Dynamic Range of Point & Shoots...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by plastic_razor@yahoo.com, Nov 18, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Is there a significant difference between a typical consumer dSLR
    (400D, D80, A100) and a midrange point & shoot camera?

    I've tried to find quantitative/statistical measurements of the dynamic
    range of these cameras, but haven't been able to find any.
     
    , Nov 18, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. wrote:
    > Is there a significant difference between a typical consumer dSLR
    > (400D, D80, A100) and a midrange point & shoot camera?
    >
    > I've tried to find quantitative/statistical measurements of the dynamic
    > range of these cameras, but haven't been able to find any.



    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=dynamic range
     
    =?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?=, Nov 18, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JohnR66 Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is there a significant difference between a typical consumer dSLR
    > (400D, D80, A100) and a midrange point & shoot camera?
    >
    > I've tried to find quantitative/statistical measurements of the dynamic
    > range of these cameras, but haven't been able to find any.
    >

    Yes. You get about a stop worth (YMMV) and if you use the RAW mode on the
    SLR, you can pull out an additional stop. Most P&S cameras don't have a RAW
    mode. I find many P&S cameras (and some dSLRs) are designed to expose for
    the shadows and tend to blow the highlights often. I find that using the
    exposure compensation setting and underexposing by a 1/2 to a full stop
    helps considerably. Also many compact cameras are set too contrasty as the
    average consumer likes the extra "snap" it gives the image. If the camera
    has a contrast setting, lower it to reduce the chance of clipping.
    John
     
    JohnR66, Nov 18, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    JohnR66 wrote:
    > >

    > Yes. You get about a stop worth (YMMV) and if you use the RAW mode on the
    > SLR, you can pull out an additional stop. Most P&S cameras don't have a RAW
    > mode.



    Some P&S cameras, like the Canon G6, do have RAW mode. I wonder how
    its dynamic range compares to dSLRs?

    I know that the dynamic range of the Digital Rebel XTi (400D) is
    measurably larger than that of the EOS 5D, even though the latter has a
    much larger sensor. With that in mind, I wonder how much more dynamic
    range a dSLR is capable of capturing than a decent P&S? Most people
    (including me) believe that dSLRs have higher dynamic range than point
    & shoots, but I've yet to see actual numbers to back it up.
     
    , Nov 18, 2006
    #4
  5. wrote:

    > JohnR66 wrote:
    >
    >>Yes. You get about a stop worth (YMMV) and if you use the RAW mode on the
    >>SLR, you can pull out an additional stop. Most P&S cameras don't have a RAW
    >>mode.

    >
    > Some P&S cameras, like the Canon G6, do have RAW mode. I wonder how
    > its dynamic range compares to dSLRs?
    >
    > I know that the dynamic range of the Digital Rebel XTi (400D) is
    > measurably larger than that of the EOS 5D, even though the latter has a
    > much larger sensor. With that in mind, I wonder how much more dynamic
    > range a dSLR is capable of capturing than a decent P&S? Most people
    > (including me) believe that dSLRs have higher dynamic range than point
    > & shoots, but I've yet to see actual numbers to back it up.
    >

    Where did you read the XTi has a larger dynamic range than the
    5D? The 5D is limited by the 12-bit A/D converter. The only way
    an XTi could beat that is if it had a 14 or 16 bit A/D, which I
    do not think it does.

    The answers to your questions are on these web pages:

    Data on sensors are here:
    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/index.html#sensor_analysis

    Dynamic range of DSLR versus P&S are shown in Figure 7 at:
    Digital Cameras: Does Pixel Size Matter?
    Factors in Choosing a Digital Camera
    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter

    Another plot of sensor dynamic range is in Figure 3 at:
    Digital Camera Sensor Performance Summary
    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance
    (This page is new and is still a draft.)

    Roger
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Nov 18, 2006
    #5
  6. wrote:
    > JohnR66 wrote:
    >> Yes. You get about a stop worth (YMMV) and if you use the RAW mode on the
    >> SLR, you can pull out an additional stop. Most P&S cameras don't have a RAW
    >> mode.

