# Canon 80D RAW files available for download. DR improved.



## PhotographyFirst (Mar 18, 2016)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-80d/canon-80dA7.HTM

Someone over at FM analyzed the files and found the low ISO DR is far better than the 7D2. 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1419472


----------



## midluk (Mar 18, 2016)

PhotographyFirst said:


> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-80d/canon-80dA7.HTM
> 
> Someone over at FM analyzed the files and found the low ISO DR is far better than the 7D2.
> 
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1419472


Make sure you put on your GAS mask before going there


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

A bit worried about the reported less-than-impressive high ISO performance. To my uses that's more important than low-ISO latitude. Probably understandable though given that this is basically first-gen tech.

Edit: pretty conflicting reports, others seem to find the noise to be at 7D2 levels (which is nice given the higher resolution).


----------



## nhz (Mar 18, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> A bit worried about the reported less-than-impressive high ISO performance. To my uses that's more important than low-ISO latitude. Probably understandable though given that this is basically first-gen tech.
> 
> Edit: pretty conflicting reports, others seem to find the noise to be at 7D2 levels (which is nice given the higher resolution).



Looks promising. A slight trade-off in extreme High ISO performance for much better low ISO DR makes perfect sense for a camera like 80D.


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

nhz said:


> Looks promising. A slight trade-off in extreme High ISO performance for much better low ISO DR makes perfect sense for a camera like 80D.



Yeah, true. But it doesn't help with my dilemma of whether my next body should be the 7D2 or the 80D


----------



## tlieser (Mar 18, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> nhz said:
> 
> 
> > Looks promising. A slight trade-off in extreme High ISO performance for much better low ISO DR makes perfect sense for a camera like 80D.
> ...



You're not the only one. One thing is sure: 7DMK2 has the better ergonomics. Esp. if you have large hands (like I do). And 2 card slots (even if they are mixed).
I'm gnawing my fingers trying to come up with a decision.
(I don't need the tilt screen, I don't need 24MPix, but I want a camera that is as easy to handle as my old 50D)


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Mar 18, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> nhz said:
> 
> 
> > Looks promising. A slight trade-off in extreme High ISO performance for much better low ISO DR makes perfect sense for a camera like 80D.
> ...



Also depends if you need speed. The 7D2 is unbelievable for Sports if you can't afford a 1DX.


----------



## RickWagoner (Mar 18, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> nhz said:
> 
> 
> > Looks promising. A slight trade-off in extreme High ISO performance for much better low ISO DR makes perfect sense for a camera like 80D.
> ...



It depends on how fast do you need the next body and how long you will keep it. The 7d3 will be out next year with an improved 80D sensor and much better NR like the 7d2 has over the 70D. The 7d3 will be more feature loaded with 4k video, greater buffer size, 1dx2 focus, wifi and maybe touchscreen also. If you can wait till next year then the $1200 you save can get you more further than it would today. If you do need it sooner then wait or look around for a 7d2 with a printer deal around $1100, once the D500 starts shipping (if and when that actually happens) the 7d2 will see some nice sales as the demand for the body is already low now and will get much worse when the D500 hits the streets.


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 18, 2016)

RickWagoner said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > nhz said:
> ...



+1. Waiting until you really need one doesn't hurt.


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 18, 2016)

Hmmm... the sensor seems like it's behaving like a Sony based on the graphs provided in the other forum.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Mar 18, 2016)

Pushing/pulling 100 ISO RAW files 5 stops in each direction shows zero degradation of the file. Hmmm, that is actually a freakishly good performance versus a 5D3, 7D2, and 6D. I will be curious to see how this sensor scored on the almighty DxO Mark! haha


----------



## JohanCruyff (Mar 18, 2016)

LSXPhotog said:


> I will be curious to see how this sensor scored on the almighty DxO Mark! haha


If the gap between Sony and Canon has been significantly reduced, I'm sure DXO will do the usual test as soon as possible  

(I mean: April 2019) ;D


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 18, 2016)

JohanCruyff said:


> LSXPhotog said:
> 
> 
> > I will be curious to see how this sensor scored on the almighty DxO Mark! haha
> ...



fixed.


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

verysimplejason said:


> Hmmm... the sensor seems like it's behaving like a Sony based on the graphs provided in the other forum.



It's just behaving like a sensor that is no longer read noise limited at low ISOs, and consequently the graph is close to that of an ideal, photon-shot-noise limited sensor. This is what people hoped for, but not very strong evidence that the sensor is actually Sony technology if that's what you implied.


----------



## H. Jones (Mar 18, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> JohanCruyff said:
> 
> 
> > LSXPhotog said:
> ...



I think you mean to say that DXO will soon have a blog post up saying that they've lost their test results and will work "very hard" to find them


----------



## LoneRider (Mar 18, 2016)

H. Jones said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > JohanCruyff said:
> ...



report to moderator - "funny as heck!" ;D


----------



## Woody (Mar 18, 2016)

H. Jones said:


> I think you mean to say that DXO will soon have a blog post up saying that they've lost their test results and will work "very hard" to find them



Nah, the 80D sensor is improved significantly from older generation Canon sensors, but is still a far cry from what is demonstrated in D7200.


----------



## K (Mar 18, 2016)

JohanCruyff said:


> LSXPhotog said:
> 
> 
> > I will be curious to see how this sensor scored on the almighty DxO Mark! haha
> ...




It might not take that long, since Canon hasn't surpassed Sony in this regard, there's less reason to cringe and delay the tests. The 5DS and 5DSR tests took absurdly long because Canon totally left Nikon in the dust. Canon L lens scores on 5DS are incredible.


----------



## K (Mar 18, 2016)

Woody said:


> H. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > I think you mean to say that DXO will soon have a blog post up saying that they've lost their test results and will work "very hard" to find them
> ...



The D7200 has a very impressive sensor for a crop.

However, Canon EF-S zooms are better than Nikon DX zooms by quite a bit, more than making up for the weaker sensor leading to better Canon IQ. Nikon DX primes are good though.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 18, 2016)

K said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > H. Jones said:
> ...


Not only for still images, I think Nikon d7200 video quality is also very good except no live AF.
What are the Nikon comparable lens for Canon STM lens. I guess third party lenses are available for both the systems. Nikon has 35mm prime for crop. Is there any cheap Nikon walk around lens?

Thanks


----------



## K (Mar 18, 2016)

The 80D is shaping up to be a serious enthusiast camera. As I've said in past posts, this now means the 7D2 is about only three things:

1. Build / Weather Sealing
2. FPS
3. Dual Slots

All of which applies more to pros or those with great demands.

The 45pt AF and 7fps is "good enough" for the vast majority out there. They have closed the gap with AF unless the programming of the AF is crippled somehow. I will call the 45pt AF a wash...once you get up to that many points, the AF now is in the realm of usefulness for action, not having to focus and recompose .....

I do think this will dig into 7D2 sales for those people who wanted more than the 70D, especially in AF and IQ but not necessarily speed. 

Figure, if you're not needing 10fps, or a super tough body...or 2 card slots for mission critical jobs - there's nothing the 7D2 offers you. If anything, it is just larger and heavier.


With Nikon D500 coming up, I think Canon may actually break this 5-6 year update cycle and release a Mark III. But that's for the rumor section.


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

K said:


> The 80D is shaping up to be a serious enthusiast camera. As I've said in past posts, this now means the 7D2 is about only three things:
> 
> 1. Build / Weather Sealing
> 2. FPS
> ...



My thoughts pretty much. Even the sealing on the 80D is probably going to be enough for almost anybody - Canon claims the 70D is already as well sealed as the very well regarded original 7D was. (Of course, it is well-known that the 7D2 sealing is in a different class altogether!)

The D500 looks like even more a mini-D5 than the 7D2 like a mini-1DX. Looks like Canon and Nikon both figure that with modern technology, there's market for an actual pro crop body. I speculate any future 7D3 will look quite a bit like the 1DX2, tech-wise.


----------



## whothafunk (Mar 18, 2016)

K said:


> As I've said in past posts, this now means the 7D2 is about only three things:
> 
> 1. Build / Weather Sealing
> 2. FPS
> ...


It's not how many focus points you have, it's how fast the camera focuses, keeps track on moving subject, and so on.
7D2 still has far superior focusing than 80D, utilizing 1DX's autofocus algorithm, case selection, lens drive speed, etc.

The 7D2 is about these things:
- ergonomics
- build quality/toughness
- FPS
- superior AF
- buffer
- larger viewfinder
- more durable shutter
- dual card slot

It also has GPS and iTR, which I personally don't care about, but neither do I for the Wi-Fi and tilty screen.


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

tlieser said:


> You're not the only one. One thing is sure: 7DMK2 has the better ergonomics. Esp. if you have large hands (like I do). And 2 card slots (even if they are mixed).
> I'm gnawing my fingers trying to come up with a decision.
> (I don't need the tilt screen, I don't need 24MPix, but I want a camera that is as easy to handle as my old 50D)



To my hands my 60D is pretty okay, though it could be a bit bigger. The joystick and larger rear dial would be nice. The extra weight, not so much. I do like the swivel screen and probably would get somewhat frustrated without it. Never have had a need for an extra card slot.



kaptainkatsu said:


> Also depends if you need speed. The 7D2 is unbelievable for Sports if you can't afford a 1DX.



Yep, although the 80D AF may well prove to be very adequate for that. I'm interested in partner dance shooting which is pretty challenging, both tech and skill-wise.



RickWagoner said:


> It depends on how fast do you need the next body and how long you will keep it. The 7d3 will be out next year with an improved 80D sensor and much better NR like the 7d2 has over the 70D. The 7d3 will be more feature loaded with 4k video, greater buffer size, 1dx2 focus, wifi and maybe touchscreen also. If you can wait till next year then the $1200 you save can get you more further than it would today. If you do need it sooner then wait or look around for a 7d2 with a printer deal around $1100, once the D500 starts shipping (if and when that actually happens) the 7d2 will see some nice sales as the demand for the body is already low now and will get much worse when the D500 hits the streets.



Right. I don't really _really_ need a new body right now, my 60D is pretty adequate, the 80D just got me uncharacteristically excited. And, of course, the 60D _is_ a six-year-old model, and already was three years old when I bought one.

The 7D2 is currently just a hundred eurobucks more expensive than the 80D preorder (1299 €) in a local brick-and-mortar store and has been on sale for less than that. It probably doesn't make sense for me to wait for a 7D3 especially seeing that its list price will no doubt be something like 1800 €.


----------



## CapturingLight (Mar 18, 2016)

I'm quite exited about this camera, increased low ISO DR is a nice addition but it remains to be seen if my photos will benefit. There is so much more to be excited about. The biggest difference I can see looking though the samples between the 80D and the 7200 is the 7200 seems to be noticeably sharper. I assume that this is due to the AA filter on the Canon. I really wish that these sites would do a series of moire test as I know that I have been caught by that before even with the Canon AA filter. It would be nice to know how much worse it can get without the filter so a more informed decision on this trade off can be made.

Just trying to hold the GAS in check for the 1st sales on the 80D to appear.


----------



## rbr (Mar 18, 2016)

One significant feature of this camera is that f8 AF will be enabled on all the focus points. Keep in mind that the 1DXII is the first camera EVER announced with f8 AF on anything besides the center point. That would make this camera ideal for songbird portraits in decent light, especially on a tripod, without having to rely only on the center point. Something like the 400 f4 DO II with a 2x becomes nearly a 1300mm lens with all AF points available in a very lightweight package.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Mar 18, 2016)

CapturingLight said:


> I'm quite exited about this camera, increased low ISO DR is a nice addition but it remains to be seen if my photos will benefit. There is so much more to be excited about. The biggest difference I can see looking though the samples between the 80D and the 7200 is the 7200 seems to be noticeably sharper. I assume that this is due to the AA filter on the Canon. I really wish that these sites would do a series of moire test as I know that I have been caught by that before even with the Canon AA filter. It would be nice to know how much worse it can get without the filter so a more informed decision on this trade off can be made.
> 
> Just trying to hold the GAS in check for the 1st sales on the 80D to appear.


