chateaulatour64
Well-known member
Isn't Provia a color reversal (slide) film?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
MK II dynamic range?
- Thread starter MS50
- Start date
James McPeak
Veteran Member
Fuji Provia is an ISO 100 slide film. If he was using a Fuji low ISO professional print film, it was either Fuji Reala (ISO 100) or Fuji NPS (ISO 160). Most likely it was Fuji Reala. Reala is known for its low contrast, subtle tones, and excellent dynamic range. This is what accounts for the great difference you saw in his pictures and your pictures.
dnjake
Veteran Member
Its partly you and partly that getting the right tonal curve for an image is not that easy. The 1D MK II will have a wider dynamic range than the 10D. But you were not limited by the 10D's dynamic range. The 10D and the 1D seem to have about the same dynamic range in raw images according to Canon's measurements. But most seem to have an easier time achieving results with the 1D that are satisfactory to them. So it would not be surprising if it turns out that you get results from the 1D Mk II that you are happier with.
But the basic point is that unless your problem is noise in the darker parts of a 10D image, you have not exceeded the camera's dynamic range. You just don't have a tonal curve that achieves the right balance in the picture. You do have to reduce the exposure enough to avoid blowing highlights (blue sky). If you are aiming in the general direction of the sun, that can easily be as much as two or three fstops. You then have to use curves or some similar tool to get the right balance between the shadows and the brighter parts of the picture.
--
David Jacobson
But the basic point is that unless your problem is noise in the darker parts of a 10D image, you have not exceeded the camera's dynamic range. You just don't have a tonal curve that achieves the right balance in the picture. You do have to reduce the exposure enough to avoid blowing highlights (blue sky). If you are aiming in the general direction of the sun, that can easily be as much as two or three fstops. You then have to use curves or some similar tool to get the right balance between the shadows and the brighter parts of the picture.
--
David Jacobson
James you were right on, just talked to him and it was Reala and he scanned on a nikon scanner at 4000 dpi. The scans look great. Is that normal also for the scans to have more range than my original 10D file?
MS50
MS50
Thanks dave that makes sense too! Also I now remember reading somewhere to shoot to the right but don't blow the highlights and you will get more info in the file. Is that true?
MS50
MS50
dnjake
Veteran Member
Given that these measurements don't seem to really exist for any DLSR's, one may suspect that meaningful measurements are not quite that easy. From my perspective, the only one that is important to me is that my 10D has had enough dynamic range at iso 100 to handle any image I have wanted to capture.
A typical image is bright backlit flowers and trees on a sunny day with a blue sky and dark shadows from some of the trees. I capture such an image at iso 100, f/11, and 1/180 second using raw. I then convert it with fvu to a 16 bit tiff using -2 contrast and -2 sharpening. I then process this image with picture window pro's curves tool. Picture window pro has the merit of having a detailed histogram that can be run in expanded mode. When I do that I can see that the image has zero points at the darkest brightness level. There is nothing in the picture that is not distinguishable from pure black.
--
David Jacobson
A typical image is bright backlit flowers and trees on a sunny day with a blue sky and dark shadows from some of the trees. I capture such an image at iso 100, f/11, and 1/180 second using raw. I then convert it with fvu to a 16 bit tiff using -2 contrast and -2 sharpening. I then process this image with picture window pro's curves tool. Picture window pro has the merit of having a detailed histogram that can be run in expanded mode. When I do that I can see that the image has zero points at the darkest brightness level. There is nothing in the picture that is not distinguishable from pure black.
--
David Jacobson
RickS170293
Leading Member
No, I meant YOU. I have a client with the same last name. Attorney here in Broward County.
Rick
Rick
Larry H. Smith
Veteran Member
The 1DII is NOT included in this list of "less than 9" models. ;-)
Larry
Robert Hurwitz141095
Active member
R
Robert P Miller
Guest
Great question. I was addressing it a bit myself while shooting my MKII today.
Last year I shot the 10D and learned to live within, what I found to be a very narrow DR. I guess it tested better than it performed for me, but I was always fussing with the exposure Compensation to deal with the lack of DR on a sunny day while shooting people.
Below is a nice untouched shot from my MKII. The full file exists here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/28389157/original
The sun across little Melissa's faces did not blow out as it had so easily in my 10D. I shot at ISO 400, as I often did with the 10D as well.