    >
    >
    > Some P&S cameras, like the Canon G6, do have RAW mode. I wonder how
    > its dynamic range compares to dSLRs?
    >
    > I know that the dynamic range of the Digital Rebel XTi (400D) is
    > measurably larger than that of the EOS 5D, even though the latter has a
    > much larger sensor.


    When, where, and how do you "know" this? Seriously, can you cite some
    URL or other?

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Nov 18, 2006
    #6
  7. Alan Browne Guest

    wrote:
    > Is there a significant difference between a typical consumer dSLR
    > (400D, D80, A100) and a midrange point & shoot camera?
    >
    > I've tried to find quantitative/statistical measurements of the dynamic
    > range of these cameras, but haven't been able to find any.


    P&S' typically have -higher pixel densities = noise
    -lower conversion dynamic range (bits) = less
    "shaddow" depth.

    dpreview has good charts for many of the cameras (but not all).

    Cheers,
    Alan



    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
     
    Alan Browne, Nov 18, 2006
    #7
  8. Mark² Guest

    wrote:
    > JohnR66 wrote:
    >>>

    >> Yes. You get about a stop worth (YMMV) and if you use the RAW mode
    >> on the SLR, you can pull out an additional stop. Most P&S cameras
    >> don't have a RAW mode.

    >
    >
    > Some P&S cameras, like the Canon G6, do have RAW mode. I wonder how
    > its dynamic range compares to dSLRs?
    >
    > I know that the dynamic range of the Digital Rebel XTi (400D) is
    > measurably larger than that of the EOS 5D, even though the latter has
    > a much larger sensor. With that in mind,


    I seriously doubt you'll find anything that backs up this claim.
    Please cite your data, if you've found something would have to defy logic.

    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 19, 2006
    #8
  9. Guest

    Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    >
    > I seriously doubt you'll find anything that backs up this claim.
    > Please cite your data, if you've found something would have to defy logic.
    >



    The EOS 400D review at DPreview claims that the 400D has a dynamic
    range that's roughly 5% better than the D80, 350D, and the Sony Alpha.
    The usable range is supposed to be around 8.4EV. In their EOS 5D
    review (same author), the measured dynamic range was around 8.2 EV.
    These were done in JPEG tests. Both cameras have about one extra stop
    of headroom in RAW mode.

    The difference in test results is so small, it's probably more accurate
    to say that neither the 400D nor the 5D has a real advantage in dynamic
    range --- at least based on this one test. Which is interesting,
    considering all the hoopla about the big bad full frame sensor having
    better dynamic range than a tiny sensoor in an entry-level digital
    rebel. Maybe I misunderstood the articles? Read for yourselves:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page22.asp

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page19.asp
     
    , Nov 20, 2006
    #9
  10. wrote:
    > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    >> I seriously doubt you'll find anything that backs up this claim.
    >> Please cite your data, if you've found something would have to defy logic.

    >
    > The EOS 400D review at DPreview claims that the 400D has a dynamic
    > range that's roughly 5% better than the D80, 350D, and the Sony Alpha.
    > The usable range is supposed to be around 8.4EV. In their EOS 5D
    > review (same author), the measured dynamic range was around 8.2 EV.
    > These were done in JPEG tests. Both cameras have about one extra stop
    > of headroom in RAW mode.
    >
    > The difference in test results is so small, it's probably more accurate
    > to say that neither the 400D nor the 5D has a real advantage in dynamic
    > range --- at least based on this one test. Which is interesting,
    > considering all the hoopla about the big bad full frame sensor having
    > better dynamic range than a tiny sensoor in an entry-level digital
    > rebel. Maybe I misunderstood the articles? Read for yourselves:
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page22.asp
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page19.asp


    Thanks for the response, and cites, which I may read later. However, you
    are disproving the claim you made, somehow not quoted here. [Mark
    squared's post is also missing on my spool in r.p.d., but the points
    made by Roger and me aren't contradicted.]