If the lenses are different, then it is hard to say really. After a processing pass and using the same lens, the sharpness difference should not be much for printing. Zooming a 24MP image to 100% or more to pixel peep is going to grossly exaggerate and differences.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Mar 18, 2016)

Here's a side-by-side of the 80D and the D7200. The Nikon D7200 is apparently the king of APS-C DR and even even only second to the D800 series cameras for DSLR cameras. According to DXO, which should be taken with a bit of radioactive salt. 

To my eyes, the Canon suffers from less color shifting. Or are the WB levels different for some reason? But overall, the two look almost identical in terms of DR at ISO 100 when pushed a few stops. 

Image courtesy of this post on DPR. http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57461339


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

rbr said:


> One significant feature of this camera is that f8 AF will be enabled on all the focus points. Keep in mind that the 1DXII is the first camera EVER announced with f8 AF on anything besides the center point. That would make this camera ideal for songbird portraits in decent light, especially on a tripod, without having to rely only on the center point. Something like the 400 f4 DO II with a 2x becomes nearly a 1300mm lens with all AF points available in a very lightweight package.



Not quite so I'm afraid. The 80D AF at f/8 works as follows:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Lens group G: 27 AF points usable. 3x3 at the center all cross-type, two 3x3 groups on the sides horizontal-sensitive only. There are exactly two lens/extender combos in this group:

Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM II + Canon EF 1.4x III
Canon EF 200-400 f/4 L IS USM EX1.4 + Canon EF 2x III
[*]Lens group H: Only center AF point usable. Cross-type. All other >f/5.6 lenses and lens-extender combinations.
[/list]

Source: The 80D instruction manual pp. 128-135


----------



## ehouli (Mar 18, 2016)

To my eyes, the image from the RAW at ISO 1600 look too soft, when trying to compensate for it in post, noise will be bad as always, ISO 1600 es used very often and Canon could have a done a better job, they're lagging behind in DR.


----------



## CapturingLight (Mar 18, 2016)

rbr said:


> One significant feature of this camera is that f8 AF will be enabled on all the focus points. Keep in mind that the 1DXII is the first camera EVER announced with f8 AF on anything besides the center point. That would make this camera ideal for songbird portraits in decent light, especially on a tripod, without having to rely only on the center point. Something like the 400 f4 DO II with a 2x becomes nearly a 1300mm lens with all AF points available in a very lightweight package.



Unfortunately that combination only will work with the center point f8. According to the 80D manual only the 100-400 and 200-400 lenses support off center f8 auto focus.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Mar 18, 2016)

I did an ACR RAW conversion of the 80D (left) and D7200 (right) at ISO 100. 

Pushed 5 stops, equal WB values, no sharpening, everything else left as default. 

Someone over on DPR that knows vastly more about sensor and data tech than I do, seems to think the measured DR is lower for the 80D because of the way Canon handles the file data, but in actual use, is probably pretty close to Nikon's best. It will be interesting to see how DXO measures the 80D if it is found that the actual files from it offer the same level of DR as Nikon in real-world use.


----------



## rbr (Mar 18, 2016)

Thanks for posting this. Here's a quote from the features listed at B&H, which no doubt was given to them by Canon :

" For working with telephoto lenses fitted with extenders, 27 of the points are capable of focusing down to f/8 and the center dual cross-type offers increased precision at brighter aperture values."

If that is only the case for 2 lenses then it's a bit of false advertising on Canon's part. In any case, having f8 AF at all on a camera of this class is a first and I'm sure many 100-400II owners will enjoy the extra flexibility.




Sharlin said:


> rbr said:
> 
> 
> > One significant feature of this camera is that f8 AF will be enabled on all the focus points. Keep in mind that the 1DXII is the first camera EVER announced with f8 AF on anything besides the center point. That would make this camera ideal for songbird portraits in decent light, especially on a tripod, without having to rely only on the center point. Something like the 400 f4 DO II with a 2x becomes nearly a 1300mm lens with all AF points available in a very lightweight package.
> ...


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Mar 18, 2016)

rbr said:


> Thanks for posting this. Here's a quote from the features listed at B&H, which no doubt was given to them by Canon :
> 
> " For working with telephoto lenses fitted with extenders, 27 of the points are capable of focusing down to f/8 and the center dual cross-type offers increased precision at brighter aperture values."
> 
> ...


The D7200 has had f8 focusing for a while now. If anything, Canon is catching up a little in that regard, and surpassing it with the two lenses mentioned for wider f8 focusing. 

I would be curious to know why it is limited to those 2 lenses? Optical designs? Electronics? Canon trying to protect sales of more expensive gear?


----------



## jrista (Mar 18, 2016)

Hmm, I'm intrigued. First time in a long time I've been intrigued by a Canon camera. I grabbed two ISO 100 NR 0 frames from ImagingResource. The 80D image was 1/13th and the 7D II image was 1/15th, so close in exposure. 

There is a definite improvement in noise quality in the shadows:

7D II:






80D:





Neither of these images had particularly deep shadows, so this comparison is probably not showing the full benefit of the 80D improvement. Still, it's a fairly obvious improvement nevertheless. The blacks also appear to be more neutral in color, with less of that classic red cast.


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 18, 2016)

rbr said:


> Thanks for posting this. Here's a quote from the features listed at B&H, which no doubt was given to them by Canon :
> 
> " For working with telephoto lenses fitted with extenders, 27 of the points are capable of focusing down to f/8 and the center dual cross-type offers increased precision at brighter aperture values."
> 
> If that is only the case for 2 lenses then it's a bit of false advertising on Canon's part. In any case, having f8 AF at all on a camera of this class is a first and I'm sure many 100-400II owners will enjoy the extra flexibility.



Yep, I too was a bit nonplussed with Canon's marketing department when I saw the actual specs.




PhotographyFirst said:


> I would be curious to know why it is limited to those 2 lenses? Optical designs? Electronics? Canon trying to protect sales of more expensive gear?



Probably optical reasons. Those two lenses are the newest Canon big whites, and non-center f/8 autofocus has probably been a specific concern in their design. We can probably expect other Group G lenses as Canon renews its telephoto lineup (of course, most of the interesting ones have already been updated recently!) I doubt it has lot to do with product segmentation - after all, who would really use the $10k 200-400 with a ten-series body?


----------



## scyrene (Mar 18, 2016)

ehouli said:


> To my eyes, the image from the RAW at ISO 1600 look too soft, when trying to compensate for it in post, noise will be bad as always, ISO 1600 es used very often and Canon could have a done a better job, they're lagging behind in DR.



