Why do DPR DR measurements show Canon similar to Sony sensors?
I've read any number of claims and reviews stating that the Sony full frame sensor used in the Nikon D800 and Sony A7r is capable of significantly better DR than Canon ff sensors at low ISO.
This seems to manifest itself better results from "pulling up" shadow areas by 3+ stops in pp. This should allow less use of HDR in high contrast situations. I could make less use of MagicLantern's Dual-ISO.
However, when I look at DPR charts showing DR, and comparing Canon FF to Nikon and Sony, this difference seems minimal, and perhaps the gray wedge chart favors the 5d3.
The above makes it appear that 5d3 is best, as far as widest DR. Do I not understand how to read this?
Is this because the chart is reporting "per pixel", and thus not really taking into account the extra pixels of the Sony sensor? I believe that is what happens with DPR's NR charts.
Is there some kind of measurement that would correspond to what a very high quality Adobe-98 monitor could show of a benchmark high contrast scene with appropriate pp? Or a very high quality 12-color wide format printer on premium glossy paper?
The chart doesn't indicate what ISO was used. My assumption would be base ISO. Or not?
Is the "pull up by 3+ stops" challenge a different issue? Would this correspond to some test of how many wedges can be accurately shown/printed with less than [fill-in-the-blank] noise?
BTW: Is the 5d3 really that much better than the 6d wrt DR?
|Post (hide subjects)||Posted by||When|
|Apr 25, 2014|
|Apr 25, 2014||3|
|May 2, 2014|
|May 2, 2014||1|
|May 2, 2014||1|
|Mig-17-1 by bbmach|
from Low Pass
|Rotting Gracefully by Mond|
from Natural Decay
|attic by wgjohnston|
from In the attic, or in the basement!
|Ox Bow Aspen by McFrost|
from cell phones - nature photographs