What should Canon conclude about Nikon D5's disappointing low-ISO DR?

lovingtheview · Mar 28, 2016

I know that Nikon offers other models than the D5 which may offer optimal DR performance, for example, the 810.

However, "the fact that the D5 has poorer base ISO dynamic range than its current peers" [from DpReview] is unflattering for the erstwhile top DR vendor's flagship model.

What, therefore, might Canon conclude from this surprising development as they weigh Nikon/Sony's current capability to further improve their Sensor's low-ISO DR? Is it possible that Sony has hit a technological barrier in sensor fabrication? If so, will the encouraging news on the 80D and 1DXII sensors mean that, while Sony/Nikon may be winded [even momentarily], it is time for Canon to get back into the DR limelight? After all, Canon is so fine in nearly every other aspect.

The above are questions, not assertions, from an all-Canon user/owner. I do not dislike Nikon at all, but it does get a bit disheartening to see my brand of choice [Canon] getting manhandled for so many years, after so many dashed hopes for better new models, by its chief competitors.

Sincerely,

Lovingtheview

ImageAmateur · Mar 28, 2016

lovingtheview said:
I know that Nikon offers other models than the D5 which may offer optimal DR performance, for example, the 810.

However, "the fact that the D5 has poorer base ISO dynamic range than its current peers" [from DpReview] is unflattering for the erstwhile top DR vendor's flagship model.

What, therefore, might Canon conclude from this surprising development as they weigh Nikon/Sony's current capability to further improve their Sensor's low-ISO DR? Is it possible that Sony has hit a technological barrier in sensor fabrication? If so, will the encouraging news on the 80D and 1DXII sensors mean that, while Sony/Nikon may be winded [even momentarily], it is time for Canon to get back into the DR limelight? After all, Canon is so fine in nearly every other aspect.

The above are questions, not assertions, from an all-Canon user/owner. I do not dislike Nikon at all, but it does get a bit disheartening to see my brand of choice [Canon] getting manhandled for so many years, after so many dashed hopes for better new models, by its chief competitors.

Sincerely,

Lovingtheview

That part in bold, do you think it still stands?

Here, D5 vs 80D, D810 D7200 at base ISO +3EV.

The 80D, as you are aware an APS-C sensor, seems to perform admirably.

Bodes VERY well for the 1DXII.

Yes, I am surprised by the D5 samples. Maybe it is better at High ISO, even then, surprising for a camera that wedding, event , sport folks use for everything.

Or does it now demand that one has both a D5 and D750 or D810? Some prefer two of the same.

This is now quite worrying for the D500. If the D500 sacrifices at low ISO, I think that will be an issue for many, as many use those APS-C pro cameras as do-it-all , two bodies and do everything, because it is cost effective with top notch gear....or expected to be.

ISO100+3EV D5, 80D, D810, D7200

ISO100+3EV D5, 80D, D810, D7200

--
Wishing You Good Light.

rxb dc · Mar 28, 2016

Nikon actually states that it is an in-house developed sensor so it does not look like they are using Sony technology. It is quite possible that they do not have the on chip ADC that seems to be needed for low noise/high DR.

Given the high ISO capability, probably a reasonable compromise.

exdeejjjaaaa · Mar 28, 2016

lovingtheview said:
What, therefore, might Canon conclude from this surprising development as they weigh Nikon/Sony's current capability to further improve their Sensor's low-ISO DR? Is it possible that Sony has hit a technological barrier in sensor fabrication?

but Sony Semi has nothing to do with sensors used by Nikon in D5, D4s, D4, D3s, D3 cameras

lovingtheview · Mar 28, 2016

ImageAmateur said:
lovingtheview said:

I know that Nikon offers other models than the D5 which may offer optimal DR performance, for example, the 810.

However, "the fact that the D5 has poorer base ISO dynamic range than its current peers" [from DpReview] is unflattering for the erstwhile top DR vendor's flagship model.

What, therefore, might Canon conclude from this surprising development as they weigh Nikon/Sony's current capability to further improve their Sensor's low-ISO DR? Is it possible that Sony has hit a technological barrier in sensor fabrication? If so, will the encouraging news on the 80D and 1DXII sensors mean that, while Sony/Nikon may be winded [even momentarily], it is time for Canon to get back into the DR limelight? After all, Canon is so fine in nearly every other aspect.

The above are questions, not assertions, from an all-Canon user/owner. I do not dislike Nikon at all, but it does get a bit disheartening to see my brand of choice [Canon] getting manhandled for so many years, after so many dashed hopes for better new models, by its chief competitors.