I think the MKII's metering is more accurate, This shot seems perfectly exposed, with out harsh shadows covering their faces. I 'll have to try it again in the noon sun.
I know the focus is MUCH better than my 10D. I shot over 100 pictures today and really only had a few which were OOF. And they were almost all due to my shortcomings and the new learning curve. My 10D was finicky with some lenses, the MKII seems at home with all mine so far. I do think I need to upgrade from my 75-300IS to the 100-400ISL. I think the 8MP sensor may show some of the 75-300's limits. Besides, it is a slow focuser. But I digress..............
I suggest to anyone who is finding limitations with their 10D to look into the MKII. You will never look back. And I do not find the MKII any larger than the 10D with Big ED ( though I'm sure it is).
Best,
Robert
Last year I shot the 10D and learned to live within, what I found to be a very narrow DR. I guess it tested better than it performed for me, but I was always fussing with the exposure Compensation to deal with the lack of DR on a sunny day while shooting people.
Below is a nice untouched shot from my MKII. The full file exists here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/28389157/original
The sun across little Melissa's faces did not blow out as it had so easily in my 10D. I shot at ISO 400, as I often did with the 10D as well.
I think the MKII's metering is more accurate, This shot seems perfectly exposed, with out harsh shadows covering their faces. I 'll have to try it again in the noon sun.
I know the focus is MUCH better than my 10D. I shot over 100 pictures today and really only had a few which were OOF. And they were almost all due to my shortcomings and the new learning curve. My 10D was finicky with some lenses, the MKII seems at home with all mine so far. I do think I need to upgrade from my 75-300IS to the 100-400ISL. I think the 8MP sensor may show some of the 75-300's limits. Besides, it is a slow focuser. But I digress..............
I suggest to anyone who is finding limitations with their 10D to look into the MKII. You will never look back. And I do not find the MKII any larger than the 10D with Big ED ( though I'm sure it is).
Best,
Robert
James McPeak
Veteran Member
The dynamic range he is getting is attributable to the film, not the scanner. If you scan a slide with narrow dynamic range, that's what you'll get. If you scan a negative with wide dynamic range, that's what you'll get. The scanner isn't going to add any information that isn't already there.
Thanks James. So does that mean that if I want to do landscapes with great tonal range I should be using MF film instead of my 10D or the MK II when it comes? What are your thoughts.
MS50
MS50
[snip]
This whole thread was making me feel like I should just go back to film. I haven't been impressed by any of the images from the Mark II until I saw your shot. It's natural and beautiful--the best I've seen from that camera so far. Thanks. Guess I'll keep my order in.
-Paul
-Paul
[snip]
James McPeak
Veteran Member
First of all, most of the best landscape photography in the world is done on slide film, which has pretty much the same dynamic range as a digital sensor. Secondly, slide film doesn't have nearly the flexibilility of a RAW file. And thirdly, there is extraordinary landscape photography (with plenty of tonal range) being done right now with Canon DSLR. If you want to take landscape photos under mid-day sunlight, with the expectation of retaining full detail in shadows and the sky, you'll be pretty disappointed no matter what medium (slide/negative/digital) you shoot-- although negative film is going to have the best chance at doing a good job in that situation. It's your job as a photographer to fit that tonal range within the range of the medium you've chosen, and that is true of any medium. Even Ansel Adams, who shot large format black and white, which has an enormous tonal range, took great care in using Zone System metering to "place" tonal values on his negatives, then spent even more time in the wet darkroom bringing those tonal values onto paper. These days, it is so much easier with digital because you've eliminated the film processing + film scanning step, and your image goes directly into your digital darkroom. Just brush up on your metering technique to capture all the data in a scene, and learn to process the image correctly. Or simply do what slide shooters (and negative shooters) have always done: pick your shooting time to limit dynamic range extremes, know how to read the light, and use things like neutral density graduated filters. It's just Landscape Photography 101. Oh, and shoot RAW for maximum processing flexibility.
