# Why you shouldn't be worried about DR



## duydaniel (Aug 30, 2013)

This is from a Nikon fanboy (and I still prefer Nikon but shoot both)

1) HDR mode is available if you "must have" that DR
2) use CPL filter boosts DR quite a lot out door.
3) 100% of time people fail to tell which pictures from which brands.
4) Great DR camera shouldn't be an excuse for bad shooting technique

Nikon is better in DR but camera body is the last thing you should worry about.
Above all it is your skill that determine the outcome.

So please stop rampaging the dxo threat about DR and DXO score.

P.S.
I found Canon color accuracy seems better than Nikon


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 30, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> This is from a Nikon fanboy (and I still prefer Nikon but shoot both)
> 
> 1) HDR mode is available if you "must have" that DR
> 2) use CPL filter boosts DR quite a lot out door.
> ...


+1 ... I shoot both Canon and Nikon but prefer Canon


----------



## Viggo (Aug 30, 2013)

+1

If I get an underexposed shot, what I do is increase the exposure to get the midtones correct and then pull down shadows and highlights, that way the shadows become brighter but with no more noise. Normally though, I ETTR and I say out of the 50k shots with the 1dx so far, I have pushed the shadow up no more than 6-7 pictures. Pulling them down, however, I do frequently.

The CPL is a very good point, I use it always outdoor, and it REALLY adds to the image, clearly DR, but the overall punch is so much better. Many people underestimate the power of a CPL.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Aug 30, 2013)

It strikes me somewhat that in he rush for huge DR and ultra high iso that it's sometimes forgotten that some detail should be rendered black, some shadows should be crunched, some ultra-whites should be allowed to burn out.

As duydanial says, it's one parameter.

For me, I use canon because I have used it for 22 years. I have accrued bits of kit that work exclusively with it and know my cameras pretty much inside out within my needs.

Do Nikon have the upper hand in the scheme of things? For now it seems they do. For the majority of the 22 years I've been shooting on Canon EOS cameras they've arguably had the upper hand.

Not that I really care about what Nikon are doing. The last great thing Nikon did was put video on their D90.
It took Canon to get it right, and it's changed the way I work.

I care about that. Not about DXO. I can't remember the last time I thought 'oh I wish I had more dynamic range' but then, I will use CPLs. I will use grads. I will use extra lights for front fill, set fill. Even if I had a couple of extra stops DR, I would probably have to filter it straight back out for broadcast safe.

I'm using my DSLRs mainly for video, and for posting stills online. The end apparatus doesn't vastly out-perform my camera in terms of DR as far as I can see.

Worry about other things. I think.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Aug 30, 2013)

Correct, I play with my brother's D7000 every now and then but after going through RAW files from it the colors just don't feel right especially on skin tone. As for DR Nikon really does have the edge, but it's an edge that photographers can live without. Landscape and studio guys might disagree, but if they're practical enough they can live without it too.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 30, 2013)

Viggo said:


> +1
> 
> If I get an underexposed shot, what I do is increase the exposure to get the midtones correct and then pull down shadows and highlights, that way the shadows become brighter but with no more noise.



Hope temple guy reads this........


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 30, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> This is from a Nikon fanboy (and I still prefer Nikon but shoot both)
> 
> 1) HDR mode is available if you "must have" that DR



not usable for all shots though




> 4) Great DR camera shouldn't be an excuse for bad shooting technique



No, but it can help when mistakes are made AND more importantly it is not so much about rescuing shots and getting well exposed shots to turn out OK if the scene has a ton of DR.



> Nikon is better in DR but camera body is the last thing you should worry about.



It may not matter so much for some, but it can certainly matter, at least here and there for others.