With all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. Canon do not and have never lagged behind in high ISO DR. This discussion is about low ISO.


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 18, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> Not only for still images, I think Nikon d7200 video quality is also very good except no live AF.



are you able to have full manual control on the D7200 while recording video?


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 18, 2016)

K said:


> The 80D is shaping up to be a serious enthusiast camera. As I've said in past posts, this now means the 7D2 is about only three things:
> 
> 1. Build / Weather Sealing
> 2. FPS
> 3. Dual Slots



viewfinder as well.


----------



## Otara (Mar 18, 2016)

Having multiple F8 work on everything is pretty useful for my lenses, and surely dual digic does something for AF etc, be interesting to see in practise if theres any practical difference.

But given the sensor, swivel screen and DPAF at 60FPS, I do find myself tempted. More GAS than sense, thats me.


----------



## arbitrage (Mar 19, 2016)

I've preordered an 80D to either work along side my 7D2 or possibly replace it. I'm hoping for a more stable AF system than the erratic 7D2....something consistent like my 1DX AF would be welcomed. But the main reason I ordered one is to shoot from my kayak with 100-400II+1.4TCIII and have 27AF points to compose with instead of just the centre point. The ability to use Zone mode with 27 points at f/8 will be an improvement for my shooting from kayak. 

I wish the 27 f/8 points worked with more lens/TC combos....seems strange that the 200-400 +2x works but not the f/4 primes + 2xTC. Must be something with the zooms and the way they pass light. I rarely use the 2x on my 200-400 and much prefer using the internal 1.4 combined with external 1.4 to have more flexibility (280-800 f/5.6-f/8) than being forced to stay at 400-800 f/8.

Seeing that the sensor has been improved is a plus but not something that my purchase was based on. I did compare the ISO 1600-6400 80D vs 7D2 IR files in LR and pushing the shadows the 7D2 shows a lot of purple and greens in the blacks where as the 80D is free of weird colours.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 19, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> I've preordered an 80D to either work along side my 7D2 or possibly replace it. I'm hoping for a more stable AF system than the erratic 7D2....something consistent like my 1DX AF would be welcomed. But the main reason I ordered one is to shoot from my kayak with 100-400II+1.4TCIII and have 27AF points to compose with instead of just the centre point. The ability to use Zone mode with 27 points at f/8 will be an improvement for my shooting from kayak.
> 
> I wish the 27 f/8 points worked with more lens/TC combos....seems strange that the 200-400 +2x works but not the f/4 primes + 2xTC. Must be something with the zooms and the way they pass light. I rarely use the 2x on my 200-400 and much prefer using the internal 1.4 combined with external 1.4 to have more flexibility (280-800 f/5.6-f/8) than being forced to stay at 400-800 f/8.
> 
> Seeing that the sensor has been improved is a plus but not something that my purchase was based on. I did compare the ISO 1600-6400 80D vs 7D2 IR files in LR and pushing the shadows the 7D2 shows a lot of purple and greens in the blacks where as the 80D is free of weird colours.



Why not just use use the 100-400 II without the TC then? I find the extra reach you get with the TC mostly not crucial and the extra stop and wider field of view frequently much more useful. When I have been in boats etc that are rocking the wider field of view and less movement of 400mm vs 560mm much more useful as also for birds in flight.


----------



## niels123 (Mar 19, 2016)

Is the sensor different from the sensor in the 750D (Rebel T6i)?


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 19, 2016)

niels123 said:


> Is the sensor different from the sensor in the 750D (Rebel T6i)?



Yes, obviously. That's what this whole thread is about. Besides, it was known to be a different sensor from the beginning, simply because it has Dual Pixel AF and the 750D doesn't.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 19, 2016)

If you shoot at ISO 100-200, then the extra DR may be of use. But, I am nearly always at ISO 640 for high shutter speeds or for dimly lit birds and the DR and S/N are similar for most sensors of the same size as photon noise dominates, not circuitry. If Canon had introduced a sensor without the low-pass filter, I would have pre-ordered the 80D. There are now several careful studies, including measurements by Lensrentals, that show you get a 10% increase in resolution or sharpness going from the 5DS to the 5DS R. Two days ago, the combination of a very large discount and a £250 cashback from Canon spurred me into buying the 5DS R. It arrived yesterday morning. I would have preferred an APS-C but I have given up waiting for Canon to make one without the blurring low pass filter.


----------



## pj1974 (Mar 19, 2016)

I've been quite interested in the 80D since it's announcement (actually, slightly before the announcement... when I saw the CR2 specs).

I have a 7D, and the 80D could potentially be a replacement / my next camera (depends on several factors though). The 80D is a very well rounded, capable camera.

What is important to realise is that the 7Dii is likely to be superior for fast moving subjects. Not just probably the difference in FPS (10 vs 7), but the fact that the extra sensor helps AI Servo AF at that speed.

On page 138 of the 80D manual it states this KEY bit of information, that few people have picked up on:
*"During Live View shooting, or when (Servo AF) is set, the maximum speed will be max. approx 5.0 shots / sec*

This appears to indicate that the 80D can shoot at 7FPS, but can not continuously AF at that speed. Maximum for continuous AF (Servo AF) is 5FPS. I know from experience, the difference between 5FPS and 7FPS and 10FPS is noticable, and can make a significant difference, depending one is trying to photograph.

I must say, for MOST of my purposes, 5FPS is sufficient, though there are times that I need higher FPS (with continual AF) - e.g. wildlife, some sports, etc. For most people though 5FPS will be sufficient for all their photography (it takes quite a bit of skill to track a fast moving subject at 10FPS). 

Being able to have continual AF in Live View at 5FPS is particularly impressive, in my humble opinion. Well done, Canon with the 80D.

Regards,

Paul


----------



## Diltiazem (Mar 19, 2016)

pj1974 said:


> I've been quite interested in the 80D since it's announcement (actually, slightly before the announcement... when I saw the CR2 specs).
> 
> I have a 7D, and the 80D could potentially be a replacement / my next camera (depends on several factors though). The 80D is a very well rounded, capable camera.
> 
> ...



I think you misunderstood. Read page 98 again.