There is some attribute to the scanner, the Nikon has a good scanning density figure, which is an important part of scanning slides particularly, to ensure all the detail is bought out. My Canon FS4000US is not able to scan the slide density as deeply & is noiser to boot...
http://www.pbase.com/image/27417053
http://www.pbase.com/foodphoto
1Ds/10D/30E/5x4/I HAVE A MKII A Pentax 67 MKII
Steve
--
http://www.pbase.com/image/27417053
http://www.pbase.com/foodphoto
1Ds/10D/30E/5x4/I HAVE A MKII A Pentax 67 MKII
Steve
Mr Majestyk
Veteran Member
I see it the other way around. Doesn't matter what DR the slide has if the scanner can't cope with it. You want a scanner with a DR of at least 3.8 to capture all shadow detail in a high contrast slide.
Thank you all for your info, it is a great point of departure for me and now it is up to me. I hope you all know how helpful you are to those of us with much less experience. However you have just made it even harder for me to wait for the MK II. Thanks again.
MS50
MS50
Alex 31415
Well-known member
Hi Robert,
Glad your answer, tnx.
Our task has three steps -- the shooting, RAW-TIFF or RAW-JPEG converting/cropping, and “analysis-paralysis”.
1st step -- getting image with zero contrast at central area of the frame, i.e. without a dispersion of brightness caused by the subject. That is the key point -- we need just the camera noise in image. The best subject at home for this -- gray card (any gray lusterless no textured subject is suited for this job). In addition, we have to defocus our subject -- we need for shooting distance (from the front lens) approx equal to focal distance of our lens (short tele is more convenient). You have to focus the lens on infinity.
So, tripod, gray card, distance approx equal to focal, and lens on infinity.
Camera settings. Sharpness and contrast -- normal, noise reduction -- off, sRGB, RAW+JPG (max quality). Set manual mode, ISO 100, aperture -- approx wide open, shutter speed -- 1/60 sec, exposure compensation -- 0, metering mode -- center weighted average metering.
Set more or less balancing illumination and proper exposure by changing aperture (near wide open) and light only (shutter speed = 1/60). Set proper white balance.
Set shutter speed = 1/15 and get first shot. Then change shutter to 1/30 -- second one and so on (shot #9 at 1/4000 sec). For last shot #10 change ISO to ISO 1600 (at 1/4000 sec). The shooting is over.
2nd step -- keep RAWs and JPEGs from camera for future experiments with different conversion modes and different post-processing -- you don’t need to repeat the shooting.
Please prepare 10 JPEG crops (100x100 from the same area, say, x = 1700…1800, y = 1100…1200, sRGB with EXIF info and send it to me by e-mail.
3rd step -- I would send the results of analysis to you -- I don’t want publish any materials without your permission and remarks.
Forgive me my poor English,
Best regards,
Alex
Glad your answer, tnx.
Our task has three steps -- the shooting, RAW-TIFF or RAW-JPEG converting/cropping, and “analysis-paralysis”.
1st step -- getting image with zero contrast at central area of the frame, i.e. without a dispersion of brightness caused by the subject. That is the key point -- we need just the camera noise in image. The best subject at home for this -- gray card (any gray lusterless no textured subject is suited for this job). In addition, we have to defocus our subject -- we need for shooting distance (from the front lens) approx equal to focal distance of our lens (short tele is more convenient). You have to focus the lens on infinity.
So, tripod, gray card, distance approx equal to focal, and lens on infinity.
Camera settings. Sharpness and contrast -- normal, noise reduction -- off, sRGB, RAW+JPG (max quality). Set manual mode, ISO 100, aperture -- approx wide open, shutter speed -- 1/60 sec, exposure compensation -- 0, metering mode -- center weighted average metering.
Set more or less balancing illumination and proper exposure by changing aperture (near wide open) and light only (shutter speed = 1/60). Set proper white balance.
Set shutter speed = 1/15 and get first shot. Then change shutter to 1/30 -- second one and so on (shot #9 at 1/4000 sec). For last shot #10 change ISO to ISO 1600 (at 1/4000 sec). The shooting is over.
2nd step -- keep RAWs and JPEGs from camera for future experiments with different conversion modes and different post-processing -- you don’t need to repeat the shooting.
Please prepare 10 JPEG crops (100x100 from the same area, say, x = 1700…1800, y = 1100…1200, sRGB with EXIF info and send it to me by e-mail.
3rd step -- I would send the results of analysis to you -- I don’t want publish any materials without your permission and remarks.
Forgive me my poor English,
Best regards,
Alex
Alex 31415
Well-known member
Of course, TIFF is better, than JPEG.
Alex
Alex
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum