Nikon Z6, Z7 and Canon EOS R low-light ISO scores?

Started Dec 4, 2018 | Discussions thread
OP Maarten D Regular Member • Posts: 182
Re: Sensor measurements considered harmful

Alex Sarbu wrote:

bclaff wrote:

I am the person who used the term aggressive and I stand by that statement.
Here's an annotated graphic to give you some idea of why

We have a problem.

A very good camera, offering image quality at least comparable - if not superior - to other cameras mentioned on this thread, is eliminated in a image quality "race". The excuse being that we can see something in a test chart.

Since this "aggressive noise reduction" madness started, I tried to see if its supposedly dramatic effect is actually real. I've compared the DPR studio samples; I've compared user-provided samples and even put my hands on a K-1 II and shot some myself. Note that this subject is well debated on several forums, and no consensus was formed, nor will it.

My personal conclusion is that I can get slightly better images with less effort by upgrading to the K-1 II.

Of course, fear of losing something is an extremely powerful motivator - to the point one wouldn't even care to see if that loss is actually real.

OTOH...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=pentax_k1ii&attr13_1=canon_eos_r&attr13_2=nikon_z6&attr13_3=nikon_z7&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr126_0=1&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.8939044135501215&y=-0.5951217540574452

"When the map disagrees with the terrain, trust the terrain" - Swiss Army proverb

Alex

To be clear, I didnt really wright of the K1 due to this, I just wrote of its superiority against the A7III, because well.. how can I be sure how good the K1 really is? The A7III with noise removal + sharpness could also get this bump, but I'll never known. In any case.. The K1 also lacked a lot of other features (Canon lens compatibility, FPS, etc), so I just disregarded it all-together.  I still think it could get some amazing pictures, and I dont doubt that the processing is still within the limits where you actually see it as something possitive, but why does it have to be there? I dont 100% mind it being there, but I can just add it later in LR, so why include it from the get go?  But thats just for me.

 Maarten D's gear list:Maarten D's gear list
Sony a7R III
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow