ ISO 3200: 7.4 EV. Now, this is plainly ridiculous. ISO 3200 on the 40D is a numerical derivative of ISO 1600; the difference is exactly 1 EV.

I don't have suitable 30D raw images for a comparison between the 30D and the 40D.

--
Gabor

http://www.panopeeper.com/panorama/pano.htm
 
Clearly that fellow doesn't know what dynamic range is, let alone how to measure it.
 
DougH said:
Clearly that fellow doesn't know what dynamic range is, let alone how
to measure it.
Click to expand...
Not to mention proper English ! ("better that the ...") !!
 
Gabor,
You mentioned 9.1 EV for Iso 200... What would be the value for ISO 100?
I'm curious...
 
wow! So your setting is mostly 200?

Would you recommend better staying at 200 or 320? I always use 100 thinking it's the "cleanest" one, but 200 would be better being faster sometimes.
 
All the 1/3 step ISOs are fake (as is 3200) with the 40D. They are numerical derivatives of the full stop ISOs, they don't represent any true ISO gain.

For example 250 is created by multiplying the ISO 200 pixel values by 1.27; ISO 320 is created by multiplying the ISO 400 values by 0.78. ISO 3200 is simply doubling ISO 1600.

Never use the fractional ISOs with raw data. You can achieve the very same in raw conversion. The full stop + 1/3 step ISOs (125, 250, 500, 1000) are forbidden , because they reduce the dynamic range by 1/3 stop.

Back to your question: I practically never use 100. On the other hand, I don't use anything higher than 200 in high DR situation, because every ISO stop reduces the DR by more than 2/3 stop.

--
Gabor

http://www.panopeeper.com/panorama/pano.htm
 
Gabor,

Thank you very much for your explanation! You are a great asset in this forum! Now I see and understand several issues I had in the past. Once, reviewing some portraits, I found a difference between my tests @ ISO 100, 200, 320 and 400.

I found 320 noisier than the rest but thought it was my mistake. No I guess it was due the conversions.
Thank you very much for enlighten me!
 
To call one camera better based upon a quick picture inside a camera store.

Even though the exposure values are the same, it is obvious the 30D shot had "more" exposure/over exposed compared to the 40D. The 30D shot really looks like the shadows were lightened but yo can see the spot light on the back wall is much more blownout in the 30D shot than in the 40D shot.

It looks like, as others have said, that the 30D sensor is just more sensitive to light than the 40D which is in no relation to dynamic range of the sensor. Dynamic Range being the ability to show detail in highlights without blown highlights and the ability to show detail in shadows without pure black recorded.
 
Were they both on same metering mode?. Evaluative vs. Spot metering could change exposure as well. Also keep in mind that if you half press shutter and recompose you get a totally different exposure unless the cameras were on tripod and pointing at exact same scene which I doubt.

--
Alex
====================================
 
I'll forgive his English since English is not his native tongue, although there is a difference between a simple mistake on a forum post where you may not have the ability to go back and edit (or care to) and a web page which should have been given more attention. However, since he hasn't been back to address his shortfalls as a camera tester, one must assume his original post was more spam than substance.
 
So while the 30D don´t has more dynamic range the sensor has an advantage in low-light. I really don´t understand why Canon has given up their sensitivity advantage.

I always have to exposure about +1/3 or 2/3 to get the same results as with the 30D.

Some people say 30D was overexposuring. For me, the 40D is underexposuring.

--
You made a picture...fine!
 
I have both cameras. His test results are based on a flawed test & he has therefore drawn an erroneous conclusion. Both cameras are capable of taking excellent photos. The 40D has many more features & is more versatile.
--
One day I'll learn how to post photos. I am 61 & technically challenged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top