----------



## nhz (Mar 19, 2016)

K said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > H. Jones said:
> ...



Good point, however in reality IMHO Canon has only a few APS-C consumer zooms (the STM series) that offer very good quality for the money (and for the size/weight). Those are great for e.g. travel or general use but probably not ideal for the average 80D or 7D2 user as they are relatively slow; they are more in line with the SL1 and Rebel bodies. 

There are a few higher quality (also heavier and more expensive) APS-C lenses like the 17-55IS and 15-85IS but especially for the last one I doubt it will do the current 24MP sensors justice. The new Nikon 16-80VR seems to be a step above the 15-85 in IQ, at least if you get a good one ;-) 

For both Canon and Nikon APS-C there is no high quality APS-C SWA prime or bright WA zoom and one has to use third party options like Sigma 1.8/18-35. Maybe they assume that cameras like 80D/7D2 and d7200/D500 are primarily used with tele lenses (sports, wildlife etc.), where both companies offer lots of good quality glass. Will be interesting to see if Nikon and Canon do something about the lack of APS-C 'pro' lenses in the WA-normal range. Maybe they are happy with more demanding customers buying a FF body to cover the WA range ;-(


----------



## nhz (Mar 19, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > The 80D is shaping up to be a serious enthusiast camera. As I've said in past posts, this now means the 7D2 is about only three things:
> ...


It also makes sense to move up with the more pro models in spec/quality and price because of the decline of DSLR sales. Keeping the DSLR market alive will mean more expensive cameras and they have to make sure those cameras are attractive enough for upgrading. Both Canon and Nikon have apparently decided that there is still money in 'pro' APS-C cameras.

I don't need any of the three 7D2 points mentioned above. Although the 7D2 is not my taste (prefer 80D instead) I'm considering the D500 because they 'pulled out all the stops' and put so many great features and technologies into that body. Even if I don't really need everything they put inside, it still looks like good value for money and the extras might be nice in future. The 80D on the other hand, although much cheaper, seems a lot less 'value for money' to me ;-(


----------



## anders (Mar 19, 2016)

Diltiazem said:


> pj1974 said:
> 
> 
> > On page 138 of the 80D manual it states this KEY bit of information, that few people have picked up on:
> ...



I don't think this make sense:

Page 98:
"The default setting is <o> (High-speed continuous shooting*). When you want to take the picture, press the shutter button completely. If you hold down the shutter button, you can shoot continuously while maintaining autofocusing to capture changes in the subject’s movement.
* Viewfinder shooting: max. approx. 7.0 shots/sec., Live View shooting: max.
approx. 5.0 shots/sec.."

and

Page 138:
"High-speed continuous shooting (Max. approx. 7.0 shots/sec.*) While you hold down the shutter button completely, the camera will shoot continuously.
* During Live View shooting or when [Servo AF] is set, the maximum
speed will be max. approx. 5.0 shots/sec."


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 19, 2016)

anders said:


> I don't think this make sense:
> 
> Page 98:
> "The default setting is <o> (High-speed continuous shooting*). When you want to take the picture, press the shutter button completely. If you hold down the shutter button, you can shoot continuously while maintaining autofocusing to capture changes in the subject’s movement.
> ...



Plus in the p. 139 blue box:

"In AI Servo AF operation, the continuous shooting speed *may *become *slightly *slower depending on the subject and lens used." (emphasis mine)

I'm inclined to believe page 138 is in error, especially as it uses the weird phrase "[Servo AF]" when otherwise the manual consistently uses the proper term "AI Servo AF".


----------



## Khufu (Mar 19, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> anders said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think this make sense:
> ...



Is " Servo AF" possibly referring to the mirror-slappy AF mode, where you're using Live View but raising the mirror to utilise the AF sensor rather than the DPAF?... I'm thinking the similarity of the terms has maybe just been naively overlooked in translation...


----------



## pj1974 (Mar 20, 2016)

Hi all...

Thanks for your posts following up what I wrote about on the top of this page (page 4).

It could be that page 138 contains an error (typo or translation). I'm not ruling that out.

However because that page gives the most 'detailed' description of how AI Servo AF is used, (continual AF while the camera is also shooting at 'maximum' FPS) I tend to think this page describes how I would AF in those cases.

The words used on page 98 are more ambiguous (can the 80D continue to do AF AND shoot at 7fps, or does the processing of images from sensor to card, slow 'continual' AF + FPS? Whereas, maybe the 80 can 'continually AF track' until the mirror starts moving and then it slows down...?

I look forward to reading both pro reviews and user reports about this - as well as trying it myself (indications are that the 80D should be in local stores in my city soon).

Regards

Paul 8)


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Mar 20, 2016)

Has there ever been a recent Canon body that reduced FPS by that much in servo AF? 

No biggie though. Just push the FPS up to 7 with the additional low ISO DR.


----------



## Corydoras (Mar 20, 2016)

The manual seems to be a bit unclear when it comes to the max fps, but I think that the manual is trying to say that the maximum fps will be 7 when using the viewfinder + servo af, and 5 if you are using servo af in live view.


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 20, 2016)

Corydoras said:


> The manual seems to be a bit unclear when it comes to the max fps, but I think that the manual is trying to say that the maximum fps will be 7 when using the viewfinder + servo af, and 5 if you are using servo af in live view.



Ah, indeed. The phrase "[Servo AF]" is used in the Live View chapter, page 275, to refer to Live View servo AF specifically. Also, interestingly, page 272 seems to claim that with one shot AF, the maximum shooting speed is ~7 fps even in Live View (which makes sense).


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 20, 2016)

pj1974 said:


> On page 138 of the 80D manual it states this KEY bit of information, that few people have picked up on:
> *"During Live View shooting, or when (Servo AF) is set, the maximum speed will be max. approx 5.0 shots / sec*
> 
> This appears to indicate that the 80D can shoot at 7FPS, but can not continuously AF at that speed. Maximum for continuous AF (Servo AF) is 5FPS.



no, you missed the key part of that. they were talking about during liveview. liveview uses Servo AF not AI Servo AF.


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 20, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm... the sensor seems like it's behaving like a Sony based on the graphs provided in the other forum.
> ...



