-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
All who migrated from Nikon DSLR with bigger DR, aren't you missing it?
- Thread starter Lietuje
- Start date
John Ideal
Leading Member
- Messages
- 514
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 667
Do you have a source that says DSLR is that much different than mirrorless? I did a quick google and all I could come up with was a minimal difference between the D850 and the Z7ii. The quote from this page -
For the real techy people out there interestingly the Nikon D850 came out slightly better than the Nikon Z7ii in the tests (nothing in it really) with the D850 “Offering outstanding dynamic range of 14.8 EV and colour depth of 26.4 bit at base ISO” and the Nikon Z7ii “Offering outstanding dynamic range of 14.7 EV and colour depth of 26.3 bit at base ISO”. So don’t expect to see any serious differences between the two of them in dynamic range, High ISO performance or image sharpness.
Loading…
www.landscapephotographyireland.com
For the real techy people out there interestingly the Nikon D850 came out slightly better than the Nikon Z7ii in the tests (nothing in it really) with the D850 “Offering outstanding dynamic range of 14.8 EV and colour depth of 26.4 bit at base ISO” and the Nikon Z7ii “Offering outstanding dynamic range of 14.7 EV and colour depth of 26.3 bit at base ISO”. So don’t expect to see any serious differences between the two of them in dynamic range, High ISO performance or image sharpness.
What do "crushed blacks" have to do with DR?
buildingsights
Leading Member
i went from 11.5 to 14.4 and then to the z7 II with 14.7 of DR... but perhaps the jpgs at these fora are not ideal for ascertain how crushed the blacks on the image are... perhaps DPR compression and/or PP...
michaeladawson
Veteran Member
I've never run into a photo that I shot where I said to myself, "gee it's too bad, this photo could have been really good if only I'd had more dynamic range." And that goes all the way back to the D100.
Sure, I know the D100 is going back a bit too far, and if I was to really look at shots taken back then to now I'd be happy I have the dynamic range today that I do. But the differences in DR between the DSLR bodies (D780 and D850) versus the mirrorless models from Nikon are just not meaningful in day-to-day use.
Lucky Sky
Veteran Member
No.
BudgetTraveller
Leading Member
Any specific camera models you are comparing with?
If you are comparing say a BSI sensor using both the Nikon D780 and the Nikon D850 for example, then the DR from the D850 at lower ISO, especially @ ISO 100 will have better DR than say a Nikon Z8, which has a stacked sensor. Likewise, the DR @ higher ISO will favor the Nikon D780 compared to a Nikon Z8 with a stacked sensor. I missed the higher ISO performance of my Nikon Df (which has a D4 sensor) compared to my Z8, but you can always mitigate it with faster glass, which allows you to shoot at a lower ISO.
But if you want a little bit better DR @ ISO 100, you can always complement say a Z9 or Z8 with a Z7II. On the lower light end, you can always complement the Z8 or Z9 with either slightly faster glass or a Z6, Z6II and the Z5II. You can either always resolve the issue with your so called crushed black by using faster glass or either the Z7II or Z5II to address both ends of the ISO needs.
There will always be a compromise with fully stacked and partially stacked sensors. You will gain faster speed readout in expense of a slight DR loss, which is what sell cameras these days for the wildlife and nature crowd. Is it prominent? It depends on each individual photographer. That's why we have options available to address those concerns.
Last edited:
Agreed. And the massive workflow comforts you pick up by going to mirrorless more than make up for... 1-1.25 stops DR?
Just out of curiosity I plotted my three most significant camera bodies, and the Z6III comes out squarely in the middle until you jump to ISOs 800 and higher, where it comes out on top. Each have been fantastic. D700, D810 and Z6III:
Even the D850, the "best DSLR ever" at best just tracks tightly to the D810:
--
http://jimlafferty.com
Evocative beats academic.
Last edited:
michaeladawson
Veteran Member
Yes. And depending on which models one cares to compare, you get even closer tracks and the results really are identical in real world use.
Create a photonstophotos chart of the D850, Z780, and Z7II and the three track almost exactly on top of each other.
Create a photonstophotos chart of the D850, Z780, and Z7II and the three track almost exactly on top of each other.
The DPR upload does compress the image, and details suffer a little.
As a test, here's an underexposed scene. I'll compare it to the original on my PC.
~~~
EDIT -- I downloaded the original size link from DPR, and compared to the original jpg.
Left--original, Right--DPR downloaded version
Colors and shadows look very similar between the two versions. There's a little more fine detail in the green tree leaves in the original.
The DPR version quite accurate, at least in this image.
As a test, here's an underexposed scene. I'll compare it to the original on my PC.
~~~
EDIT -- I downloaded the original size link from DPR, and compared to the original jpg.
Left--original, Right--DPR downloaded version
Colors and shadows look very similar between the two versions. There's a little more fine detail in the green tree leaves in the original.
The DPR version quite accurate, at least in this image.
Last edited:
JacquesC
Veteran Member
With all the improvements The Z system has brought over the DSLR's the differences in DR (whether real or imagined) has disappeared into the black hole of insignificant.
PLShutterbug
Veteran Member
Note that when you look at images here you are looking at JPGs, which are 8-bit files. There will be some banding because the file format DPR supports doesn't have 14.3 (14.4? 14.2?) stops of DR available.
primeshooter
Veteran Member
To be fair, (not here, in this particular case on dpreview samples) but they can be related though...
But would it be meaningful to you if you were a first-time poster to the forums, probably a Sony f*nboy, just looking to troll up some drama?
TheSoaringSprite
Veteran Member
When I decided to buy the Z8, of course I worried about the weaker dynamic range compared to my D750, but the other benefits were too numerous to not consider it. I bit the bullet and made the move.
I like to shoot in "highlight-weighed" metering mode, which means most of my files will be underexposed to protect the highlights. That leads me to have to lift some deeper shadows during post-processing.
After having to do this multiple times, I realized my fears of lower dynamic range were a bit silly. YES I would love to have even more dynamic range, but the Z8 performs just fine even in slightly extreme circumstances. It's not holding me back.
Some examples:
Here's the DR comparison:
According to the PDR site, the D750's highest DR is 11.49 at ISO80
D850: 11.63 at ISO31 and ISO63
Z8: 11.32 at ISO31
--
http://www.dreamsourcestudio.com
@TheSoaringSprite
Last edited:
michaeladawson
Veteran Member
If my view of this topic is simply as an armchair techno-geek looking solely at a couple of numbers on spec sheets, then I don't need to be a Sony f*nboy to try and stir up trouble. I can just as easily be a DSLR holdout.
Anyway, without further evidence all I can do is state my opinion that the differences in the numbers are small enough as to be meaningless for taking great photos in almost all shooting situations.
Andre Yew
Veteran Member
Trolls used to have bigger DR before they migrated from DSLRs.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum