6D dynamic range

[olyduck]

As I consider purchasing the 6D, I do come across articles about the apparently wider dynamic range of the sensors in the Nikon and Sony DSLRs.  Do their sensors really have better native dynamic range or are they just achieving that effect via processing algorithms?  If the latter, is something being sacrificed to achieve that wider range?  It's just crosses my mind whenever I get my highlights clipped when shooting my 40D.  I grew up shooting Kodachrome 25 so I'm not completely in "contrast shock" and can selectively bias my exposure, but a liitle wider range without going the HDR route would be nice.

[Bob Atkins]

The Nikon sensors (made by Sony) do have more dynamic range than the Canon sensors, but it's at low ISO settings and it's on the underexposure side. You can dig information out of the shadows better. I don't think they are particularly better on the overexposure side and at high ISO settings there is less advantage. The difference mainly seems to come from the lower shadow noise of the Nikon (Sony) sensor.

I looked at the D800 and 5D MkIII and you can see the results here:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/Canon_EOS_5D_MkIII_vs_Nikon_D800_dynamic_range.html

From all the data I've seen, the 6D and 5D MkIII should be pretty similar, even though they don't have exactly the same sensor.

Other than careful exposure, turning on HTP (High light tone priority) is probably the best way to avoid highlight clipping on EOS DSLRs, though you can lose a little shadow detail.

[KeithB]

Bob might comment on the methodology, but DxoMark has a direct rating for dynamic range in EV's. The 6D is about 12:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_landscape

[KeithB]

Here is a recent online review of the 6D I saw referenced on TOP:
http://shutterfinger.typepad.com/shutterfinger/2013/05/why-i-like-the-canon-eos-6d.html

[Bob Atkins]

The DxOMark scores for Landscape DR are based on low ISO settings. Nobody shoots landscapes at ISO 1600 and up, so their "single number" ratings don't tell the whole story. However they do show about a 2EV advantage to Nikon in the low ISO range, similar to what I saw comparing the 5D MkIII with the D800.

I've been shooting with an EOS 6D for the last few weeks. I like it. So far I haven't found any real issues with either the image noise, image quality or even the relatively simple AF system.  In fact the AF system (center zone) works in extremely low light. Seems like an excellent buy if you want a FF body for under $2000. The GPS and WiFi are fun to play with too

Best deal on the 6D right now looks like $1999 from ADORAMA with a 2% credit ($40) and around $90 of "free" goodies thown in.

EOS 6D at ADORAMA - $1999

[KeithB]

Well, the DxoMark shows the 6D at about a stop higher in dynamic range than the 40D, so you will get some more headroom, but not the 3EV you would get going to the Nikon. I would think it also depends on your investment in EF lenses.

[Bob Atkins]

Again though you have to look where the extra dynamic range is. If it's mostly at the shadow end of the range, it's not going tp help with blown out highliight, and as far as I know most of the added dynamic range of the Sony/Nikon sensors does come at the shadow end.

Comparing the 6D with the 40D I don't think you'll see significantly more headroom in the RAW files.

[KeithB]

Well olyduck said:
"I grew up shooting Kodachrome 25 so I'm not completely in "contrast shock" and can selectively bias my exposure, but a liitle wider range without going the HDR route would be nice."

So it looks like they know how to "expose to the left" 
8^)

[olyduck]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts on this issue.  I appreciated the links provided as well.


-Dave