This is for Ted to get his photographic fix.
Photos to Photons ves DXOmark
should DR be based on noise or actual captured images.
eg: DXO the sony a7s sports iso rating 3700 vers sony a7s3 iso 2500 knowing that the sony a7s3 is binned 48 meg to 12 vers a7s 12 large single pixels. Bills site shows a different result.
Hello, Donald: I am biased for Bill Claff and against anything DxO but, in any case, there's an ISO Standard for Dynamic Range, so noise.
so adding noise reduction increases DR 🤔 as it clearly shows in bills site but is the exact opposite to cine-d testing where the z6ii tested 2 stops less DR 😊to other FF cameras.
Numbers are nice, but photos are better, especially with regards to DR (in my opinion, DR is the most misunderstood of the IQ metrics). To that end, I really like the DPR "DR comparometer". The main issue with this method is how strongly the results vary with different RAW converters.
That said, I don't think DR is an issue with any cameras of the past decade unless you're someone who does a lot of heavy shadow pushing. It's the same with pixel count. Yes, 48 MP is better than 24 MP, but unless you're heavily cropping or displaying super large and viewing super close, the differences really don't matter all that much. In fact, depending on the photo, the differences won't matter even then. : )
That's not to say that more DR (or more resolution) can't be useful, but the best way to achieve this, methinks, is the way smartphones do it: merging multiple photos. If modern cameras were able to take even two exposures and merge them into a 16 bit (or even 24 bit!) RAW file, that would be something special. For example:
If the camera had taken even two exposures, one with the same exposure taken, and the other with, say 1/4 the exposure time, and merged them, then there would still be detail in the moon sliver. Could I have done it manually? Sure. Set the camera to shoot an exposure bracket, convert the photos, then merge with the desired levels. Would really like one stop shopping, here, and, honestly, I don't think it's that much of an ask. Sure, if you're firing off 20 fps, but if you're just taking that one shot, and it takes the camera even three seconds to process it into a high bit high DR RAW file, that would be awesome.
But with regards to sensor tech for single exposures, yes, there's a difference, but, for the most part, I don't think the difference really matters as any "meaningful" difference would require a massive increase in DR which would be best served, by far, by merging multiple exposures like smartphones.
im the same and photos are the only way to exactlly measure DR. given bills site says that the a7iv and a7r5 are the same but from images taken on Dustin Abbottts site the a7iv is clearly in front at 3 stops over exposed and clearly infront at 5 stops under exposed, so how do sites get it so wrong 🤔
