Dynamic Range (Page 3): Kind of like DxO does for Nikon...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

mikeroetex wrote:

So a subjective website that promotes Sony comes up with a chart that shows Sony is better in low light. Never saw that one coming.

Kind of like DxO does for Nikon

gwilliams6

bpulv wrote:

How many times in the last year has any of you needed to shoot at ISO 25,000 or even 12,500? Except for VERY specialized applications, the performance at those speeds are irrelevant other then for theoretical nitpicking. Focusing on performance in that range and making buying decisions based on that is like paying $50,000 for a stereo system because it produces sound frequencies that are even too high for a dog to here.

I dont shoot professionally at ISO 25,000 or higher, but yes I do appreciate the great results modern sensors can give me when I need to make a shot at 3200, 6400 or even 12,800 ISO. Older sensors couldn't give me usable shots at those ISOs before, but now I can go there if absolutely necessary and use less supplemental lighting. Cheers

Mobius Loc: Troy, MI

Looking at two charts posted the differences shown will, in my opinion, be irrelevant in the real world.

gwilliams6

Mobius wrote:

Looking at two charts posted the differences shown will, in my opinion, be irrelevant in the real world.

Not clear your point Mobius, I find the differences in sensors does make a difference when I shoot professionally in the real world. That is partly why I chose the gear I have.

gwilliams6

Architect1776 wrote:

Kind of like DxO does for Nikon

Folks stop looking for conspiracies or brand-bias everywhere. DXO, DPReviews, Image Review,countless photo mags plus independent and respected youtube reviewers and vloggers come up with pretty much the same results and conclusions when they test cameras and lenses from ALL the various makers.

shelty Loc: Medford, OR

Why not just go and take pictures instead of spending all of your time trying to find the infinitesimal differences between cameras. Photographers have won prize-winning pictures from all of them.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

Architect1776 wrote:

Kind of like DxO does for Nikon

And you know, if I owned a Honda and a consumer advocate magazine like Consumer Reports always seemed to rate Toyota higher than Honda, I might want to say that Toyota has them in their pocket, too. I do own a Honda. Have owned several. Have also owned Toyotas. Both are excellent car makers. You own Canon. I own Nikon. Just how sour are those grapes, anyway?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

gwilliams6 wrote:

Folks stop looking for conspiracies or brand-bias everywhere. DXO, DPReviews, Image Review,countless photo mags plus independent and respected youtube reviewers and vloggers come up with pretty much the same results and conclusions when they test cameras and lenses from ALL the various makers.

The point of this post is that there is more than the totally biased DxO scoring system that does favor attributes of one brand over others by scoring artificially high some parameters and then lowers other parameters in order to get the desired outcome. Other testers have parameters that who knows what but their bias is not as obvious as DxO parameters.

gwilliams6

Architect1776 wrote:

The point of this post is that there is more than the totally biased DxO scoring system that does favor attributes of one brand over others by scoring artificially high some parameters and then lowers other parameters in order to get the desired outcome. Other testers have parameters that who knows what but their bias is not as obvious as DxO parameters.

Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself, please, or take it up with DXO directly. You have no proof of any bias claims you make. And what about DPReview, Image Review and all the rest of the youtube reviewers and vloggers, are they biased also ? Geez !

Cheers

Bill_de Loc: US

gwilliams6 wrote:

Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself, please, or take it up with DXO directly. You have no proof of any bias claims you make. And what about DPReview, Image Review and all the rest of the youtube reviewers and vloggers, are they biased also ? Geez !

Cheers

You've been around the block a few times. You know they are all in it together.

--

TheDman Loc: USA

shelty wrote:

Why not just go and take pictures instead of spending all of your time trying to find the infinitesimal differences between cameras. Photographers have won prize-winning pictures from all of them.

The only thing that strikes me about those charts is how incredibly small the difference is between cameras, especially with all the ranting and raving you hear online about dynamic range. It might be one of the most useless ways to compare today's cameras, especially since anyone with a modicum of skill can greatly exceed the dynamic range of a single shot anyway.

gwilliams6

Bill_de wrote:

You've been around the block a few times. You know they are all in it together.

--

I guess if enough folks believe this. lol

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

TheDman wrote:

img src="https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/images/s... (show quote)

Another point of the chart. To listen to Nikon fanboys you would think it was an 8 stop difference between the D850 DR. Where it is imperceptible according to the chart.

drklrd Loc: Cincinnati Ohio

duane klipping wrote:

Would tend to agree with you. As you tech gurus a... (show quote)

Sometimes in dark sports arena I need to go to 25600 and would like if I could go another stop or two. My shots go to the high school yearbook. The shots unless I pull one or two out that I like never go more than to an 8x 10 in size so yes i shoot high ISO to get the shots for the kids and besides I get paid to do it. I went with the Nikon D7200 for this reason high ISO and 24 mpx. This allows me to shoot with standard zooms versus high speed zooms that I may never need when this photography stuff becomes a hobby again.