Michael Tapes Sony review

[Hans Kruse]

Here's a real world example from a shoot yesterday in Florence.

Posted for fun with no implications. I just thought it might be worthwhile to remember why it is that we fuss over technical arcana.

Sony A7R II with 16-35mm f/4 @ ISO 100







Shadows opened about 4 stops. There was a lot more, but I wanted to retain the mystery.

I also tried a bracket, but an HDR version just didn't look as honest.



Michael

Nice shot and I like it. Maybe even slightly shadows pushing would make it stand out even better.

Why would an HDR merge in Lightroom of bracketed shots not give the same possibility? To me should give exactly the same ability to adjust like you want and even give more flexibility than a single RAW (even though not needed perhaps in this case).

[Manoli]

Why would an HDR merge in Lightroom of bracketed shots not give the same possibility? To me should give exactly the same ability to adjust like you want and even give more flexibility than a single RAW ...

Just perhaps, Hans, 'cos some of us photograph creatures that move .. both human and animal.
Boosting shadow detail is one thing, HDR - which is really only practical in landscape photography - quite another.

[Hans Kruse]

Just perhaps, Hans, 'cos some of us photograph creatures that move .. both human and animal.
Boosting shadow detail is one thing, HDR - which is really only practical in landscape photography - quite another.

Please note the context of the question. I assume the painting did not have moving elements, but maybe I'm wrong?

[Manoli]

Please note the context of the question.

Oh but I did, and I also noted the context of both the test and this thread which is about pushing those shadows! 

[Hans Kruse]

Oh but I did, and I also noted the context of both the test and this thread which is about pushing those shadows! 

I asked a specific question to Michael.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I asked a specific question to Michael.

I also wondered a bit about Michael's remark about the HDR from LR, not looking as good as a pushed version. But since I'm not a subscriber to LR CC, I cannot test that myself. My experience with other HDR tonemapping software, suggests that very realistically tonemapped results are certainly possible based on HDRI source files, some even better than the real thing because they overcome the physical limitations that we work around with our eyes/brain by constantly accommodating for the average brightness differences in a narrow angle of view.

But since he's traveling, maybe he just didn't get the opportunity yet to do a better HDR tonemapping job.

Cheers,
Bart

[RobertJ]

I don't really pay attention to tests, I just open hundreds of RAW files and use my own eyes.

I can also say that with the right lens and technique, the Canon 5DsR is an amazing camera.  The files impress me more than anything from Sony, despite having "obsolete" technology.

I will say that sticking with Nikon might be the best choice.  The Zeiss ZF lenses can be used on Nikon, Canon, and Sony. 

[Hans Kruse]

I also wondered a bit about Michael's remark about the HDR from LR, not looking as good as a pushed version. But since I'm not a subscriber to LR CC, I cannot test that myself. My experience with other HDR tonemapping software, suggests that very realistically tonemapped results are certainly possible based on HDRI source files, some even better than the real thing because they overcome the physical limitations that we work around with our eyes/brain by constantly accommodating for the average brightness differences in a narrow angle of view.

But since he's traveling, maybe he just didn't get the opportunity yet to do a better HDR tonemapping job.

Cheers,
Bart

I was certainly not trying to put Michael on the spot. Rather if there was some reason that I was not aware of, I'd like to understand why he wrote this. I have had very good results with the HDR function in Lightroom and especially since it generates a DNG file it is very editable whatever look I prefer. Of course, HDR merging has it's limitations as we all know and I did not want to go into that discussion once again (as in the response from Amolitor)

And maybe Michael was on the road and did not thorougly try the HDR merge which is fine too. We all know how it is to be on the road, I guess

[jeremyrh]

I also wondered a bit about Michael's remark about the HDR from LR, not looking as good as a pushed version. But since I'm not a subscriber to LR CC, I cannot test that myself. My experience with other HDR tonemapping software, suggests that very realistically tonemapped results are certainly possible based on HDRI source files, some even better than the real thing because they overcome the physical limitations that we work around with our eyes/brain by constantly accommodating for the average brightness differences in a narrow angle of view.