> Above all it is your skill that determine the outcome.



that really depends, sometimes it really doesn't matter what skill you have




> I found Canon color accuracy seems better than Nikon



it might be in the profiles the software you use makes, a typical canon raw might make it a bit easier to work with certain tones on certain skin types but for other colors it apparently tends to measure somewhat less accurately than Nikon on average, it's a VERY complex subject with no easy answers though by any remote means


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 30, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> 1) HDR mode is available if you "must have" that DR



This is simply wrong, if something moves (and in nature, most things do) hdr won't work, you can blend a hdr with some non-hdr parts but this is a pita. I often have to do ~1-1.5ev bracketing with my 60d when shooting outdoors at noon, so there's not that much dr missing, but there you are. 

I'd wager to say I'm good at exposing properly (ettr and recovering highlights in post) - but often it's simply the choice between very minor shadow data or blown highlights. Esp. with reflections you quickly get a speckled look, recovery helps at the expense of highlight rolloff, but some more dr would further eliminate the problem and also help cut postprocessing time.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > +1
> ...


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 30, 2013)

Try this:


http://www.moodjuice.scot.nhs.uk/anger.asp


----------



## Viggo (Aug 30, 2013)

Ankorwatt: I think the horse is dead already.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Try this:
> 
> 
> http://www.moodjuice.scot.nhs.uk/anger.asp



Well seeing that it's NHS Scotland. That should be issued to everybody in Scotland!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 30, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> I answer the thread creator and corrects errors because there are significant knowledge gaps in terms of the benefits of DR from many of you.



I'm not sure you realize it, but it's quite possible to understand the benefit of something while concurrently understanding the compromises necessary to gain that benefit, and the fact that the benefit under discussion is neither necessary nor applicable in all scenarios.


----------



## J.R. (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



This thread was tailor made for him ... you should have seen it coming!


----------



## gferdinandsen (Aug 30, 2013)

Viggo said:


> The CPL is a very good point, I use it always outdoor, and it REALLY adds to the image, clearly DR, but the overall punch is so much better. Many people underestimate the power of a CPL.



+1 I never leave home with out one (or two)


----------



## J.R. (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Try this:
> 
> 
> http://www.moodjuice.scot.nhs.uk/anger.asp



I clicked on the link and it immediately there was a pop-up asking whether I wanted to print. The first thing that struck me was ... what is the DR of my printer! 

ugh...


----------



## J.R. (Aug 30, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> How do you then want to use these two or more stops are up to you



You got that part spot on ... I agree


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Aug 30, 2013)

I use my CPLs quite often.
Didnt like to buy a 82mm for the 24-70, was nice to use my 77mm for the old and the 70-200.
Always in my bag.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 30, 2013)

The DR is better on nikon. :/


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Aug 30, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> The DR is better on nikon. :/



My canon lenses fit better on canon. :\


----------



## zlatko (Aug 30, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> Nikon is better in DR but camera body is the last thing you should worry about.
> Above all it is your skill that determine the outcome.
> 
> So please stop rampaging the dxo threat about DR and DXO score.
> ...


Good point about skill, and I agree 100% about color accuracy.


----------



## MK5GTI (Aug 30, 2013)

any technical reason why CPL add DR? I am aware of the benefit of CPL, i have a 77mm too. just not aware it can add DR, never did a comparison thou.

thanks


----------



## duydaniel (Aug 30, 2013)

MK5GTI said:


> any technical reason why CPL add DR? I am aware of the benefit of CPL, i have a 77mm too. just not aware it can add DR, never did a comparison thou.
> 
> thanks



CPL doesn't add DR but it cut out light that come from angles which cut the highlight quite a bit.
It is like the D+ mode in Canon but without loss in shadow


----------



## tcmatthews (Aug 30, 2013)

DR is better on my Sony but My lens focus better on my Canon  

The only time I ever realized it made a difference was when I was taking pictures of our cows. We have black cows with white caves. Black cows end up as featureless black cow shape. If exposed properly for the Black cow then the white cave will be a featureless blown out white calf shape and the whole seen will be blown out. Properly exposed ETTR they both lack detail and I spent tons of time in post pushing down mid tone pushing up highlight and pushing up shadow then adjusting black level/white level. Then I have to add contrast and saturation lost in slightly over exposing back to the picture. Real solution wait until more favorable time of day to take the picture. 