Well I'm not implying anything except that Canon might be using something a similar technology. I'd be very happy if they're not actually using a Sony sensor. This would be a clear indicator that Canon has caught up with the competition when it comes to low ISO DR. My 6D is already good enough for most landscape photography that I'm doing but I'm always in awe with my friends' Nikon D800s and D810s when it comes to low ISO DR.


----------



## pj1974 (Mar 20, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> pj1974 said:
> 
> 
> > On page 138 of the 80D manual it states this KEY bit of information, that few people have picked up on:
> ...



Ah.... now this finally makes sense! Thanks everyone for helping unravel the various references to the 80D's continual AF and FPS.

That's great news too. As I wrote above, having continual AF at 7FPS is noticeably different (better) than 5FPS.

My 7D achieves 8FPS, which meets most of my wildlife, BIF and sporting needs, so 7FPS will also be mostly adequate. 5FPS with continual AF (Servo AF) during Live View will at times be convenient too.

Plus - with the initial indications that the 80D having appreciably less ISO and increased dynamic range potential at most useful ISO's, it comes as a noticeable upgrade to several other Canon APS-C DSLRs.

Well done, Canon. Looking forward to more reviews and user reports in the coming weeks and months. Most of all, good photos.

Paul 8)


----------



## dufflover (Mar 21, 2016)

As above hope this is Canon apparently catching up with others in the sensors. Means there isn't that constant excuse-making about how it's a "camera system" and whatever else (I actually agree with it, but still the worst overused excuse used to dismiss people who wouldn't mind a better sensor anyway).
The early signs convince me a lot more to possibly get one as it was always upgraded brains that I was looking for if I was upgrading my 70D - brains as in sensor, AF smarts, metering smarts, etc.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Mar 21, 2016)

One question:

If Canon's Low-ISO Dynamic Ranges [totally or almost] catches up with Sony's one, will we all be able to complain ONLY about the presence of the AA-filter on most Canon cameras? 
Photography forums will not make sense anymore! 
P.S. In any case, with or without the AA-filter, never forget that Canon is *******!


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 21, 2016)

JohanCruyff said:


> One question:
> 
> If Canon's Low-ISO Dynamic Ranges [totally or almost] catches up with Sony's one, will we all be able to complain ONLY about the presence of the AA-filter on most Canon cameras?



Oh, low-ISO DR is sooo last year. Given the D5's definitely non-ISO-invariant DR results, now it's again fashionable to complain about high ISO performance instead!


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 21, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> JohanCruyff said:
> 
> 
> > One question:
> ...


Wondering how dxomark going to score 80d. Probably 80d might have better DR than D5.. If it is true, it is going to be funny when someone starts a thread telling how Canon 80d is better than D5 based on DXOmark numbers.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 21, 2016)

EDIT: well others say it might clip at 16000+ which would be way higher than before and might be enough to make a difference so hang on while I recalcuate.


Hmm well it seems to be mixed. After all this time they did jump DR noticeably, but after all this and if this is the best they can do it's a bit disappointing in that it's still a ways off from Exmor. It closes the gap but probably even less than half the way.

Very roughly it seems like it might have about 2.88 Std Dev read noise for ISO100. To normalize to what DxO does to compare everything fairly regardless of MP count you then apply normalization factor of sqrt(8MP/24.2MP) and multiply that times the 2.88 read noise. Then you also take the high signal-low signal, in the past the high for IOS has often been around 13400 or so for the 14bit cameras and 1024 or 2056 for the low, for this 80D the low is 512, not sure the high but it doesn't change things super much if you are off so just use though numbers. (EDIT: some claim they think they see it peaking at 16383 which is much higher than before and enough to make some difference. That is an oddly high number but I'll use it and hopefully it's correct.) Anyway take that difference and divide by the prior results and then take Log2 of that and there you go and you get 13.2 in this case. It seems the Canon 750D Rebel 24.2 MP got around 12 so it seems around 1 to a little over 1 stop better than their prior best APS-C (and 1.8 compared to the old 50D and prior stuff) and 1-1.2 stop better than 5D2/5D3.

OTOH top Sony/Nikon/etc. APS-C seem to hit 14.5ish or so so you are talking 1 stop better for Canon but still 1.3 stops behind so it's really kind of a shame if this turns out to be all they can manage and it will be like this for another 10 years. It's enough to help for some scenes but still a little short for lots of dappled lighting in forest scenes which Exmor can JUST pull off but this might still leave a little questionable, although better.

As far as banding it appears as if there might be totally zero so that is good.

Hopefully the 1DX 2 or at least 5D4 will have even better sensor tech than tech than the 80D.

I'm really starting to think they should just give up and buy from SOny now that SOny split their sensor division appears willing to sell as much as they can to anyone as soon as they can.

How awesome would a 42.MP high DR camera that can handle oversampled 4k video be combined with a DSLR body from canon for high speed AF, fps, etc. and Canon UI?

Anyway it seems to be the best Canon has ever done and it's a good deal better than say a 50D sensor since it goes from tons of banding to zero (most likely) and maybe jumps almost 1.8 stops better DR (and since the banding is way better, more than 1.8 better in real world usability). OTOH it still seems some ways, another decade at Canon pace, behind catching up to Exmor of today and even a few years ago.

But they may have a better version in the 1DX2/5D4 so who knows for that stuff. And the measurements here are a little rough, it could easily end up +/- 0.33 difference in reality.


----------



## nhz (Mar 22, 2016)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Hmm well it seems to be mixed. After all this time they did jump DR noticeably, but after all this and if this is the best they can do it's a bit disappointing in that it's still a ways off from Exmor. It closes the gap but probably even less than half the way.
> ...
> OTOH top Sony/Nikon/etc. APS-C seem to hit 14.5ish or so so you are talking 1 stop better for Canon but still 1.3 stops behind so it's really kind of a shame if this turns out to be all they can manage and it will be like this for another 10 years. It's enough to help for some scenes but still a little short for lots of dappled lighting in forest scenes which Exmor can JUST pull off but this might still leave a little questionable, although better.
> ...
> Anyway it seems to be the best Canon has ever done and it's a good deal better than say a 50D sensor since it goes from tons of banding to zero (most likely) and maybe jumps almost 1.8 stops better DR (and since the banding is way better, more than 1.8 better in real world usability). OTOH it still seems some ways, another decade at Canon pace, behind catching up to Exmor of today and even a few years ago.



