snead Loc: Napa, California

Hello, this is my first post here. I enjoy reading the comments of talented photographers concerning their equipment and methods.

I first got involved in photography in 1949 when I got an after school job in a camera shop and continued with film until 2002 when I bought my first digital camera, a Canon G1. With every new camera I noticed improvements in equipment but still lacking the Dynamic Range of film.

I don’t photograph sports or BIF and don’t have a need for Super Fast focusing of a young woman dancing with a square box on one eye and a DOF of a few mm.

I would like sunny day skies to be blue and still have a little detail in the shade. In my view Canon has not been able to produce these kinds of results even though they are producing some new low resolution sensors with large pixels. I don’t have any Nikon equipment but have seen some results that display some improved Dynamic Range using Sony sensors.

Which cameras do you think have better Dynamic Range?

CPR Loc: Nature Coast of Florida

Due to budget constraints I take multiple exposures and put together with Photoshop. My old D5300 still takes good shots - be interesting to hear about wider DR in the camera.
Even the old D5300 will do mult-exp in camera but not always acceptabel.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Current Low MP full frame cameras . Also, Sony and some others that can do combined 3 exposure HDR in camera.
.

John Matthews Loc: Wasilla, Alaska

At this moment in time the high end Nikon and Sony have the cameras with the best dynamic range. Of course if you print the printer can not match the camera’s dynamic range.

JimRPhoto Loc: Raleigh NC

You might look into the Olympus line of 4/3 cameras. I have an OM D E 5, and a PEN F, and both have built-in HDR. Essentially, it sounds like when you switch on HDR for a high contrast shot, the camera takes, in quick sequence, five shots. You can see the result right afterward on the monitor. This works great for landscapes and cityscapes, and even group portraits if you have everyone be still for a couple of seconds, but it would not work for others where the subject is moving. JimR

repleo Loc: Boston

Welcome to your first post.

Go to www.dxomark.com. Click on the Cameras tab and then 'Explore Database'. Click on the 'Landscape' tab at the top of the chart to sort the results by Landscape score which is Dynamic Range. The current leading FF bodies are the Sony A7Riv Nikon D850 and D810 with DRs of 14.9ev.

You can also extend your DR with any camera by shooting in exposure bracket mode and merging or blending in PP.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Welcome aboard. Consider getting Dynamic Range with multiple exposures and post processing.Look forward to see your images.Stan

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I suggest that you post an image that you are dissatisfied with, in terms of range, and check the (store original) box so the EXIF data can be accessed. With precise exposure control, your files many have more "information" in the shadows than you think.

I use some older Canon digital gear in my studio where I can control contrast, however, I have been using my MarkII shooting on constructions sites where I am working in very high contrast sunny days conditions, where flash fill would be impractical and I am getting rich blue skyscapes and detail in the shadows.

Perhaps newer gear will have more intrinsic range, but you present gear might do it for you. Sometimes a little tweak- a slight dodge or burn in post-processing will do the trick.

If you post permission to "edit" one of you images, that might help as well!

There are also lots of folks in this forum that are up-to-date on ALL the latest equipment so plenty of advice will be coming your way.

Oh- another solution is the use of split neutral density filters or a CPL (polarizing filter) to enhabce colr saturation, darken skies and remove unwanted glare from foliage.

Ourspolair

When in doubt, use a tripod and take 3 bracketed images with 2-stop range. If you do this, you end up with a higher dynamic range. There are issues with this method if anything in the shot is moving, when the blending process can produce unpredictable results. Generally, if you bracket, one of the images will be "good enough" to post process with an HDR algorithm and I find can produce an image which is very acceptable. I currently use a D5500 and this "technique" works well for me, but a tripod is essential if you are doing bracketing and HDR processing. Surprised that the 3500 does not do in-camera HDR - probably have to revert to JPEG mode to do it in-camera. Stay well and keep on experimenting.

