Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 It is a bit sad that my Facebook feed is full of groups for cameras like the NX1 and A7s and are now saying with concrete authority that the C300 II only has 12.5 stops of DR, completely ignoring any tests that show otherwise, just to try and make themselves feel better about their cheaper cameras (I own both, great cameras, but i'm not gonna try and convince myself that they are now somehow better because of this C300 II review!). If it makes the consumer-gadget internet users feel better, the power to them, it might even encourage them to shoot something since they don't need a C300II. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted September 25, 2015 Super Members Share Posted September 25, 2015 Even though all of the camcorders all have excellent dynamic ranges better than film, with film I could just buy by the ASA and it would be the same measurement for each film camera. 200asa film kicks the ass of any iso 20 000 camcorder when it comes to DR. odie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted September 25, 2015 Super Members Share Posted September 25, 2015 Is Dynamic Range the measurement of light it can handle?Its the meauserement of how much you can see from the darkest shadow (black) to the lightest highligt (white).If you have 1 stop you have black, grey and white.If you have 2 stop you have black, dark grey, light grey, white.(its not exactly like this but imo it illustrates the point.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantsin Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Dynamic range, in visuals, is the difference between the brightest and darkest area. In photography, film and video, we're dealing with (a) the dynamic range of the subject/scene we record, (b) the dynamic range the film/sensor can reproduce, (c) the dynamic range of the particular reproduction medium (screen, print etc).In photography and film, we're often dealing with light in relative measurements. Opening one f-stop of a lens means to let in twice as much light. If I'm shooting the desert at noon, with the sun visibly in the camera shining light on a palm tree, my scene "(a)" will have nearly infinite dynamic range from the darkest shadow of the tree to the sun. In a normal bright sun light situation, without holding the camera into the sun, my scene will have about 15-17 stops dynamic range. The camera sensor "(b)" can only record a limited part this dynamic range - typically, something around 8-10 stops usable dynamic range -, so the camera operator will need to make a decision which areas s/he should let clip to white respectively black. For example, I could expose for the palm tree, then the sky would likely clip to white. Or I could expose for the sky, then the palm tree would turn black. In this situation, an Arri Alexa will give me more range than, for example, a C300 or (let alone) a GH4, with a higher likelihood that shadow details of the palm tree will still be visible when exposing for the sky. Third in the equation is the dynamic range of the output medium (c). An average flatscreen TV might have a contrast ratio of a 1:1000, which is about 2^10 (1024), u,e, ten f-stops. In this case, camera dynamic range and display dynamic range are roughly equivalent (although, if we deliver in 8bit, we can't encode 10 f-stops dynamic range without color banding - another can of worms). If we print on photo paper, we'll have maybe 6 f-stops dynamic range and compress the recorded dynamic range into that. (On a postcard, you can still print near-infinite dynamic range of the subject (a) - from shadows of trees to blue skies - by compressing dynamic range.) In studio production, camera dynamic range isn't really an issue, because you simply light the scene (a) within the dynamic range of the film/sensor (b). This is why Hollywood could make films even in times when film had poor dynamic range. (And the same reason why the GH2 did will at the Zacuto camera shootout - back then, the GH2 team properly lit the scene for the camera's limited dynamic range.)- Oh yeah, if I lived in a science fiction world (or in Plato's cave, for that matter) where there were nothing but either pitch-black or fully-white objects, and my camera and display could reproduce this, then my scene (a), my recording medium (b) and my display medium (c) would all have infinite/perfect dynamic range. So Mattias' explanation is, in fact, wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odie Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 200asa film kicks the ass of any iso 20 000 camcorder when it comes to DR.+1200 ..and 50d film ...give the image...subject..actor...actress..friend...family member..an unexplainable feel..like etched in immortality... TheRenaissanceMan and Mattias Burling 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanveer Posted September 27, 2015 Share Posted September 27, 2015 They should test the ML features and the Nikon Hacker features and all of the third party stuff that comes with them. hahaha. Zacuto were extremely shocked by all the brickbats from the Companies, the DoPs and the participants, when online users started randomly quoting single sentences and taking random figures frlm their findings. It got to the point that they couldn't take it anymore, and they cancelled any further tests/ shootouts.With Hacked Canon and Nikon, Zacuto wohld be digging a 100 metre grave for themselves, which they might never be able to come out of. Hehehe ;-) Technical shooter 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted September 27, 2015 Super Members Share Posted September 27, 2015 For me the last Zacuto Shootout showed that no more shootouts needs to be made. Its still 100% current and adding the c300ii, fs7, ursa mini etc would not ad anything valuable to the test.The result would still be, given a good DP and enough lights, they can all look good.Thats why I a while back tested and imo sort of proofed the opposite. If you take a couple of cinema cameras and a couple of cheap once but pay zero attention to lights and grading. It will again look pretty much the same. sanveer, IronFilm and TheRenaissanceMan 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bySeb Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Hi there,We just posted a follow up on our article with Canon's response and ours and their testing methodology side-by-side:https://***URL not allowed***/canon-measured-15-stops-dynamic-range-c300-mark-ii/ Don Kotlos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 30, 2015 Administrators Share Posted November 30, 2015 VW also cheat at tests. Zach Goodwin and sanveer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Hi there,We just posted a follow up on our article with Canon's response and ours and their testing methodology side-by-side:https://***URL not allowed***/canon-measured-15-stops-dynamic-range-c300-mark-ii/It is always great to be able to understand all the testing methodology and have the relative comparisons between cameras. sanveer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.