Dynamic Range

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
Flat view
challenger12 New Member • Posts: 24
Dynamic Range

In the interminable format discussions, one often repeated pearl of ‘wisdom’ is the alleged superiority in dynamic range of full-frame vs MFT. Particularly for landscapes. Now as a MFT user, who mainly does landscapes and who continues to be amazed at what information can be pulled from well exposed, carefully processed MFT RAW files (Capture One 12 with luma gradients - wow), I do wonder what all the fuss is about.

I’ve never been able to see that much difference from personally processing RAW files from other cameras that have been kindly provided online. So I just thought I’d dig a bit deeper to see what was behind this wisdom. Here are a few bits of data:

From: http://photonstophotos.net/

Sony A7iii dynamic range at ISO 100, 10.7

G9 at ISO 100, 10.0

EM1ii at 200, 9.8 (pixel shift 11.7, I assume something similar would happen on the G9?)

Fuji X-T3 at 160, 10.3

From: PDN Online

Sony A7iii at ISO 100, 10.1 f-stops


Fuji X-T3 at ISO 160, 9.1 f-stops


G9 at ISO 200, 10.6 f-stops


I assume these are all ‘test rig’ data and that real world differences would be even less? My own conclusion is “meh” and certainly nothing that proves I’m missing out significantly by continuing to use MFT.

Fujifilm X-T3 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow