ICEINSPACE
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
Waning Gibbous 99%
|
|
10-01-2013, 12:58 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 807
|
|
Anyone seen this Canon 6D High ISO test?
|
10-01-2013, 01:08 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bathurst, NSW
Posts: 116
|
|
|
10-01-2013, 09:39 PM
|
|
IIS Member #671
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
|
|
Yep, do want for landscapes/nightscapes!
H
|
10-01-2013, 11:47 PM
|
|
Galaxy hitchhiking guide
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,111
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbaddah
The 6D performs incredible at high ....
|
Incredibly.
|
11-01-2013, 01:31 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,563
|
|
Interesting. I had completely ignored the 6D until now.
|
11-01-2013, 10:21 AM
|
|
Sir Post a Lot!
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,761
|
|
The 6D looks very very impressive.
Can't wait to try out the WiFi etc.
|
11-01-2013, 12:09 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 807
|
|
My "new" 5D Mark II feels so obsolete now The 6d is performing at least 2+ stops better. Quite a jump.
|
11-01-2013, 12:19 PM
|
|
IIS Member #671
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
|
|
The 5D Mark II was announced in October, 2008. So, the sensor is getting long in the tooth. However, it still takes just a beautiful image today as it did the day it was released. And, same with the original 5D.
It's quite telling that the gap was quite small in release dates between the 5D Mark III and the 6D, and the 6D performs better in terms of noise characteristics. So, even in those few months, there was advancement in sensor technology.
Oh, there's also rumours of a 40 megapixel monster around the corner, too.
I think I might just have to get one.
H
|
11-01-2013, 12:32 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,901
|
|
It lokos terrific although I would say there is a caveat.
It is highly unlikely Canon have developed a new sensor here. This would the same tech as before.
The difference is the Digic V+ and most likely a more advanced noise reduction algorithm going on.
I think Canon have started manipulating RAWs like Nikon used to do. There are posts about this on DPreview.
Your RAW is probably not RAW. Whether that means less faint stars or no difference at all is something future images will show.
But low noise is low noise no matter how they are getting it as long as you don't miss out on detail. Its the final image we are intereted in not how you get there.
A 6D high ISO jpeg I saw on the net at ISO8000 was pretty grainy and lacked a lot of detail, simiar to my little Sony RX100. So jury is out on this high ISO point. I would be surprised if it could beat the 5D3 personally but thats just an opinion. The trend has been for a lot of manufacturers to rely more on the increased processor power and the jpeg engine to do noise reduction rather than the sensor itself being much cleaner or a combo of both.
Greg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane
The 5D Mark II was announced in October, 2008. So, the sensor is getting long in the tooth. However, it still takes just a beautiful image today as it did the day it was released. And, same with the original 5D.
It's quite telling that the gap was quite small in release dates between the 5D Mark III and the 6D, and the 6D performs better in terms of noise characteristics. So, even in those few months, there was advancement in sensor technology.
Oh, there's also rumours of a 40 megapixel monster around the corner, too.
I think I might just have to get one.
H
|
|
11-01-2013, 02:47 PM
|
|
Canon collector
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Taylors Lakes Melb
Posts: 1,965
|
|
This to me seems a killer camera and now I just gotta get one!! The low noise has won me and being full frame is a new step for me. Really keen to see how the Wifi transfer performs, No cables..... now that to me is heaven.
Darrin (Midnight) has done a great comparison in this thread here. http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=100058
|
11-01-2013, 03:03 PM
|
|
Sir Post a Lot!
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,761
|
|
Once you go full frame, you'll never go back!
|
11-01-2013, 08:47 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,901
|
|
I did a post elsewhere. It seems RAW is RAW up to ISO25600 and then a noise routine is run like is run on the jpegs.
That's good news.
Greg.
|
13-01-2013, 01:38 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,865
|
|
Less noise in single shot images would be a huge boon for the people shooting nightscapes etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
I did a post elsewhere. It seems RAW is RAW up to ISO25600 and then a noise routine is run like is run on the jpegs.
|
As Craig Stark found, Canon RAWs aren't truly "raw" - it's already had pre-processing before it hits the CR2 file. It explains why In-Camera Noise Reduction works better than shooting separate light+dark exposures back-to-back...
|
14-01-2013, 06:47 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,901
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by naskies
Less noise in single shot images would be a huge boon for the people shooting nightscapes etc
As Craig Stark found, Canon RAWs aren't truly "raw" - it's already had pre-processing before it hits the CR2 file. It explains why In-Camera Noise Reduction works better than shooting separate light+dark exposures back-to-back...
|
I am not sure that Craig Starks article is conclusive. ISO response is not linear very often with DSLRs. You can get a drop in sensitivity by going to a nonstandard ISO setting (ie not a standard multiple of 1600, 3200, 6400 etc. That varies by camera maker and model I believe. For example the Nikon D800 does not drop dynamic range between ISO's but other models do.
So he may just be seeing that phenomena. Of course it may be a secret routine is being applied but it smacks of conspiracy theory - in this case against Canon. Who knows but I kind of doubt it as it could hurt their sales and little to be gained by doing that. The pixel peepers would pick it up and crucify them for it.
Greg.
Last edited by gregbradley; 15-01-2013 at 08:11 PM.
|
15-01-2013, 12:29 AM
|
|
IIS Member #671
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
|
|
Thankfully, the majority of photographers out there aren't pixel peepers or armchair sensor designers a la DP Review forum users.
I love my Canon gear; they make beautiful photographs.
H
|
15-01-2013, 11:44 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,865
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
I am not sure that Craig Starks article is conclusive. IO response is not linear very often with DSLRs. You can get a drop in sensitivity by going to a nonstandard ISO setting (ie not a standard multiple of 1600, 3200, 6400 etc. That varies by camera maker and model I believe. For example the Nikon D800 does not drop dynamic range between ISO's but other models do.
|
I think the dark noise investigations are pretty conclusive (pages 3-5 of the article). Based on how imaging sensors work, we know that dark noise only increases over time - thermal noise doesn't subtract from the well counts. However, when extracting data from the "raw" files it clearly does...
Quote:
Of course it may be a secret routine is being applied but it smacks of conspiracy theory - in this case against Canon.
|
I disagree that it's a conspiracy theory - the methods he used are clearly stated, his findings match what I've experienced, the theory for what he's saying appears legit, and he provides very compelling reasons why this behaviour (scaling) would be highly desirable for normal shooting.
The main point is that the process is being performed before the data is being written to the CR2 raw file - hence there's no way to undo the rescaling. CR2s are a lot more "raw" than JPEGs but they're obviously not equivalent to FITS files from astro CCDs either.
I should point out that this process works extremely well. I can fiddle around with equivalent Exposure Values, e.g. 30 sec @ ISO 25600 gives me a histogram with the same peak location as 8 mins @ ISO 1600. Likewise shooting timelapse sequences on manual doesn't change the location of the histogram peak (that I've noticed) even as the sensor warms up substantially.
In fact, it worked so well that before getting into astro I didn't even realise that there was such a thing as dark current
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +10. The time is now 09:51 AM.
|
|