Yes, about one stop improvement compared to their best APS-C sensor and about 2 stops compared to the APS-C sensors from almost ten years ago ... and still way behind Nikon. The first DPReview tests with pushing shadows by 5-6 stops show about a stop improvement over 70D, and 1.5-2 stops behind Nikon D7200. 

I'm using a 450D and I'm not happy with its DR, which according to DXO was the same as my 300D from 2003 (and in my impression in practice even a bit worse, maybe due to different chroma noise pattern / banding). I haven't upgraded in all those years because there was very little improvement in DR / noise performance which for me is the main bottleneck for image quality. Over 95% of my images are taken at 100-800 ISO (action shots mostly 400/800). The 80D shows some obvious improvement, but it this all they can do after almost zero progress in over ten years? 

Of course there is more to image quality than just DR in the 100-800 ISO range, and the DXO DR ratings can be debated but they look pretty realistic to me. If I want a better sensor some of the options with their cost are listed below; the Canon options don't look like value for money. If they could offer a similar sensor improvement in a Rebel or SL2 it would look better, but that could take some time. Of course there are other factors in chosing a camera, the new AF system of the 80D etc. should be nice but for me image (sensor) quality is at the top of the list.

Canon 450D DR 10.8 cost 0
Canon 750D DR 12.0 win 1.2 stop, cost €600
Canon 80D DR 13.2 win 2.4 stops, cost €1300
Nikon D5500 DR 14.0 win 3.2 stops, cost €600
Nikon D7200 DR 14.6 win 3.8 stops, cost €1070
Nikon D500 DR xx.x win 4 stops(?), cost €2370

I really want a tilt screen, otherwise I would already have purchased the Nikon D7200. The 750D/760D and D5500 are not a real option for me because they lack focus adjustment and have small viewfinders. I'm even considering the D500 and if its low ISO DR proves as good as the D7200 it might be a very attractive option despite the high price (which might come down a bit once they are in stock?).


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 22, 2016)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> EDIT: well others say it might clip at 16000+ which would be way higher than before and might be enough to make a difference so hang on while I recalcuate.
> 
> 
> Hmm well it seems to be mixed. After all this time they did jump DR noticeably, but after all this and if this is the best they can do it's a bit disappointing in that it's still a ways off from Exmor. It closes the gap but probably even less than half the way.
> ...


It is only Nikons. Latest Sony (a6300) has less DR than 80d. d7200 and d5500 are the ones with highest DR. Between them, d7200 turns gray and dark patches into violet or brown with anything above +3ev push in DPR tests. D5500 is the one actually holds colors also with these extra pushes. D5000 series cameras are amazing. Nikons even have better iq in video. Hopefully Canon improved this in 80d.

Thanks


----------



## bmwzimmer (Mar 22, 2016)

I really want a tilt screen, otherwise I would already have purchased the Nikon D7200. The 750D/760D and D5500 are not a real option for me because they lack focus adjustment and have small viewfinders. I'm even considering the D500 and if its low ISO DR proves as good as the D7200 it might be a very attractive option despite the high price (which might come down a bit once they are in stock?).
[/quote]

I'd wait a few months after the D500 is released for a D510 with all the bugs worked out.


----------



## scyrene (Mar 22, 2016)

nhz said:


> I'm using a 450D and I'm not happy with its DR, which according to DXO was the same as my 300D from 2003 (and in my impression in practice even a bit worse, maybe due to different chroma noise pattern / banding). I haven't upgraded in all those years because there was very little improvement in DR / noise performance which for me is the main bottleneck for image quality. Over 95% of my images are taken at 100-800 ISO (action shots mostly 400/800). The 80D shows some obvious improvement, but it this all they can do after almost zero progress in over ten years?
> 
> Of course there is more to image quality than just DR in the 100-800 ISO range, and the DXO DR ratings can be debated but they look pretty realistic to me. If I want a better sensor some of the options with their cost are listed below; the Canon options don't look like value for money. If they could offer a similar sensor improvement in a Rebel or SL2 it would look better, but that could take some time. Of course there are other factors in chosing a camera, the new AF system of the 80D etc. should be nice but for me image (sensor) quality is at the top of the list.
> 
> I really want a tilt screen, otherwise I would already have purchased the Nikon D7200. The 750D/760D and D5500 are not a real option for me because they lack focus adjustment and have small viewfinders. I'm even considering the D500 and if its low ISO DR proves as good as the D7200 it might be a very attractive option despite the high price (which might come down a bit once they are in stock?).



I don't mean to be rude, and of course cost is a limiting factor here, but are you really saying no Canon camera since the 450D is better for action than that one is? I'd have thought AF alone was at least as important as DR, but I don't know what you're shooting precisely...

And tbh if Nikon provide what you want, why not jump ship? Your camera is eight years old. Almost any current model from any producer will be a big step up in most areas.


----------



## nhz (Mar 22, 2016)

scyrene said:


> nhz said:
> 
> 
> > I'm using a 450D and I'm not happy with its DR, which according to DXO was the same as my 300D from 2003 (and in my impression in practice even a bit worse, maybe due to different chroma noise pattern / banding). I haven't upgraded in all those years because there was very little improvement in DR / noise performance which for me is the main bottleneck for image quality. Over 95% of my images are taken at 100-800 ISO (action shots mostly 400/800). The 80D shows some obvious improvement, but it this all they can do after almost zero progress in over ten years?
> ...



I don't shoot just 'action' like sports photography etc., in that case I would of course have purchased a very different camera like 7D2 or 1DX or some Nikon equivalent. I shoot landscape/cityscape and nature/wildlife, and for me 'wildlife' is mostly flying dragonflies which is a specific type of 'action' photography. I prefer to use one camera for those subjects (in addition to the infrared camera that I also use ...), so I'm looking for the best compromise for those kind of subjects. When buying a new camera I want one that I can use for years.

All Canon APS-C DSLRs from 2015 or earlier have very similar DR/noise quality at low-medium ISO compared to my 450D, it would be hard to notice except in carefully controlled conditions. The 750D/760D is a small step up that one would notice, but it's still only one stop. And besides better sensor I also want focus adjustment and a better viewfinder. The 80D is the first that is significantly improved IMHO.

