Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - Printable Version +- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com) +-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4) +--- Forum: Just Talk (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=17) +--- Thread: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO (/showthread.php?tid=4773) Pages:
1
2
|
RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - Brightcolours - 06-26-2020 It still is not true that Nikon and Sony are filtering noise from low ISO/base ISO RAW, and you are not correcting in that claim. And the high ISO long exposure example still really has no bearing on base ISO DR discussions. Nikon filtered noise from JPEG back at that time in for instance the D300 and D40, which skewed reviews that were mostly looking at JPEG output at the time. RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - wim - 06-26-2020 (06-26-2020, 09:35 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: It still is not true that Nikon and Sony are filtering noise from low ISO/base ISO RAW, and you are not correcting in that claim. And the high ISO long exposure example still really has no bearing on base ISO DR discussions.There is proof for it, but I do not feel it is important enough to try and convince you otherwise. Someday you may find it yourself. Regards, Wim RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - Brightcolours - 06-26-2020 Sure, very convincing, wim. RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - Brightcolours - 08-01-2020 To update on this old thread: I wrote about how DXO totally messed up the data, coming up with nonsense conclusions about the Canon 1D X mark III sensor. I just now discovered for myself that DXO has since changed the review. Not sure when they did that, because the posting date reads "June 19, 2020", but that was the date of the original, totally nonsensical review. https://www.dxomark.com/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-iii-sensor-review/ Now it is more in line with photonstophotos measurements. Seems like a pattern with DXO, posting wrong results with a lot of fanfare of Canon stuff, and then either not correct, or correct later in silence, when the damage has been done. Oh well. RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - toni-a - 08-01-2020 (08-01-2020, 05:48 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Seems like a pattern with DXO, posting wrong results with a lot of fanfare of Canon stuff, and then either not correct, or correct later in silence, when the damage has been done. Oh well. Damage is more to DXO than Canon IMHO RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - Brightcolours - 08-01-2020 (08-01-2020, 06:54 PM)toni-a Wrote:(08-01-2020, 05:48 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Seems like a pattern with DXO, posting wrong results with a lot of fanfare of Canon stuff, and then either not correct, or correct later in silence, when the damage has been done. Oh well. You know how many here really think the highest DR matters... It is the same on other forums. There are bound to be some who would have gotten the 1D X mk III without the DXO nonsense, and now have not. And just look at AP, who will make all their photographers shoot with the Sony A9 II instead of Canon 1D X mk III. Some managers make these decisions with Sony marketing and nonsense from sources like DXO. Same with botched lens reviews by DXOmark... RE: Sensor dynamic range and native ISO - wim - 08-01-2020 (08-01-2020, 06:48 AM)toni-a Wrote: Suddenly, overheating became the main issue of cameras while it has been there for a long time and nobody cared.... first it was megapixel race, nobody talked about dynamic range, then suddenly dynamic range became the main issue, now overheating at video resolutions very few need is the main trend.... (08-01-2020, 08:01 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:(08-01-2020, 06:54 PM)toni-a Wrote:(08-01-2020, 05:48 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Seems like a pattern with DXO, posting wrong results with a lot of fanfare of Canon stuff, and then either not correct, or correct later in silence, when the damage has been done. Oh well. I understand DXO is supported by Sony and Nikon, but not by Canon ..... Kind regards, Wim |