What's the dynamic range of the new 1DX

<p>My 5D2 has a five stop histogram, from left to right.</p>

<p>How many stops does 1DX's histogram show?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_1d_x is all that is known so far. Some eager anticipation at http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/story/2011-11-05/canon-1dx-camera-review/51073096/1</p>

<p>Let it actually become available in March and maybe somebody can tell you.</p>

<p>By the way, there is a difference between how the histogram is organized and the actual dynamic range of an imager. Remember that Spinal Tap's amplifiers went to 11 because that was "louder than 10".</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The 5D mkII offers 8.4 stops in JPEG, and 11.1 stops in RAW with maximum recovery (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page25.asp).</p>

<p>Your histogram is not a "5 stop" display.</p>

<p>Nobody knows what the 1DX will offer in terms of DR until it is formally tested using a Stouffer transmission step wedge.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The 5D mkII offers 8.4 stops in JPEG, and 11.1 stops in RAW with maximum recovery (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page25.asp).<br /> Your histogram is not a "5 stop" display.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't know where you get his from but when I take a picture of landscape and measure carefully, the difference between the lightest and brightest part is 5 stops in RAW. More than 5 stops and the shadows remain black and the highlights are blown out.</p>

<p>Perhaps you want to explain how you get 11 stops coverage without HDR or multiple exposure blending.</p>

<p>Full recovery of highlights and fill light in post does not yield acceptable results.<br /> Let me rephrase: how many stops DR does the 5D2 and 1DX offer <em>without </em>fill light and highlight recovery?</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_1d_x" target="_blank"></a>The 5D mkII offers 8.4 stops in JPEG, and 11.1 stops in RAW with maximum recovery (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page25.asp).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I studied that link and it seems that the only way to get to 11 stops is to drastically flatten the tone curve. While in theory this extends the DR, applying such a tone curve to images yields flat and lifeless results.</p>

<p>People are fooled into thinking the camera has 11 stops DR while its practical, genuine range is much lower.</p>

<p>What I seek is to extend the DR while retaining an S curve. I wonder if the 1DX does exactly that.</p>

<p><em>> Let me rephrase: how many stops DR does the 5D2 and 1DX offer without fill light and highlight recovery?</em><br>

Probably 11.5 at some ISO seting and with proper technique...<br>

Look, ALL files are processed before you can see the results, so your question doesn't make any sense.</p>

<p>In the times of film based photography, there was a lot of post processing as well (development, dodging burining in...) to achieve the measured, published, tonal capacity of a given film, with "real life" contrast and tonal separation, and digital is no different.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>In the times of film based photography</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Or now.</p>

<p>Are you buying the camera? If not, why does it matter?</p>

<p>So you all agree that the DR of 5d2 is closer to 5 stops than 11.</p>

<p>Glad this is made clear.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Glad this is made clear.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Why?</p>

<p>No, the 5D II provides 11 stops of dynamic range at ISO 100 so long as the sensor is fully saturated at the highest stop. As you increase ISO, the dynamic range will shrink. Of course, this really doesn't matter for most of us as 8 bit monitors and printers ensure that the maximum number of stops we can view/print is 8</p>

<p><em>> So you all agree that the DR of 5d2 is closer to 5 stops than 11.</em></p>

<p>If I were you I'd go back to the grade school you did or didn't graduate from and ask for my money back: they have failed miserably in teaching you reading with comprehension.</p>

<p>As an aside, you might get better results trolling somewhere else.</p>

I find the 11-stop claim to be dubious. 5D2 shadows tend to be noisy, and recovered highlights are the wrong color iin

many cases. Getting 11 stops out of the camera sounds like an academic exercise with little applicable value. This Is

Spinal Tap, and mine goes to 11!

 

Maybe 8 stops is more a reasonable estimate. I used to be quite happy with five stops of slide film. My Nikon has

better DR than the 5D2, but I prefer the Canon's images in most cases. Detailed and breathtaking when solid

technique and the best lenses are used! Graduated ND filters still work amazingly well in high contrast light. Others

can play numbers games. I use the camera, and I love the results.

<p>It's not a dubious claim at all as the camera <strong>can</strong> physically distinguish levels over 11 stops. Now whether or not you find the lower stops artistically useful is another question entirely. I agree that they are too noisy to be typically useful, but this is a matter of my personal taste and opinion. Others may find that the lower stops are just fine. In any case, the camera can distinguish between them. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>If I were you I'd go back to the grade school you did or didn't graduate from and ask for my money back: they have failed miserably in teaching you reading with comprehension.<br /> As an aside, you might get better results trolling somewhere else.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for your clever and kind reply. Your manners show the true troll.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I find the 11-stop claim to be dubious.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Me too. Make a practical test and photograph a landscape in raw at base iso. Meter the black and white points of your exposure. They are much lower than 11 stops, closer to 5 stops.</p>

<p>Please show me a <em>single unprocessed exposure</em> one has made that claims 11 stops between the black and white point. Recovered highlights show color degradation and banding and fill light shows noise and banding. There's only so much you can recover / fill even at base iso without degrading the image.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I used to be quite happy with five stops of slide film.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm also quite happy with what I have but I don't buy into the 11 stops of DR and I'm interested in knowing how much the 1DX improves on that. 11 stops of digital is definitely different from film because digital does not have the compressing qualities of film. In fact, my 7 stop film does a better job with landscapes than my 11 stops digital!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ah, it was an attack on digital all along.</p>

<p>Obviously you have no interest in buying this camera, which is why people think you are a troll. You don't have any photos posted, no interest in anything but this trolling.</p>

<p>Jeff, you have a problematic attitude. If you can't give any constructive comments, give us a break and go do something more useful.</p>

<p>Since when do pictures justify an arrogant attitude? I won't even comment on your pics because I don't want to be rude. But if you think you're so great, I'm happy for you. Ignorance is bliss.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I am beginning to think qdfvhpo qdfvhpo is another new false identity designed to hide one of our notorious Trotskyite entrists* here using his/her/their new-found 'freedom' to "subtly" attack one of our moderators. <em>That</em> was the true purpose of this otherwise pointless discussion, after all.</p>

<p>_______<br>

*Eternal paranoia is the price of liberty, you just have to choose what flavor of paranoia you favor.</p>

<p>I'm no expert on dynamic range, but doesn't a camera like the 16 bit Leica S2 have an advantage in dynamic range? If so, why? Is it just because it is recording files with 16 bits per color instead of 14 bits? If that is the case, why doesn't Canon make the 1Dx a 16 bit camera instead of "old" 14 bit? This just stumps me.</p>