Yes, I had a nexus 5x and I agree that camera might have been a bit better. It was the first to use the new Google algorithms, but it was slow. Unfortunately my 5x bootlooped like many/most of them do eventually.
I have DXo and I may repeat my test just for curiosity if I can find the time.Yup, I've done the test too, Pixel 1 vs 80D and more recently Pixel 3 vs a7 III. However I think the scene you chose is an outlier. Most scenes do not have such wild DR to capture. Such a scene is the Pixel's strength.
On an a6000 I've have shot that with highlight priority metering and +1EV of exposure compensation and then pulled the highlights down in post and pulled shadows and midtones up.
However I'd be willing to bet the default profile in DxO PhotoLab would produce an image from your raw that looked just like the Pixel 2's only with more detail. DxO's smart lighting algorithm is pretty excellent with no user input.
Here's an a7 III vs Pixel 3 Night Sight (basically HDR+ without any time constraints) shot in a scene that plays to the Pixel 3's strengths. The a7iii shot was just processed through the standard preset on DxO PhotoLab 2. If you look closely the Sony shot is clearly better, but at web sizes they look fairly interchangeable.
Also as far as getting that Pixel style tile&merge tech in camera, computer power needs to catch up first. The a6000 can't read images from its sensor fast enough do what the Pixel does (Pixel uses a stacked BSI sensor like the a9 and only has 12mp to deal with on a physically smaller sensor). The growth in processing time required going from 12mp to 24mp isn't a simple 2x linear, its more like 4x. You need both fast readout speeds from the sensor and an SoC that can sustain fast image processing of multiple 24mp frames without making the rest of the camera unusable.
Again, its hugely impressive what the top phones can achieve, I just wish they'd look at processing algorithms, if you look at the crops below the Pixel hasn't quite got the rendering of detail like the Sony. That being said it is getting better as OEM's tweak their processing to look more natural, but it still has a way to go.Yup, I've done the test too, Pixel 1 vs 80D and more recently Pixel 3 vs a7 III. However I think the scene you chose is an outlier. Most scenes do not have such wild DR to capture. Such a scene is the Pixel's strength.
On an a6000 I've have shot that with highlight priority metering and +1EV of exposure compensation and then pulled the highlights down in post and pulled shadows and midtones up.
However I'd be willing to bet the default profile in DxO PhotoLab would produce an image from your raw that looked just like the Pixel 2's only with more detail. DxO's smart lighting algorithm is pretty excellent with no user input.
Here's an a7 III vs Pixel 3 Night Sight (basically HDR+ without any time constraints) shot in a scene that plays to the Pixel 3's strengths. The a7iii shot was just processed through the standard preset on DxO PhotoLab 2. If you look closely the Sony shot is clearly better, but at web sizes they look fairly interchangeable.
Also as far as getting that Pixel style tile&merge tech in camera, computer power needs to catch up first. The a6000 can't read images from its sensor fast enough do what the Pixel does (Pixel uses a stacked BSI sensor like the a9 and only has 12mp to deal with on a physically smaller sensor). The growth in processing time required going from 12mp to 24mp isn't a simple 2x linear, its more like 4x. You need both fast readout speeds from the sensor and an SoC that can sustain fast image processing of multiple 24mp frames without making the rest of the camera unusable.
OK, I shot the two shots again (to be sure the lighting/time of day had not changed).
night sight mode would even get better white balance and sharpness.
The mainboard of my Nexus died and the battery was also 99% dead, but LG repaired it.
The Sony Dxo result is unusable in my opinion. There is a ton of green color noise at the left side of the image (including a green arc at the top left corner). This happens when shadows are too dark for the sensor (a new Aps-c sensor would likely perform better), too dark shadows can be caused by a lens that has much vignetting. The Pixel 2 has much better shadows here in this case, so technically the Pixel 2 shows better dynamic range here.OK, I shot the two shots again (to be sure the lighting/time of day had not changed).
I used DXO Smart Lighting from RAW, keeping all of the other settings default.
This is MUCH closer. The DXO I'd say is a hair too green, and the Pixel is too warm, but from a DR and exposure POV they are quite close. The Pixel did better protecting from blowout on the outside portion of the photo, but DXO did slightly better raising the shadows in the dark areas.