Sony take the picture jpeg is good enough. 

The problem is not really one of DR it is the inability of Canon to capture detail in dark areas or on dark objects without introducing noise. If you know your camera you can compensate ETTR but it is not optimal. So if you need to take picture of black objects and capture detail in bright scene then Canon may not be the brand for you. I do not know many user that have this as a priority.

If you ever have a seen with truly stark DR issues there is no camera on the market that will have sufficient DR. HDR is the only option. 

For all you D800 users here is a Challenge. *Go to Sunset Crater in Arizona and take pictures at Noon that render the whole scene on a sunny day. I dare you. *


----------



## duydaniel (Aug 30, 2013)

I am not here to bash Nikon because I love it 
but it drives me nut seeing people rampaging about the 70D dxo mark.
There is no such things as perfect camera for example

D800 has left focus and green color cast issue
D600 dust oil
5D3 doesn't have good DR as D800

There is no perfection. Live with it


----------



## Pi (Aug 30, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> duydaniel said:
> 
> 
> > 1) HDR mode is available if you "must have" that DR
> ...



+1

Also, a high DR sensor is HDR done with one shot. This is like saying that you can still use your old and noisy 10D in low light, you just have to blend exposures.


----------



## bchernicoff (Aug 30, 2013)

For all the talk about inaccurate colors, I wonder if anyone has done a simple color calibration? 
1.)Buy a MacBeth test chart http://www.adorama.com/GHCCC.html
2.)Download Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor 
-------Windows:http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5494&fileID=5490
-------Mac: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5493
3.)Take a picture of the chart, convert to DNG
4.)Open DNG file in Profile Editor
5.)Click the Chart tab, and follow the instructions.
6.)Open Lightroom (or restart if it was already open) and the color profile is available in the Develop module under Calibration.

Congrats, you have just made a custom color profile for your camera.
The chart isn't cheap, but every photographer should own one.


----------



## Pi (Aug 30, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> MK5GTI said:
> 
> 
> > any technical reason why CPL add DR? I am aware of the benefit of CPL, i have a 77mm too. just not aware it can add DR, never did a comparison thou.
> ...



It is more complicated than that. CPLs alter drastically the spectral balance, among the rest. This messes up the colors, at least with the Hoya CPL I own and an older CPL I used. It is like shooting Nikon.  You cannot fix that with WB tweaks - you can make it a bit better but the colors are still weird, and you can get visible noise even at ISO 100 (in addition to the high read noise which Canon adds to each of your shots but this time in the midtones and the highlights as well).


----------



## duydaniel (Aug 30, 2013)

bchernicoff said:


> For all the talk about inaccurate colors, I wonder if anyone has done a simple color calibration?
> 1.)Buy a MacBeth test chart http://www.adorama.com/GHCCC.html
> 2.)Download Adobe's free DNG Profile Editor
> -------Windows:http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5494&fileID=5490
> ...



Has anyone purchased 2 of these, did he/she got the same profile from those 2?


----------



## Ewinter (Aug 30, 2013)

Funnily enough, some people don't care about shadow noise or read noise....because some of us shoot film and like noise/grain


----------



## bchernicoff (Aug 30, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> bchernicoff said:
> 
> 
> > For all the talk about inaccurate colors, I wonder if anyone has done a simple color calibration?
> ...



I've probably over simplified. What I described is a good way to create a baseline. However, if you are doing a shoot where color accuracy is really important, you should take a picture of that chart under the exact lighting conditions of the shoot...have the model hold it for a shot in a fashion shoot, lean it against the product for a shot in a product shoot, etc.

Think of it as taking it a step beyond grey card white balance.


----------



## duydaniel (Aug 30, 2013)

bchernicoff said:


> duydaniel said:
> 
> 
> > bchernicoff said:
> ...



