# 5D Mk4 Dynamic Range Analyzed From RAWs.



## Yiannis A - Greece (Sep 7, 2016)

Dear friends,

I just found this topic at "fredmiranda.com". I'm not sure if it's legit or not but seems quite OK to me.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1447974

I'm really curious of some real, complete first reviews, although i'm pretty sure i won't get the 5D Mk4 but i'll go straight to 1Dx mk2 (if it's not crippled with soft focus issues as i'm reading in some topics)!

All my best wishes from shiny, summery Greece.
Yiannis A.

P.S: I just found the topic while "googling" for reviews of 5D Mk4.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 8, 2016)

Still no 18 EV or at least 2 EV more than any other sensor : : :
Canon is ******* :'( :'( :'(
[/sarc mode]


But thanks for sharing, Yiannis! 
Kalimera!


----------



## Yiannis A - Greece (Sep 8, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> Still no 18 EV or at least 2 EV more than any other sensor : : :
> Canon is ******* :'( :'( :'(
> [/sarc mode]
> 
> ...


Lots of "Kalimeras" from Greece Maximilian,

i don't think that Canon is *******, it seems that it tries hard to suck every penny out of people's pockets by giving the least amount of characteristics asked by consumers, in every product category, every x years! Sony and Nikon on the other hand, do the same by giving EVERY possible new feature but with a frequency of ... months ,leading to product depreciation and leaving the buyer with a sense of not having the best ... of the month in his/her hands!!!

With global economics going rapidly south hill, i'm not really aware of what all major electronics companies around the world try to do; milk the consumer by luring him to buy products overloaded with features every second month or doing so by producing crippled articles every five years? Either tactics is disgusting...to say the least...

All my best wishes for a very happy day,
Yours 
Yiannis A.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 8, 2016)

Yiannis A - Greece said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Still no 18 EV or at least 2 EV more than any other sensor : : :
> ...



Sorry, maybe I’ve been misunderstood.
When I wrote "[/sarc mode]" this meant that everything written before was meant sarcastic. 
Although more DR is always welcome I never felt the need for it, so I never understood that DR discussions.

I was just joking 

Except for the Price I believe that the 5D4 will be a great product. 
But others will always complain about whatever Canon will release.


----------



## chauncey (Sep 8, 2016)

For my personal edification...in the age of PS, how relevant is dynamic range?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2016)

chauncey said:


> For my personal edification...in the age of PS, how relevant is dynamic range?



I personally don't think the two ("the age of PS" and 'the relevance dynamic range") have any relationship.


Is it possible to digitally composite every image? Sure, but the vast majority of photographers are not Jerry Uelsmann (who is still better in a darkroom than I am in photoshop), and I'd venture to say they'd rather capture images in (ideally) a single exposure. 

A better question may be "how important is the difference between 13-stops and 12-stops"?


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2016)

chauncey said:


> For my personal edification...in the age of PS, how relevant is dynamic range?



There is no connection between the two.

Dynamic range is very important to some photographers and of practically no value at all to others. Increases, however modest, are good in that it means we are moving forwards. Hopefully in a few years we will be getting medium format 16bit files with >15 stops. That doesn't mean you can't take pictures with cameras with less than the new ones, Velvia, the film for landscape photographers for years, had 6-7 stops of DR.

I can see a stronger case for a 1DS type camera with a host of new sensor features on a drawing board or as a prototype. Take the 5DSR sensor, make it dual pixel for a 100mp dual raw output, give it the FWC to give us true 16 bit clean output and you have a sensor that will actually compete with medium format, keep it at $7,000 and Canon have an unmatched studio and high end imaging tool when combined with the 85 f1.2, 50 f1.2 etc.

I'd far rather buy a $7-8,000 1DS than a Pentax 645. Now if Canon made a couple of leaf shutter lenses to go with that 1DS replacement they would sell a good number of them, and the R&D needed would be a fraction that of the occasionally rumored Canon medium format system.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Dynamic range is very important to some photographers and of practically no value at all to others.



I don't think that's true. Dynamic range is very important to all photographers, but most cameras have sufficient dynamic range that slight increases aren't widely valuable.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 8, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Dynamic range is very important to some photographers and of practically no value at all to others.
> ...



I'm sure private is referring to *DR* rather than dynamic range  That is "12 isn't enough, we must have 12.5" ;D


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 8, 2016)

Yiannis A - Greece said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Still no 18 EV or at least 2 EV more than any other sensor : : :
> ...


 How is giving every feature a problem. That is what every company kind of dues and update yearly from phones to graphics cards. you buy now or what later for something slightly better but it doesnt really hurt anybody. making people wait 4 or 5 years is worse. in 4 or 5 years a tech company could still end up being behind others or still might not deliver what you are waiting for, making you wait another 4 or 5 years for the features you want. That is BS.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 8, 2016)

chauncey said:


> For my personal edification...in the age of PS, how relevant is dynamic range?



I think you make a good point and am not sure why others think there is no connection. With post processing, I can lighten the shadows to a sufficient degree 99.9% of the time and need no additional DR in the sensor (I shoot mostly landscapes and flowers). In many cases, I don't need to lighten the shadows at all and my minimal post processing adds brightness and contrast instead - lowering the DR in other words. I have never understood the DR mania that surrounds every new release. For many folks the DR number is nothing but a competition between brands and as long as Sony is the "leader" they get all bent out of shape and ridicule Canon for not "catching up". Yes, I understand that for some applications - indoor shooting, astrophotography - that more DR makes a difference. But overall IQ - color, contrast, tonal curves, etc. is more important to me and why I chose Canon over Nikon many tears ago.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...





DR wasn't generally considered when we had 5-6.5 stops in slide film, yet the world ends because Canon is only "catching up" when they are at 13.4 as compared to 13.6 (or whatever the numbers actually are).


----------



## chauncey (Sep 8, 2016)

My bad...I often make the assumption that all descent photographers are adept at PS CC.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2016)

chauncey said:


> My bad...I often make the assumption that all descent photographers are adept at PS CC.



You are conflating a third aspect now. 

DR is at capture, if your camera doesn't have it you can't get it back. In most shooting situations the cameras native DR is capable of capturing the scene DR.

The need for DR in the age of PS is unconnected. PS can't recover DR never captured, however good you are in PS.

The ability to get your intended output from the file you got at capture is unconnected to that file or the capabilities of PS.

To get your imagined output you need the input, DR, and the ability in PS. Unless you are happy with what you get OOC, and many people are.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 8, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> chauncey said:
> 
> 
> > My bad...I often make the assumption that all descent photographers are adept at PS CC.
> ...



Precisely. 

PS comes into play as a replacement for wide DR if you plan is to composite multiple captures in order to construct a picture including levels outside the range of the camera I/O. One could just as easily ask "what relevance DOF plays in the age of photoshop". 

And that third conflation is really bizarre.


----------

