[nandadevieast]

Do you guys prefer DPP to LR by any chance. 

I like the colors.

[Brightcolours]

I can imagine that in some fields high DR is very valuable, like in astro photography. But the sad thing is that in many Nikon DSLRs NR gets applied to long-ish exposure images, making them less ideal again. And Sony mangles their RAW in other ways (problematic compression scheme). But in theory, high DR can be useful in specialized fields.

[Brightcolours]

I like DPP in combination with PS (currently PS CS6). But my PP skills do not reach yours, and my lightroom experience is way less than extensive. I tried it a few times, but I can't get into it (colour wise and UI wise). 

[JJ_SO]

That's the reply to post #9, sorry it took me a while:

 

The linear compressing is not what I do when lifting shadows or lowering highlights. Basically, I'm doing something similar like HDR photographers do, but in a less obvious, more subtle way. What I'm saying or try to: The DR of D800 allows me to go deeper or higher or both in range. Usually I leave the midtones as they are and decide if there's interesting information in the high or low tones. Low tones give the power to a picture and hightones define the lightness. Balancing those two poles is something I really like to do. Your pictures - at least the ones I've seen so far - are showing the full contrast range but not many tones in between. I don't find that wrong or worse, it's just a different way.

 

You're right, there are no devices out there showing a huge dynamic range of (already available) camera sensors. Yet.

 

But I'm sure, you've seen some of the old glass/film negatives enlarged or scanned with contemporary technique. There is so much more in those negatives  than the original photographers have seen. Lucky us, we can see the available information in a much wider range than them have at their time. I could imagine monitors or beamers in the future can show more range - but I also can imagine the opposite. New techniques sometimes improve things and other times the quality decreases. Like the clean sound of CDs sacrificed the wider range of high quality LPs.

 

We do have 14 bit RAWs and don't have to shoot 8 bit JPGs all the time. 

[JJ_SO]

HI Joju,
Just wanted to ask what this feature does and how useful it is...should i just ignore it.

Ok, got it.
 

With 'artists' i meant to say, photographers have always found a workaround for these small things.
My switch has nothing to do with DR. Which is a good thing for post processing. It was to do with other factors like usability, handling, lack of the lenses i need, missed shots due to unsure focussing...basically i was fighting with my camera all the time.

Understood. In my eyes, Nikon sofwtare-engineers could learn a lot of the Apple way of software-design to the needs of the user instead of the thinking of engineers. It means a lot if the camera doesn't hinder you when setting up. To me, the Nikon menus do have too much branches and not enough clarity.

These things are much more important than DR to me.
Landscape shooters can bracket their shots...they have all the time in the world.

When the light gets in "drama-mode" it's changing quickly - not good for HDR bracketing
When it's very windy (drama mode again) you even get in landscapes (with trees, grass, waves on water) too much blurr. Especially in high resolution, big prints.
Also, I hate to fool around with more exposures that I feel it needs for the final result.

And what to do in portrait, theatre, concerts? I don't want to talk you away, but those serial-shot techniques like focus-stacking or bracketing are come with some disadvantages I'm no big fan of.

I am sure its good while shooting as you don't get blinkies that often, and good in post processing...some people do HDR stuff and i am sure they have a use for it. But in my experience i need to crunch the DR to get more contrast while printing or making final image...in 100% cases. You can't make flat pictures.
Yesterday 12 stops were great, today 14 stops are great. A7s is bringing more than 15 stops of DR.
Question is, what you do with that.

Putting it in good looking tech-data tables, making comparisons and what else...

To me, I can correct the forgotten "-1.7 ev" exposure value. I can make people visible who were standing in the dark. I can make pale faces looking healthy again. I'll try to put some samples onto my galleries of "normal" DR and "manipulated" DR, perhaps my posiiton gets a bit clearer afterwards.

[Brightcolours]

With a 6D, one can correct the forgotten -1.7 EV too.  Isn't -1.7 underexposing? So forgetting that, you would get an over exposed image? The low noise floor for Sony sensors gives a bigger DR in the dark, not in the light part.

I never use exposure compensation (setting)... It is an odd concept to me  :ph34r:

[JJ_SO]

Yes, it is underexposing. And forgetting that correction, you get an underexposed image. Instead of 1/125 it will be exposed with 1/400. If the camera is set to matrix-measuring and spot metering not possible one can correct the tendency of overexposing - which is sometimes annoying on D7000 and less of a problem with D800. If I photograph (white) people on stages I also use underexposing by -1...-1.3 and spot metering.

 

Additionally, I could put a general correction factor in one of the hundreds of settings, that would make the correction in general invalid. And I really "love" the way of hidden parameters working against visible buttons or displayed settings...  :angry:

[nandadevieast]

Tell me if i am wrong, this high DR advantage to Nikons is limited to low ISO settings only, right?

So which ISO setting sort of equalizes this advantage? 400?

[JJ_SO]

As far as I understand it, the DR "advantage" of 2 stops more is measured by DxO at base ISO and remains over the whole ISO-bandwidth as advantage but maybe in decreasing values. In high ISO (over 800) the bandwidth will decrease - but this is more or less the same for all sensors, so the advantage remains. If I'd go down to very low ISO like 50 or 25, the advantage decreases as well because the sensor can't take more light than base ISO without cutting  some edges of histogram. The contrast becomes more harsh.

[Brightcolours]

Tell me if i am wrong, this high DR advantage to Nikons is limited to low ISO settings only, right?

So which ISO setting sort of equalizes this advantage? 400?

With the 6D versus the D610 and D800, the difference at base ISO (ISO 100) is about 2 stops, according to DXO. That difference gets smaller with increased ISO settings, because the Canon sensor gives better light capture (but the Sony sensors have less ADC noise).

At about ISO 800 things are pretty equal (11.5 DR for 6D, 12 DR for D800) and at ISO 3200 and higher the 6D has the advantage (about half a stop).

 

That is just for DXO measurements, for whatever they are worth. In real usage, the 6D does visually better at higher ISO's, with better colours and finer noise.

 

It is anyway not a big deal, all these cameras are very capable. The 6D just also is a nice "small" FF DSLR camera to use.