What I meant was I doubt the accuracy of such. By testing 2 of those in the same conditions, if each yields the exact same profile, then I can trust the manufacture, otherwise, little can be done to verify the claim you know


----------



## Invertalon (Aug 30, 2013)

I don't think DR is as crazy important as people make it out to be. Photographers have been making epic images for many years now with the "limited DR" of the Canon system and Nikon previous to the D800. Honestly, I find the D800 images looking a bit "flat" compared to the 5D3 because of the extra DR.

I don't care one bit, honestly. I would take higher ISO ability over DR, and the 5D3 wins against the D800. All they need to correct is the low ISO banding in shadows and I would be perfectly happy with the DR we have.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 30, 2013)

Pi said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > duydaniel said:
> ...



Not when you are talking about the difference between 12 and 14 stops.


----------



## zlatko (Aug 30, 2013)

Ewinter said:


> Funnily enough, some people don't care about shadow noise or read noise....because some of us shoot film and like noise/grain



Agreed. That's why I say that complaining about shadow noise is like complaining about the grain in 8x10 sheet film. It's measurable, but not that important.

Also, all across the net people pine about the loss of Kodachrome. Kodachrome, like other slide films, was all about limited DR. Today's cameras have much more exposure latitude.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Aug 30, 2013)

LOL...I pretty much only read this topic because I knew you know who would find the carcass of the dead hourse, which is almost a skeleton now, and beat it some more...

It's all about compromise, more DR at the expense of (Fill in the blank issue here), or the flip of that. At the end of the day though, are people hiring you because of your images, or because you can put a badge on your web site saying I have 14 stops of DR??? 

Or more extreme, are people buying your fine art images without looking at the image ---all they need to know is it has 14 stops of DR. 

This brings me back to my joke for weddings...instead of a proof gallery, I will send my clients DXO lab analysis of their photos - they can just pick from the highest scores....


----------



## pdirestajr (Aug 30, 2013)

I like noise. Sometimes when I am feeling crazy I even add more!


----------



## dlleno (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Pi said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



yea exactly. moreover, and I hope this doesnt degenerate into another set of awning pictures, because most of us get that the extra couple of stops is not a bad thing. When certain conditions prevail, namely:

* you must shoot at low ISO, where the D800 DR advantage would be available (which it is not, at high ISO)
* the scene is noteworthy 
* you must capture the shot with one exposure 
* the required shutter speeds are too slow, or the requried resolution precludes handheld IS 
* the scene contains detail that is important to the meaning and effectiveness of the photo, that is beyond the DR capability of your sensor 

...when all of the above converge, having the extra two stops of DR in-camera capabilty is a benefit for sure. This may apply to some 'togs all the time and it may rarely, or never, apply to others. however, it is also worth pointing out that when the above situations all come together, or the photographer makes them come together to get the photo, that a tripod and/or other suitable support is not out of the question! in which case one can indeed blend exposures and capture a great deal more DR than a D800 single frame is capable of. 

I am not trying to sell popcorn here, believe me, or bring out the awning wars again. I'm just pointing out that one really needs to determine the extent to which the DR advantage is really important to the situation.


----------



## Pi (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Pi said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



But yes, when 2+ stops is all you need. Also, pattern noise is not reflected in that difference, and it is very hard to clean.


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 30, 2013)

dlleno said:


> * the scene contains detail that is important to the meaning and effectiveness of the photo, that is beyond the DR capability of your sensor



To me, blown highlights (unless intended by the photog) always look bad, not matter if this part would contain "important detail" - but of course that's just perception.

I'd like to add that of course no sensor in the near or mid-term future will allow you to capture sunset with a dr of 18-20 stops, but unfortunately I'm often just missing a little bit, so I'm positive that even a little gain in dr would help a lot.



dlleno said:


> that a tripod and/or other suitable support is not out of the question!



That's mutually exclusive with your points containing "you must capture the shot with one exposure" - my main problem with hdr outside are moving grass & leaves, and if these are in a high dr area of the shot even manual blending in postprocessing doesn't help.

