This is because Nikon/Sony sensors are "ISOless". They exhibit (almost) linear decrease in dynamic range as you increase ISO. Dynamic range goes down 1 stop when ISO increase 1 stop. This consists of almost no improvement in shadow detail, but almost 1 stop reduction in highlight detail. In other words, with a Sony/Nikon sensor, shooting at base ISO will get you the shadow detail you would have gotten by using maximum ISO (with same aperture and shutter speed), with the extra highlight detail that you lost when increasing ISO.Canon's sensor only loses on dynamic range, and at low ISO only.
again, please let the comparison chart speak by itself:
View attachment 5174
This is because Nikon/Sony sensors are "ISOless". They exhibit (almost) linear decrease in dynamic range as you increase ISO. Dynamic range goes down 1 stop when ISO increase 1 stop. This consists of almost no improvement in shadow detail, but almost 1 stop reduction in highlight detail. In other words, with a Sony/Nikon sensor, shooting at base ISO will get you the shadow detail you would have gotten by using maximum ISO (with same aperture and shutter speed), with the extra highlight detail that you lost when increasing ISO. In Canon sensors, increasing ISO by 1 stop will not clip 1 stop of highlight detail. It will clip less than 1 stop of highlight detail, and you will gain less than 1 stop of shadow detail. Dynamic range decreases with ISO, but not linearly. This means that you can always shoot at base ISO on your Sony/Nikon and get max dynamic range, and gain nothing by raising ISO, except a nicer looking JPG preview. Your shot might be underexposed, but as long as you didn't clip the shadows, you're fine (equivalent to shooting properly exposed at higher ISO, except you lose highlight detail that way). In practice, however, few people do this, because if you're supposed to shoot at ISO 25600 but you used ISO 100, your JPG preview will be pretty much just black.
I don't have any photos to show for comparison, but this link does provide a set of sample images, though not at extreme conditionsIam very noob and don't understand what u mean. Do u have photos to show for comparison? Are Sony and Nikon using the exactly same sensor? Some of my friends told me Sony reserved the best sensor for Nikon and some said they reserved the best for themself,whichever it sounds like the sensors are not exactly same?
exactly what im planning 1st 24-105 f4L for about 2 to 3 months then 16-35 f208L then 50mm F1.4 or 85mm f1.8 lastly 70-200f2.8L by end of 2015 should have all these lens![]()
I don't have any photos to show for comparison, but this link does provide a set of sample images, though not at extreme conditions
Anyway, Sony sensors are used in many Nikon and Pentax DSLRs. All of them are "ISOless". Some people also claim Fuji sensors are made by Sony, because they are also ISOless.
This link and this link have some explanation on the concept of an ISOless sensor
Regardless of whether Sony sensors are ISOless or otherwise, bottomline is Sony APSC sensors are NOT better than Canon FF sensors. That remains a fact. I also hope that Canon can improve their base ISO DR. But i will not go around spreading lies.
This is because Nikon/Sony sensors are "ISOless". They exhibit (almost) linear decrease in dynamic range as you increase ISO. Dynamic range goes down 1 stop when ISO increase 1 stop. This consists of almost no improvement in shadow detail, but almost 1 stop reduction in highlight detail. In other words, with a Sony/Nikon sensor, shooting at base ISO will get you the shadow detail you would have gotten by using maximum ISO (with same aperture and shutter speed), with the extra highlight detail that you lost when increasing ISO. In Canon sensors, increasing ISO by 1 stop will not clip 1 stop of highlight detail. It will clip less than 1 stop of highlight detail, and you will gain less than 1 stop of shadow detail. Dynamic range decreases with ISO, but not linearly. This means that you can always shoot at base ISO on your Sony/Nikon and get max dynamic range, and gain nothing by raising ISO, except a nicer looking JPG preview. Your shot might be underexposed, but as long as you didn't clip the shadows, you're fine (equivalent to shooting properly exposed at higher ISO, except you lose highlight detail that way). In practice, however, few people do this, because if you're supposed to shoot at ISO 25600 but you used ISO 100, your JPG preview will be pretty much just black.
Keep on track and forget about the nonsense about ISOless. There is no such thing. This thread is about TS asking which camera to get. I admit I got a carried away arguing on sensor issues and I apologise about it. But lets get back on track, we are not here to confuse TS more with all these nonsenses. Bottomline, Sony, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Fuji, Olympus and every other brands all made good cameras, sensor as many claim to be the most important thing in a camera is not the only thing in a camera, there are other components that made a good camera and also other components that would enable someone to decide on which camera to get. I do not want to see any more of this nonsense before this perfectly innocent thread turns into a brand war.
Wah bro...u sound like someone wif deep pockets. All Photographers envy people like uI came from a 600d to 6d. No point getting another crop for yourself unless u do sports. U will appreciate the ff-ness the 6d gives u. The bokeh at f2.8 on 600d is like the f4 on 6d coz of the bigger sensor. Low light is definitely much better too, even wif the 24-105 f4 but know the limits of your f4.
I do agree on that.
I don't take reviews too seriously but rather as an information added to my knowledge until I have tested myself and see the difference then I will say iam convinced.