ELNikkor

I went from the Nikon D5100 to the D750, and noticed a huge improvement in Dynamic Range. When I shoot similar film images at the same time and of the same subject with my F3, the D750 has a greater dynamic range than the film. In the menu, it has a setting called "Active D Lighting", which can be applied when shooting, as well as after the shot is taken. This improves the dynamic range. There is also a setting so the camera can take two shots in quick succession, overlaying them to make 3 more stops of dynamic range. The final image can also be modified in the computer to bring up the shadows, or suppress the highlights to add even more dynamic range.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Is it the camera? You say "sunny day skies to be blue" and every camera I am aware of does this just fine. Dynamic range is generally about getting shadows with detail. Any camera can get a blue sky, given that the exposure has been set correctly. Blue skies are mid-range tones, not highlights or darks, which is what dynamic range is about. Do you use exposure compensation? Do you set your focus/exposure point in the right place? JPEG or RAW? With JPEG be careful not to set exposure so that highlights are blown out but you can take down highlights when processing, assuming you do this. If shooting RAW you have more latitude to get highlights, and a greater degree of tones, and can then take down the HL in processing. Maybe you don't process at all, could this be the issue? To answer the specific question most high end cameras have good dynamic range, which, again, is not really an issue for blue sky.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

From what I read, negative film can handle about 8 stops of dynamic range and slide film around 5 stops. Looking at the specs for a couple of my cameras a D7200 24mp has a dynamic range of about 8 stops and my D850 45.7mp over 8 stops. FWIW, the 12mp sensors that most cell phone cameras have can show more detail than film.

In any case, when I have a raw image with a higher dynamic range than my monitor, I will "dodge and burn" in post processing to make it display correctly. While taking a picture, if I have a scene that is outside of the dynamic range of my camera, I will bracket, usually +/-2 or +/-3 stops, then fix it in post processing.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Dynamic range, even for a particular camera, varies dependent on ISO. Increasing ISO comes at the expense of less dynamic range. The Photons to Photos website is one place to look. That site also provides the ability to plot dynamic range vs. ISO and to directly compare an almost unlimited list of cameras from multiple makers.

I shoot Nikon. I have several friends who shoot Canon, but do not have direct experience with other makers. I find the Nikon very capable of capturing wide ranging images (which must then be edited to produce a printable image). My friends do beautiful full-range work with their Canons. Just about any of the cameras can capture more than be printed when working at the lower end of the ISO range.

The one comment I will make is that I have participated in several night sky workshops. Without exception, the Canon users have to work harder than the Nikon users to get usable results. (They can eventually do it...they just have a bigger struggle).

I would suggest that before going off the deep end here that the first thing to look at is your metering techniques and your use of the various metering modes that your camera offers. The sky is the brightest part of your image. If you meter on it, your camera is going to try to represent it at the brightness of an 18% gray card. That is five (or maybe four) stops below the capability of your camera and doesn't leave much room for shadow detail. Look into various ways to increase your exposure somewhat. Exposure compensation is a good way to give an extra stop or two of exposure, which may solve your problem and retain the color of the sky. I have also found that boosting saturation can have some good effect.

Outdoor photography when the sun is shining is a non-trivial undertaking. Experiment with a few changes and yu might be a little bit surprised at the results you can achieve.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

I have two some very different suggestions for the OP.

1. In addition to DXO mark, an excellent source, there is also:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm
which can show the DR by ISO for most current and recent cameras.

2. If you download sample images from ImagingResource, making sure it's the raw file, and then open them in RawDigger you will see the actual dynamic range of those test shots. But, still on the subject of RawDigger, open some of your own shots with it (raw only) and see if you are exposing sufficiently to the right such that you are getting the maximum exposure short of blown details. If not then you are not getting the DR that you could.

RawDigger is at https://www.rawdigger.com and the basic version has a free trial download and can be purchased for something under $25.

Everything above this post is good information; I'm only trying to add to the contributions you receive. I also respectfully suggest that the DR for film is kinda-sorta the opposite from digital (hard to blow details in film, very easy in digital, etc.) and an adjustment in techniques/practices may be needed.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

Look into HDR software such as Photomatix, Aurora, and HDR Efex Pro (part of the NIK Suite). Or, alternatively, try the HDR functions that are built into Lightroom Classic and Photoshop CC.