Pixel 2 XL, SOOC
Sony A6000, RAWwith DXO default and smart lighting set to STRONG
Yes, which is amazing.The Sony Dxo result is unusable in my opinion. There is a ton of green color noise at the left side of the image (including a green arc at the top left corner). This happens when shadows are too dark for the sensor (a new Aps-c sensor would likely perform better), too dark shadows can be caused by a lens that has much vignetting. The Pixel 2 has much better shadows here in this case, so technically the Pixel 2 shows better dynamic range here.OK, I shot the two shots again (to be sure the lighting/time of day had not changed).
I used DXO Smart Lighting from RAW, keeping all of the other settings default.
This is MUCH closer. The DXO I'd say is a hair too green, and the Pixel is too warm, but from a DR and exposure POV they are quite close. The Pixel did better protecting from blowout on the outside portion of the photo, but DXO did slightly better raising the shadows in the dark areas.
Pixel 2 XL, SOOC
Sony A6000, RAWwith DXO default and smart lighting set to STRONG
The Pixel does not have better dynamic range than APS-C cameras. I've been playing with the DNG files from the Pixel 3 (which is stacked from multiple shots) and compared that to the raw files from the Nokia 9 (5? shots merged into one), Canon M100 and Sony A7R III - it has the least amount of details that you can recovery in post processing.
It's dynamic range from the Pixel's default processing versus that of the A6000 in my example case.
You don't seem to understand...the pixel 3 stacks multiple raw images into one raw image to maximize raw image data and it still has less dynamic range than one shot from an APS-C camera. I have played with the files in a raw editor and it's not even close.
when did a dark room with a bright window not become a real world usage? it is real world to take party pictures of guests in the living room and not staging the shot by closing the curtains to even out the internal lighting versus outside lighting, without flash.
The Pixel 2 doesn't combine different exposures. It's a common misunderstanding. Google combines identical exposures. Each exposure is the same. Combining multiple exposures reduces shadow noise, therefore Google HDR+ raw files have better dynamic range than a single exposure dng file of a Google phone.
My point wasn't that it isn't a reasonable test case, but more that in the real world you wouldn't run into this situation all that often. In this particular case the Pixel managed to outperform the a6000, but that wouldn't be the case in the majority of photos. And yes obviously in some circumstances a Pixel can have DR competitive with an APS-C sensor, hell even full frame.Yes, which is amazing.The Sony Dxo result is unusable in my opinion. There is a ton of green color noise at the left side of the image (including a green arc at the top left corner). This happens when shadows are too dark for the sensor (a new Aps-c sensor would likely perform better), too dark shadows can be caused by a lens that has much vignetting. The Pixel 2 has much better shadows here in this case, so technically the Pixel 2 shows better dynamic range here.OK, I shot the two shots again (to be sure the lighting/time of day had not changed).
I used DXO Smart Lighting from RAW, keeping all of the other settings default.
This is MUCH closer. The DXO I'd say is a hair too green, and the Pixel is too warm, but from a DR and exposure POV they are quite close. The Pixel did better protecting from blowout on the outside portion of the photo, but DXO did slightly better raising the shadows in the dark areas.
Pixel 2 XL, SOOC
Sony A6000, RAWwith DXO default and smart lighting set to STRONG
Another poster commented that "most pictures don't have as large a DR as this" which implied that this wasnt a reasonable test case. But if you interpret that, what they were really saying is that the Pixel has better DR than an APS-C camera! And the A6000 picture is from a RAW.
A room with all the lights turned off? The only light present in this scene seems to originate from the bright window. How commonplace is that? Most people have lights on in their homes. Also as a photographer wouldn't you try to control the light a bit? Maybe not shoot a horribly backlit subject if you could avoid it by standing elsewhere? Or use a fill flash?
If you want to PP then that may be true. But for any type of default processing, the Pixel is far better.
So you are saying use a flash to compensate for the lack of A6000 DR vs the Pixel?
You are saying that in-camera DRO or HDR with 6 stops between isn't enough exposure to maximize the sensor's DR?
Lots of work there versus the phone.
Look, I have the A6000 and I totally buy into the overall superiority of an ILC. But you can't deny the impressive capabilities of the phone due to computational photography.
Thanks for that hint, I may try that.
The room is not that dark, it's just that outside is quite bright.