Sincerely,

Lovingtheview

Click to expand...

That part in bold, do you think it still stands?

I understand what you say, ImageAmateur, and your point is well taken. We Canonites can indeed take heart that real progress has been made. I am delighted with my 70D, and want an 80D, but the 70 is still "new" to me. I am indeed optimistic.

[I might have posted the original question in the 70D forum, but the focus of the subject was the D5.]

I'm wishing for the foreshadowed, much desired improvement in the 1DXII. There, it will carry even more significance.

Thanks for your thorough presentation and answer.

Lovingtheview

ImageAmateur said:
Here, D5 vs 80D, D810 D7200 at base ISO +3EV.

The 80D, as you are aware an APS-C sensor, seems to perform admirably.

Bodes VERY well for the 1DXII.

Yes, I am surprised by the D5 samples. Maybe it is better at High ISO, even then, surprising for a camera that wedding, event , sport folks use for everything.

Or does it now demand that one has both a D5 and D750 or D810? Some prefer two of the same.

This is now quite worrying for the D500. If the D500 sacrifices at low ISO, I think that will be an issue for many, as many use those APS-C pro cameras as do-it-all , two bodies and do everything, because it is cost effective with top notch gear....or expected to be.

ISO100+3EV D5, 80D, D810, D7200

ISO100+3EV D5, 80D, D810, D7200

--
Wishing You Good Light.

rjp85 · Mar 28, 2016

No, Sony has not hit a technological barrier. That's a ridiculous statement, lol.

It just so happens that with the D5, Nikon is going for better high ISO performance over base ISO dynamic range. I believe the 1DX2 is doing the opposite, though I expect great high ISO performance as well from the 1DX2.

If you're a working pro using a D5, chances are you're probably using a minimum ISO of 800 during most of your shooting. People who use the D5 for what it's actually made for will have no problems.

The 1DX2 looks like a promising all-around great camera by comparison.

lovingtheview · Mar 28, 2016

rxb dc said:
Nikon actually states that it is an in-house developed sensor so it does not look like they are using Sony technology. It is quite possible that they do not have the on chip ADC that seems to be needed for low noise/high DR.

Given the high ISO capability, probably a reasonable compromise.

The following is with regard to the APSC and full-frame DSLR categories. [I don't think it matters for the prestige of Canon and Nikon if they use Sharp, Sony, or Samsung processors in the P&S lines.]

I had much rather see Canon competing directly with Nikon alone than against Nikon as fortified with the formidable sensor technology of Sony. Canon vs Nikon makes for a more level playing field than Canon vs Nikon+Sony.

I must admire Nikon for going out on the battlefield without re-hiring the Goliath as their protagonist. Maybe there will be a period of equilibrium between C and N for a time, which will be good for both. I can guess that the Nikon/Sony union was not a blissful marriage for Nikon, and that they would love to be able to stand on their own feet. I can even hazard a guess that Nikon will ultimately be stronger without the recent dependency.

It will be interesting.

Lovingtheview

CG_Photography · Mar 28, 2016

I think Nikon, in theory, made the right call by trading low iso dynamic range for improved high iso performance (although I still not quite convinced how much high iso performance has been gained). Obviously it is better to improve dynamic range across the board, but these cameras should be optimized for low light high speed photography, there are simply better smaller tools for landscape. I hope Canon brings their dynamic range improvements across the whole iso range, but if they are behind at high iso (even with greater total dynamic range improvement at low iso) then they have again miscalculated imo.

What really would have made sense is to have the new sensor tech in the 5ds/r series, but that is just too logical. :-D

--
http://www.chrisgullettphotography.com

LuxAlta · Mar 28, 2016

rjp85 said:
No, Sony has not hit a technological barrier. That's a ridiculous statement, lol.

It just so happens that with the D5, Nikon is going for better high ISO performance over base ISO dynamic range. I believe the 1DX2 is doing the opposite, though I expect great high ISO performance as well from the 1DX2.

If you're a working pro using a D5, chances are you're probably using a minimum ISO of 800 during most of your shooting. People who use the D5 for what it's actually made for will have no problems.

The 1DX2 looks like a promising all-around great camera by comparison.

Or what if there really is a small trade off in DR required for high-speed read out. What if that means the 5D and 6D next gen sensors have even more low iso DR than we are seeing with the 1dx2

LuxAlta · Mar 28, 2016

CG_Photography said:
I think Nikon, in theory, made the right call by trading low iso dynamic range for improved high iso performance (although I still not quite convinced how much high iso performance has been gained). Obviously it is better to improve dynamic range across the board, but these cameras should be optimized for low light high speed photography, there are simply better smaller tools for landscape. I hope Canon brings their dynamic range improvements across the whole iso range, but if they are behind at high iso (even with greater total dynamic range improvement at low iso) then they have again miscalculated imo.

What really would have made sense is to have the new sensor tech in the 5ds/r series, but that is just too logical. :-D

Lawn Lends · Mar 28, 2016

lovingtheview said:
rxb dc said:

Nikon actually states that it is an in-house developed sensor so it does not look like they are using Sony technology. It is quite possible that they do not have the on chip ADC that seems to be needed for low noise/high DR.

Given the high ISO capability, probably a reasonable compromise.

Click to expand...

The following is with regard to the APSC and full-frame DSLR categories. [I don't think it matters for the prestige of Canon and Nikon if they use Sharp, Sony, or Samsung processors in the P&S lines.]

I had much rather see Canon competing directly with Nikon alone than against Nikon as fortified with the formidable sensor technology of Sony. Canon vs Nikon makes for a more level playing field than Canon vs Nikon+Sony.

I must admire Nikon for going out on the battlefield without re-hiring the Goliath as their protagonist. Maybe there will be a period of equilibrium between C and N for a time, which will be good for both. I can guess that the Nikon/Sony union was not a blissful marriage for Nikon, and that they would love to be able to stand on their own feet. I can even hazard a guess that Nikon will ultimately be stronger without the recent dependency.

It will be interesting.

Lovingtheview

I think Canikon have both learned not to rely on a third party for something as critical as the main sensor. I would guess Sony is looking for an arm and a leg for their latest sensor and Nikon is having second thoughts about the relationship.

lovingtheview · Mar 28, 2016

LuxAlta said:
Everyone does realize today's sensors are so close to the limits on high iso it's stupid right? Sure there is still theoretical room to improve but it's really really hard to get and probably not overly worth going after. High iso has been shot noise biased for a few years now.

Even though I read about these issues with enthusiasm every day, your first sentence/question is not obvious to me, and I wonder what percent of the forum readers do in fact understand as basic and given, that the state-of-the-art is already near the limits on high ISO.

Thanks for the clarification. Nevertheless, we are still at a moment in Canon's evolution which is quite significant. Maybe it is even a time to celebrate an advancement.

Lovingtheview

Dan_168 · Mar 28, 2016

rjp85 said:
It just so happens that with the D5, Nikon is going for better high ISO performance over base ISO dynamic range. I believe the 1DX2 is doing the opposite, though I expect great high ISO performance as well from the 1DX2.

If you're a working pro using a D5, chances are you're probably using a minimum ISO of 800 during most of your shooting. People who use the D5 for what it's actually made for will have no problems.

Sounds about right, most if not every D4/D5 owner I know are going for the high ISO and speed of those camera, and for landscape which are mostly done at low ISO, if not just base ISO 100, they all use different camera like D800/D810 or Sony A7R series, myself doing the same, I will not buy a D5 to mainly shoot landscape where base ISO DR matters, but rather use my D800E and A7R II for that and use the D5 only for low light or sport events. Just different tools for different jobs.

if I am buying a D5 ( or 1Dx for that matter), I really careless about the base ISO DR as I will almost never use it anyway, it would not hurt to have few more stop DR there but I would almost never take base ISO landscape picture with this camera and take advantage of them, I mean why even bother with a low resolution big and heavy D5 while I have a A7RII (or even a D810) with twice the resolution and better DR and so much smaller and lighter when I am going on a backpacking or any landscape photo trip?

loitokitok · Mar 28, 2016

I'll give the same comment as I did in another thread.

"What it indicates to me is that the camera manufacturers (on the whole) understand their markets far better than most people on DPR forums.

Now that may be a radical thought, which could be a bit difficult for some of us to accept, but it is quite probable that the successful manufacturers in this industry do have in their employ more than a few very sharp people who are totally focused on the needs of the market and know how to satisfy those needs. Rather than a handful of forum 'experts' who think they do.

I'll go out on a limb and say there are hardly any people on this forum who could push a D5 or a 1DX II to its limits (excluding tvstaff perhaps). There was a time when users of such products did frequent these forums but those have long since left (for a variety of reasons) and have been replaced with a very different kind of user. Now I'm not denigrating the current crowd that make up DPR's audience as it is what it is. Most of us are here because we love the techie stuff. Many of us are retired and have the time, if not always the income, to indulge in our hobby.

