# "In Camera HDR" effectiveness



## JohanCruyff (Apr 21, 2015)

I know my 70D has a significant limitation: it produces* JPEG only* : images using its "in camera HDR" function.
I wonder if some of the forumers have tried it (or know about external measurement / reviews) to assess whether this option actually increases dynamic range in a noticeable way.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 21, 2015)

Yes, the HDR in camera will allow for more dynamic range, the discernible. Deep shadows will seem less dark and more details. The highlight will be less blown, and will have more details as well.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Apr 22, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Yes, the HDR in camera will allow for more dynamic range, the discernible. Deep shadows will seem less dark and more details. The highlight will be less blown, and will have more details as well.


 
Thank you.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 22, 2015)

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your situation. It sounds like you have the camera, so why don't you try out the HDR function and compare it to a regular shot? I have the 6D and find the in-camera HDR isn't particularly useful. It doesn't give me as much range as I would want, but that's a different camera and I'm not you!


----------



## GammyKnee (Apr 23, 2015)

I would rather doubt that the in-camera stuff does anything that the HDR tool in DPP can't, so unless you're pushed for time my suggestion would be this: 

Ignore the in-camera stuff and shoot your bracketed exposures in raw as normal. Then try using the HDR tool in DPP. If you like the results (I don't but HDR is a very personal thing) then you'll have 16-bit TIFF output that'll be more flexible than jpg. If you don't like the results, you're still free to try other techniques (like my preference - manual blending) or other software.

One big win with this approach is that if you keep the raw files, you can always reprocess them differently in the future if/when your tastes change. Nothing lost.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Apr 23, 2015)

dak723 said:


> Perhaps I am misunderstanding your situation. It sounds like you have the camera, so why don't you try out the HDR function and compare it to a regular shot? I have the 6D and find the in-camera HDR isn't particularly useful. It doesn't give me as much range as I would want, but that's a different camera and I'm not you!


Yes, I made a few experiment and actually saw "better" highlights in contrasty situations. 
Not being a technician and not being used to make accurate measurements, the (implicit) question was whether this apparent gain in Dynamic Range was completely offset by the disadvantages of shooting RAW (lower sharpness etc.).



GammyKnee said:


> I would rather doubt that the in-camera stuff does anything that the HDR tool in DPP can't, so unless you're pushed for time my suggestion would be this:
> 
> Ignore the in-camera stuff and shoot your bracketed exposures in raw as normal. Then try using the HDR tool in DPP. If you like the results (I don't but HDR is a very personal thing) then you'll have 16-bit TIFF output that'll be more flexible than jpg. If you don't like the results, you're still free to try other techniques (like my preference - manual blending) or other software.
> 
> One big win with this approach is that if you keep the raw files, you can always reprocess them differently in the future if/when your tastes change. Nothing lost.


"In camera HDR" vs. "DPP Tool" depending on the time available is a good suggestion. Thanks!


----------