I'm currently using MF instead of AF for flying dragonflies, because AF is simply way too slow and I think that even with a 7D2 it would be difficult sometimes because dragonflies are very fast and erratic flyers. The 7D2 is also a heavy and expensive camera (in Europe) and it doesn't have a tilt screen which I really want, so for me it's not an option at all. Canon FF is not an option either because those are relatively big/heavy (or a bit crippled like the 6D), don't have a tilt screen, have lower pixel density (bad for wildlife, except the even heavier 5DS) and offer by definition only one stop in IQ gain over APS-C with similar sensor technology.

The Nikons mentioned above all are more attractive to me than the Canons, but of course in addition to the cost of the body there is the cost of upgrading your lenses which is a big factor. So I can't buy just e.g. a D7200 body and be done, if that was the case it would be an easy decision ...


----------



## scyrene (Mar 22, 2016)

nhz said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > nhz said:
> ...



Ah, okay. Dragonfly photography is specialised, and I have respect for anyone who can do it - I've all but given up on them! I don't think it's fair to say full frame isn't good enough for wildlife due to the pixel density - many dedicated wildlife photographers who can afford them use either a 1Dx or 5DIII (or other brand equivalents). Of course, small and light, high pixel density, and a flip screen - I can see why you've been reluctant to upgrade. Still, I think you'd find there would be a big step up in quality from the 450D (to, say, the 70D) despite what spec sheets might suggest.

Incidentally, the cost of upgrading lenses is surely the same whether sticking with Canon or changing to Nikon - more or less? You can sell most lenses and get a lot of the value back. That's been my experience, anyway. Bodies, not so much.


----------



## nhz (Mar 23, 2016)

scyrene said:


> Ah, okay. Dragonfly photography is specialised, and I have respect for anyone who can do it - I've all but given up on them! I don't think it's fair to say full frame isn't good enough for wildlife due to the pixel density - many dedicated wildlife photographers who can afford them use either a 1Dx or 5DIII (or other brand equivalents). Of course, small and light, high pixel density, and a flip screen - I can see why you've been reluctant to upgrade. Still, I think you'd find there would be a big step up in quality from the 450D (to, say, the 70D) despite what spec sheets might suggest.
> 
> Incidentally, the cost of upgrading lenses is surely the same whether sticking with Canon or changing to Nikon - more or less? You can sell most lenses and get a lot of the value back. That's been my experience, anyway. Bodies, not so much.



For wildlife photography in low light conditions a FF camera is in general still the better choice. And it depends on how one travels, if you travel by car and can bring all the gear you need near your photography spot it's easier to use heavy equipment. I travel by bike and walking so I want light gear, also because dragonflies move fast. A FF camera with by definition much bigger lens (for same magnification) would not work for this because it is far more difficult to hold and quickly point/track. Apart from the sensor this is one reason for looking at Nikon, their 4/300PF lens is much lighter than my Canon 4/300IS and even if I'm chosing a relatively heavy Nikon body like D500 the combo is still lighter than my current Rebel with the Canon 300mm.

I have tried some of the newer Rebels and looked at files from the 70D, and IMHO the image quality in the 200-800 ISO range is pretty close, about what the DXO numbers suggest.

The second hand lens market in my country doesn't work very well IMHO, you take a 20-25% loss on most lenses which adds up. Ebay doesn't work for lens sales here, and selling internationally is very difficult because our purchase prices include VAT; in general that would only work for professionals who can deduct the VAT when purchasing their lenses. I would prefer to stay with Canon because I like their lenses better, but the half-hearted improvement in 80D image quality and its high initial price doesn't make that very attractive.


----------



## scyrene (Mar 23, 2016)

nhz said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > Ah, okay. Dragonfly photography is specialised, and I have respect for anyone who can do it - I've all but given up on them! I don't think it's fair to say full frame isn't good enough for wildlife due to the pixel density - many dedicated wildlife photographers who can afford them use either a 1Dx or 5DIII (or other brand equivalents). Of course, small and light, high pixel density, and a flip screen - I can see why you've been reluctant to upgrade. Still, I think you'd find there would be a big step up in quality from the 450D (to, say, the 70D) despite what spec sheets might suggest.
> ...



That's fair enough. I don't fully agree with your conclusions (for instance, I don't think the difference between the 80D's sensor and that of equivalent Nikons is going to make a practical difference to almost any photographs), but regardless I hope you find a camera that works for you, whoever makes it 

Incidentally, I'm a walking/public transport nature photography person too - it definitely shapes what is possible (although I went with big and heavy gear anyway)


----------



## nhz (Mar 24, 2016)

scyrene said:


> That's fair enough. I don't fully agree with your conclusions (for instance, I don't think the difference between the 80D's sensor and that of equivalent Nikons is going to make a practical difference to almost any photographs), but regardless I hope you find a camera that works for you, whoever makes it



I'm not sure the difference with the equivalent Nikons is important in practice either, it's more that I would like some more headroom just in case (and I would regret my purchase if next year they have another camera with 1-2 stops more DR ...). And it also depends on the RAW converter used, PP etc. For the dragonflies the 80D sensor should be fine (assuming it performs well at 400-1600 ISO, we should know that soon enough), for landscape images I would really prefer DR of 14-15 stops as it would make life much easier.


----------



## honza_lin (May 29, 2016)

PhotographyFirst said:


> I did an ACR RAW conversion of the 80D (left) and D7200 (right) at ISO 100.
> 
> Pushed 5 stops, equal WB values, no sharpening, everything else left as default.
> 
> Someone over on DPR that knows vastly more about sensor and data tech than I do, seems to think the measured DR is lower for the 80D because of the way Canon handles the file data, but in actual use, is probably pretty close to Nikon's best. It will be interesting to see how DXO measures the 80D if it is found that the actual files from it offer the same level of DR as Nikon in real-world use.



Upload you please original raw file this photos? .. Canon 80D and Nikon D7200. Thank you very much


----------



## K-amps (May 30, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > JohanCruyff said:
> ...



I suspect DxO gives a lot of weightage to color depth, which in Canon sensors is still is behind Sonikon... so DxO will be more than happy not to tweak their algorithm to keep the 80D behind. ;D


----------