But the D5 and 1DXII aren't hobby products and they aren't aimed at us. Of course Nikon or Canon will be more than happy to sell us one but they sure as hell aren't making them for you and I, even if we happen to like to play our own peculiar version of top trumps with them."

halfwaythere · Mar 28, 2016

LuxAlta said:
CG_Photography said:

I think Nikon, in theory, made the right call by trading low iso dynamic range for improved high iso performance (although I still not quite convinced how much high iso performance has been gained). Obviously it is better to improve dynamic range across the board, but these cameras should be optimized for low light high speed photography, there are simply better smaller tools for landscape. I hope Canon brings their dynamic range improvements across the whole iso range, but if they are behind at high iso (even with greater total dynamic range improvement at low iso) then they have again miscalculated imo.

What really would have made sense is to have the new sensor tech in the 5ds/r series, but that is just too logical. :-D

Click to expand...

Urmas Tartes · Mar 29, 2016

LuxAlta said:
rjp85 said:

No, Sony has not hit a technological barrier. That's a ridiculous statement, lol.

It just so happens that with the D5, Nikon is going for better high ISO performance over base ISO dynamic range. I believe the 1DX2 is doing the opposite, though I expect great high ISO performance as well from the 1DX2.

If you're a working pro using a D5, chances are you're probably using a minimum ISO of 800 during most of your shooting. People who use the D5 for what it's actually made for will have no problems.

The 1DX2 looks like a promising all-around great camera by comparison.

Click to expand...

Or what if there really is a small trade off in DR required for high-speed read out. What if that means the 5D and 6D next gen sensors have even more low iso DR than we are seeing with the 1dx2

If you remember, D800 did not have clear real time live view but instead live view had decreased resolution and no first curtain electronic shutter. Same was true for a7R. All hinting, that signal readout and processing is was not that easy or speedy.

Snapper2013 · Mar 29, 2016

ImageAmateur · Mar 29, 2016

loitokitok said:
I'll give the same comment as I did in another thread.

"What it indicates to me is that the camera manufacturers (on the whole) understand their markets far better than most people on DPR forums.

Now that may be a radical thought, which could be a bit difficult for some of us to accept, but it is quite probable that the successful manufacturers in this industry do have in their employ more than a few very sharp people who are totally focused on the needs of the market and know how to satisfy those needs. Rather than a handful of forum 'experts' who think they do.

I'll go out on a limb and say there are hardly any people on this forum who could push a D5 or a 1DX II to its limits (excluding tvstaff perhaps). There was a time when users of such products did frequent these forums but those have long since left (for a variety of reasons) and have been replaced with a very different kind of user. Now I'm not denigrating the current crowd that make up DPR's audience as it is what it is. Most of us are here because we love the techie stuff. Many of us are retired and have the time, if not always the income, to indulge in our hobby.

But the D5 and 1DXII aren't hobby products and they aren't aimed at us. Of course Nikon or Canon will be more than happy to sell us one but they sure as hell aren't making them for you and I, even if we happen to like to play our own peculiar version of top trumps with them."

This is true. Clearly the D5 is geared to the specialist news, sports, event, wildlife users.

And likely those users need the ISO1600 and up more than anything else.

So, that is the focus.

The only ones I wonder about are the wedding folks, who would use the camera at all ISO's more.

But then, they have lighting, strobes etc so pushing the shadows at ISO 100 is unnecessary or should be.

Also, those folks would likely have a D810 or D750 on hand as an alternate camera anyway.

So, that gives Nikon another bonus point, i.e. selling a D810 for the low ISO stuff, as well as a D5 for those users who need it.

;-)

The ONE question I have is..... the 1DXII will surely have better low ISO DR than previous Canon's, how will the High ISO compare to the D5, if it compares will, then why could Nikon not achieve both top notch low ISO DR as well as superb High ISO performance, d but Canon can...IF the IDXII lives to expectations and early signs?

Left to be seen if it does.

NWT · Mar 29, 2016

I am amazed that people are so obsessed with the so called base ISO 100 in this digital age.

rxb dc · Mar 29, 2016

NWT said:
FNWT wrote:

I am amazed that people are so obsessed with the so called base ISO 100 in this digital age.

Why are you amazed?

Base ISO gives the highest amount of detail and DR.

High DR can surmount many high contrast situations though you still need multiple exposures in many cases.

What should Canon conclude about Nikon D5's disappointing low-ISO DR?

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Member

Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Snapper2013

Guest

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts