Wide dynamic range Preferred camera: Back in September 13 a post mentioned "need to have a camera with a good dynamic range". Which of the present Nikon SLR's would be able to...

mmcgavin

Back in September 13 a post mentioned "need to have a camera with a good dynamic range".

Which of the present Nikon SLR's would be able to accommodate the range in the attached photograph (taken on Kodachrome film) Our subjects have a range from zone 7 to 9 on an 11 step scale. At present we have Nikon D 7100.

Do upscale digital cameras really vary in their ability to accommodate wide dynamic ranges? Is one Nikon DSLR superior to others?

Sorry, I could not get the photo to attach. It was a white brain slice on a black background.

CPR Loc: Nature Coast of Florida

Dynamic range is almost a moot point although some cameras have a bit better than others. To get dynamic range of the human eye most people go to HDR which is basically taking photos set for different parts of the dynamic range and then putting them together with computer software.
Also some cameras have the capability to do a version of HDR in camera. For instance the D5300 will do two shots and combine them in camera.
By the way - thanks for not putting the brain slice up...........

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

mmcgavin wrote:

Back in September 13 a post mentioned "need t... (show quote)

Nikons sensors have long given the best dynamic range. Here is a review ranking the best available as of last year:

http://www.camerastuffreview.com/camera-guide/review-dynamic-range-of-60-camera-s

mmcgavin

Many thanks for the specific remarks- about both topics

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

mmcgavin wrote:

Back in September 13 a post mentioned "need t... (show quote)

The D810 is the camera with the widest dynamic range, even better than the D5.

mmcgavin

I noticed now that there was a typo in the original message.
The range was 2-9 zones.

My apologies.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

CPR wrote:

Dynamic range is almost a moot point although some cameras have a bit better than others. To get dynamic range of the human eye most people go to HDR which is basically taking photos set for different parts of the dynamic range and then putting them together with computer software.
Also some cameras have the capability to do a version of HDR in camera. For instance the D5300 will do two shots and combine them in camera.
By the way - thanks for not putting the brain slice up...........

HDR only works with static shots. Anything with a moving subject can't take advantage of it, so a camera with more dynamic range is valuable.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

for a medical/forensic shot you can't use HDR.

mmcgavin

Very interesting, particularly to those of us who have to take the occasional forensic photograph.
Can you give the rationale and cite one or more references?
Much appreciated.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

oldtigger wrote:

for a medical/forensic shot you can't use HDR.

***********************************************************************
There was a time when digital images were NOT acceptable in legal evidence situations. (UK law though). Times change.

JPL

mmcgavin wrote:

Back in September 13 a post mentioned "need t... (show quote)

Kodacrome is said to have about 12 stops dynamic range. Most modern dslr and mirrorless cameras have about 12-14 stops dynamic range.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

JohnSwanda wrote:

HDR only works with static shots. Anything with a moving subject can't take advantage of it, so a camera with more dynamic range is valuable.

For the main subject, sure. But the Photomatix program has the ability to detect (or you can manually target) several moving objects within the image and fix that. It also aligns shots that are hand-held.

oldtigger wrote:

for a medical/forensic shot you can't use HDR.

I suspect you're right. Using HDR is a digital manipulation and would probably not be admissible as evidence.