I also agree that many might never encounter that problem, the real question is what tradeoff a higher dr would produce, i.e. as far as I understand it filling a higher dr range with low dr data produces worse gradients, this tradeoff could only be fixed by a 15/16bit resolution?


----------



## dlleno (Aug 30, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> dlleno said:
> 
> 
> > * the scene contains detail that is important to the meaning and effectiveness of the photo, that is beyond the DR capability of your sensor
> ...


 yes, thats what I mean by "important detail" for example, small areas of blown highlights, reflections and such, can be acceptable depending on their size and shape and the way the blend into the photo. If they are not acceptable, then it means there is important detail that you can't capture and the photo fails to meet the tog's objective.


> I'd like to add that of course no sensor in the near or mid-term future will allow you to capture sunset with a dr of 18-20 stops, but unfortunately I'm often just missing a little bit, so I'm positive that even a little gain in dr would help a lot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 not necesarily... what I mean here is the just because you must capture with one shot doesn't mean you are not already using a tripod. that is, the conditions that favor the need to capture a high DR scene are often compatible with using a tripod. I dont' mean all the time, of course . yea totally agree with moving leaves especially that this is a real challenge, no matter how good the ghost reduction is. and today's HDR offerings are pretty impressive in that regard.


> I also agree that many might never encounter that problem, the real question is what tradeoff a higher dr would produce, i.e. as far as I understand it filling a higher dr range with low dr data produces worse gradients, this tradeoff could only be fixed by a 15/16bit resolution?


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 30, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> I'd like to add that of course no sensor in the near or mid-term future will allow you to capture sunset with a dr of 18-20 stops, but unfortunately I'm often just missing a little bit, so I'm positive that even a little gain in dr would help a lot.



And if you did have this amount of latitude in a single exposure you would produce a very flat, boring image with little visual punch.

The irony of the DR debate is that the compression of DR is what often makes a photograph worth looking at.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 30, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



Yep, and I know what a lunatic is too.


----------



## insanitybeard (Aug 30, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> you do not know what a selective curve is - do you



You do not know when to stop - do you?

We get it. Nikon is better. How many more times need you tell us?


----------



## dlleno (Aug 30, 2013)

I'm having second thoughts maybe I should sell popcorn afterall!


----------



## Pi (Aug 30, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> ankorwatt is ruining this place, you can't have a thoughtful conversation, you can't offer advice, you can't just talk to each other without his incessant DR is the only important imaging metric, D800 this, QPcard that. I am out of here until he gets banned again, it just isn't fun, informative, or helpful.



In a thread called _Why you shouldn't be worried about DR_, his posts are not out of line.


----------



## Apop (Aug 30, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> I'm done, have fun.
> 
> ankorwatt is ruining this place, you can't have a thoughtful conversation, you can't offer advice, you can't just talk to each other without his incessant DR is the only important imaging metric, D800 this, QPcard that. I am out of here until he gets banned again, it just isn't fun, informative, or helpful.



Banning people because you do not agree with them?
If you dont like his opinion , dont read it ?

As long as there are no serious personal insults I see no reason why people should be banned .
His participation in topics is very selective anyway , I dont see many other comments from him that arent DR related.....

You running away from discussions or one sided arguments from a DR fixated person is rather weak!


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 30, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> And if you did have this amount of latitude in a single exposure you would produce a very flat, boring image with little visual punch.



Of course any high-dr image before applying a global tone curve, global tonemapping or local adjustments (no matter if done by you or by "intelligent" software) looks extremely boring, that's why you're supposed to use postprocessing  ... if you want punchy out-of the box shots use a mobile phone as you immediately get satisfying blacks and blazing whites :->



privatebydesign said:


> I'm done, have fun. [...] it just isn't fun, informative, or helpful.



I'm sorry, you're one of the most competent and helpful members around here - but of course it's your free, spare time and it certainly *should* be fun, informative and helpful. I hope you reconsider as ignoring parts of a thread is possible, usually longer-running threads degrades into silliness anyway, ankorwatt or not.


----------



## tcmatthews (Aug 30, 2013)

Lets face it this post was troll bait to begin with.


----------



## Alrik89 (Aug 30, 2013)

Still fun to see, how much time you waste on this stupid theme.


----------



## dlleno (Aug 30, 2013)

> ankorwatt is ruining this place, you can't have a thoughtful conversation, you can't offer advice, you can't just talk to each other without his incessant DR is the only important imaging metric, D800 this, QPcard that. I am out of here until he gets banned again, it just isn't fun, informative, or helpful.



its true that the common denominator in these derailed threads that degenerate into nothing is, well, recognized by most. The signal to noise is painful in some posts, to be sure. But as for offering adivce, engaging in thoughtful conversation and just plain talking -- these are wonderful objectives, to be sure. and there is an easy solution to the S/N problem: ignore (i.e. don't respond do) the ad hominum. If we did more of that around here we could have some engaging conversations I suspect.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 30, 2013)

pdirestajr said:


> I like noise. Sometimes when I am feeling crazy I even add more!



I doubt you add pattern banding noise though . And I doubt you add so much as to completely erase details that you want to be present .

I sometimes add some film-like grain to B&W white shots and stuff too, but that's something different than not wanting more DR for some things.


----------



## Famateur (Aug 30, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> ankorwatt said:
> 
> 
> > you do not know what a selective curve is - do you
> ...



He won't quit until he gets 14 "stops". ;D


----------



## Joe M (Aug 30, 2013)

I would love it if my 5D3s had 12 fps, 15 stops of DR, had two blazing CF slots and had all double cross focus points. But if Canon gave me all of that today, what would they sell me in a couple of years? They hand out features in dribs and drabs to keep the customer coming back for more. Do I want more DR? Yes. Can I shoot with what I have now? Yes. Should Canon give us more? Yes. Will Canon give us what they want to give us and not what we want? Yes. Am I worried? No.


----------



## Pi (Aug 30, 2013)

Joe M said:


> But if Canon gave me all of that today, what would they sell me in a couple of years?



Well, the flip side is: if they do not give you what you want, what would they sell you *today*? In my case, nothing. I did not upgrade because I was not excited enough.


----------



## qwerty (Aug 31, 2013)

Famateur said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > ankorwatt said:
> ...



What halfway serious photographer would be content with only 14 stops??? 

Last time I was shooting for fun, I needed something like 19-20 stops of DR (graffiti in an abandoned basement at EV 1-2; looking out into daylight at EV 13-14). To get the shadows indoors and the highlights outdoors on my 5d III, I had to take 5 exposures at 2 stop increments. (For those of you keeping score at home, DxO reports the DR @ 8MP; the DR at full resolution will be lower by almost a stop. In theory I could have gotten away with taking exposures in an 8 stop range instead of 10 stops.) Obviously some scenes can not be captured in multiple exposures like this.

To get this extra 8 stops, all we need are bigger sensors; doubling the edge length of a sensor (and keeping the per-pixel tech the same) will give you one stop of DR (at the original resolution), with a free resolution boost in the midtones. So, I just need Canon to come out with a sensor of (36*2^8) mm format (about 30 ft), and I will have all the DR I needed for that shot (assuming I was content with a resolution of 20-some MP in the shadows). On the other hand, an Exmor sensor with its built-in 2 stop DR advantage would only need to be (36*2^6)mm (about 7 1/2 ft) -- small enough to mount on your truck. 

Looking at it another way, all Canon would need to do to match Nikon's 2 stop DR advantage would be to make sensors with their current tech that are about 100x150mm. (And you would get a huge boost in resolution when you are not limited by read noise.) Or maybe, in the interest of fairness, we could convince Nikon to replace their FX line with a 4x crop sensor so us Canon fanboys won't feel inferior.