    --
    John McWilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Nov 20, 2006
    #10
  11. Colin_D Guest

    wrote:
    > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    >> I seriously doubt you'll find anything that backs up this claim.
    >> Please cite your data, if you've found something would have to defy logic.
    >>

    >
    >
    > The EOS 400D review at DPreview claims that the 400D has a dynamic
    > range that's roughly 5% better than the D80, 350D, and the Sony Alpha.
    > The usable range is supposed to be around 8.4EV. In their EOS 5D
    > review (same author), the measured dynamic range was around 8.2 EV.
    > These were done in JPEG tests. Both cameras have about one extra stop
    > of headroom in RAW mode.
    >
    > The difference in test results is so small, it's probably more accurate
    > to say that neither the 400D nor the 5D has a real advantage in dynamic
    > range --- at least based on this one test. Which is interesting,
    > considering all the hoopla about the big bad full frame sensor having
    > better dynamic range than a tiny sensoor in an entry-level digital
    > rebel. Maybe I misunderstood the articles? Read for yourselves:
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page22.asp
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page19.asp
    >

    See also this link from Roger Clark:

    http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary

    where the 5D is vastly superior to all other cameras.

    Colin D.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
     
    Colin_D, Nov 20, 2006
    #11
  12. Mark² Guest

    wrote:
    > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    >>
    >> I seriously doubt you'll find anything that backs up this claim.
    >> Please cite your data, if you've found something would have to defy
    >> logic.
    >>

    >
    >
    > The EOS 400D review at DPreview claims that the 400D has a dynamic
    > range that's roughly 5% better than the D80, 350D, and the Sony Alpha.
    > The usable range is supposed to be around 8.4EV. In their EOS 5D
    > review (same author), the measured dynamic range was around 8.2 EV.
    > These were done in JPEG tests. Both cameras have about one extra stop
    > of headroom in RAW mode.


    Those who are concerned about the minutia of dynamic range differences are
    unlikely to shoot in jpeg. Has it occurred to you that jpegs are far more
    limited than the range that can be pushed/pulled from a RAW file?

    Once you convert to jpeg, you've given away a tremendous amount of data and
    potential dynamic range.


    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
     
    Mark², Nov 21, 2006
    #12
  13. Colin_D wrote:
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    >>
    >>> I seriously doubt you'll find anything that backs up this claim.
    >>> Please cite your data, if you've found something would have to defy
    >>> logic.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> The EOS 400D review at DPreview claims that the 400D has a dynamic
    >> range that's roughly 5% better than the D80, 350D, and the Sony Alpha.
    >> The usable range is supposed to be around 8.4EV. In their EOS 5D
    >> review (same author), the measured dynamic range was around 8.2 EV.
    >> These were done in JPEG tests. Both cameras have about one extra stop
    >> of headroom in RAW mode.
    >>
    >> The difference in test results is so small, it's probably more accurate
    >> to say that neither the 400D nor the 5D has a real advantage in dynamic
    >> range --- at least based on this one test. Which is interesting,
    >> considering all the hoopla about the big bad full frame sensor having
    >> better dynamic range than a tiny sensoor in an entry-level digital
    >> rebel. Maybe I misunderstood the articles? Read for yourselves:
    >>
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page22.asp
    >>
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page19.asp
    >>

    > See also this link from Roger Clark:
    >
    > http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary
    >
    > where the 5D is vastly superior to all other cameras.
    >
    > Colin D.
    >

    And note that Figure 4 in digital.sensor.performance.summary
    all the DSLRs real dynamic range bump up against the
    12-bit A/D limit (the pink horizontal line at about 11.6 stops).
    Thus, it would be expected that the 400D and 5D would measure
    out to the same dynamic range at low ISO. But they
    would diverge as the ISO increases (similar to Figure 5:
    the D200 would be close to the 400D, and the 1D Mark II would
    be essentially the same as the 5D).

    Roger
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Nov 21, 2006
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. measekite

    Top 5 Point and Shoots under $500

    measekite, Feb 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    818
    Pete D
    Mar 1, 2005
  2. Robert Feinman

    Scene range vs dynamic range

    Robert Feinman, Jun 30, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    704
    Marvin
    Jul 4, 2005
  3. Paul Rubin

    Good AA-powered point-and-shoots?

    Paul Rubin, Nov 23, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    847
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Nov 24, 2005
  4. Rich
    Replies:
    237
    Views:
    3,438
    John Navas
    Nov 19, 2007
  5. measekite

    Megapixel War Over for Point and Shoots?

    measekite, Nov 29, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    845
    Paul Furman
    Dec 5, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page