You know, sometimes I can't tell where I am on the serious-sarcastic spectrum... time for the weekend.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> it requires knowledge



Back when I taught in medical schools, and with some coaching from my wife (who has taught science to preschoolers through adults, and is a professor), I learned that beating people over the head with a fact repeated over and over was _not_ an effective way to instill that knowledge in people who require it. 

That seems to be a piece of knowledge that has eluded you.


----------



## Jim O (Aug 31, 2013)

Pi said:


> Joe M said:
> 
> 
> > But if Canon gave me all of that today, what would they sell me in a couple of years?
> ...



This may be a quite logical choice. It's always about costs and benefits and there are always those who will skip a generation or even two. That's a built-in part of the equation and Canon, like any corporation, understands that that maximizing profits is not about selling the most units. Sometimes they might get it right, sometimes they might not. Sometimes managers get promoted, sometimes they get _reassigned_. They do not care whether _you_ upgrade. They care that they sell _enough_ units to meet their predictions in terms of cost and price. If everyone upgrades they haven't priced it high enough. If no one upgrades, they've priced it so high that there's no value in upgrading, even for the new feature set.

Do you upgrade your car every year? Probably not. I'm driving a 2006 E class Mercedes with 33,000 miles on it. I practically stole it from the dealer three plus years ago when it was four years old and had only 5500 miles on it! One owner who really never drove it. It's got a lot of life in it. When I bring it in for service they give me a loaner and it's usually a current or one year old E class. It has blue tooth, satellite radio, a more sophisticated sound system in general, a more sophisticated navigation system (as does my iPhone 5 with Google Maps for what that's worth), and a nicer sunroof. It also has a rear view camera, something I've lived without all of my driving life, but wouldn't mind having. The ride is pretty similar, especially since I put on four new tires that had dry rotted from age but still passed inspection. Am I going to "upgrade"? No, of course not. Why? It's not enough to convince me. Maybe if they add in jet packs so I can fly over traffic, that might convince me. In the meanwhile, I'll keep driving my "nearly new" almost eight year old car. And you'll keep shooting with your older camera(s) until there is something to which upgrading makes sense.


----------



## Jim O (Aug 31, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> ankorwatt said:
> 
> 
> > it requires knowledge
> ...



So well said.

There is also a thing called courtesy and repeatedly insulting people with "you do not know what a selective curve is - do you" is not a good way to achieve a goal, unless the goal is to get them to stop hearing what you have to say.


----------



## Famateur (Aug 31, 2013)

qwerty said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > insanitybeard said:
> ...



LOL...touché. You've convinced me -- I'm not going to be satisfied until I have at least a truck-mounted 20-stop camera that fits in the abandoned basement to get that shot and avoid bracketing.

These dynamic range flame wars have been entertaining at times. Thanks for keeping it that way. (I mean that genuinely.)


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Aug 31, 2013)

Without mentioning anyone specific I just wanted to say that writing an essay requires good grammar, which also requires knowledge. ;D


----------



## bholliman (Aug 31, 2013)

@Ankorwat. - Please don't waste everybody's time by writing what everybody here already knows: Nikon (Sony) sensors have more dynamic range right now. 

I don't think that old bit information is going to cause any Canon users reading this forum to jump ship. Lets all go take some pictures and let this topic die!


----------



## ME (Aug 31, 2013)

One more before it dies. I am now convinced that I should buy a nikon sensor and install it on my 5dmkii. I can only imagine how much better the images will be. By the way, does anyone know how to do this? ;D


----------



## Joe M (Aug 31, 2013)

Pi said:


> Joe M said:
> 
> 
> > But if Canon gave me all of that today, what would they sell me in a couple of years?
> ...



Touche. 
That is the delicate balance Canon (and I suppose all manufacturers do this dance) has to juggle. If the update is too great, everyone buys it but then the next model will have nothing to beat it with. If the update is too small, there is something left for the next but Canon risks no one buying this one in numbers that are profitable.


----------