But since he's traveling, maybe he just didn't get the opportunity yet to do a better HDR tonemapping job.

Cheers,
Bart

Maybe he just wanted to press one button one time and be done with it?

[Hans Kruse]

Maybe he just wanted to press one button one time and be done with it?

This is getting silly. Michael mentioned that he also did bracketing and that's what the discussion is about.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

This is getting silly. Michael mentioned that he also did bracketing and that's what the discussion is about.

I agree, it's probably due to what's called 'projection' (of one's own mindset).

Shadows opened about 4 stops. There was a lot more, but I wanted to retain the mystery.

I also tried a bracket, but an HDR version just didn't look as honest.

It's the latter part that is intriguing, but maybe for a separate thread. Human vision plays a lot of tricks on us, but many photographers would also like to be able and approach 'realism', before they decide to deliberately change perception of that reality to their liking (creative intent). I recall Kevin Raber mentioning he was evaluating HDR expose, maybe a nice occasion to pick that up where he left it, and there is some new development going on with my personal favorite, SNS-HDR.

It's nice to have options.

Cheers,
Bart

[Manoli]

Why do some photographers wish to complicate things unnecessarily ?

In Michael's test you've got 2 options: either open up the shadows or use HDR, one is a single button adjustment the other, unless there's a good reason for it, probably overkill.

Now at a guess, Michaels throwaway line ' I also tried a bracket, but an HDR version just didn't look as honest. ' I take to mean that the tonal relationship of the HDR shot, in his opinion, didn't look as realistic, convincing, genuine , lifelike ( take your pick). No doubt it would have with accurate and detailed tone-mapping but that would have entailed extra post processing and to what avail, if the single button alternative produced excellent, not to say preferable results ?

Some of us have a penchant for HDR, others less so - to each his own. But the point made, and made well, is that shadow recovery has a very practical and visible benefit.

[Hans Kruse]

Why do some photographers wish to complicate things unnecessarily ?

In Michael's test you've got 2 options: either open up the shadows or use HDR, one is a single button adjustment the other, unless there's a good reason for it, probably overkill.

Now at a guess, Michaels throwaway line ' I also tried a bracket, but an HDR version just didn't look as honest. ' I take to mean that the tonal relationship of the HDR shot, in his opinion, didn't look as realistic, convincing, genuine , lifelike ( take your pick). No doubt it would have with accurate and detailed tone-mapping but that would have entailed extra post processing and to what avail, if the single button alternative produced excellent, not to say preferable results ?

Some of us have a penchant for HDR, others less so - to each his own. But the point made, and made well, is that shadow recovery has a very practical and visible benefit.

This is pretty amazing. The question for Michael was not about shadow pushing at all. It was also not about "real" HDR as seen with most standalone HDR programs. It was about HDR merged in Lightroom (assuming that Michael merged in Lightroom) which is essentally a super RAW file which (in my experience) can be processed to look exactly like one of the RAW files going into the HDR merge except for (potential) noise in shadows and (potential) highlight clipping if the single RAW file had any of this. As mentioned a number of times before I'm not arguing against high dynamic range at all and in fact I'm shooting with the best on the planet at the moment: D810. I'm only asking why Michael made this statement and I look forward to see Michael answer this question

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Why do some photographers wish to complicate things unnecessarily ?

Hi Manoli,

That's not what's going on. Using equipment+technique to achieve superior results is.

Now at a guess, Michaels throwaway line ' I also tried a bracket, but an HDR version just didn't look as honest. ' I take to mean that the tonal relationship of the HDR shot, in his opinion, didn't look as realistic, convincing, genuine , lifelike ( take your pick). No doubt it would have with accurate and detailed tone-mapping but that would have entailed extra post processing and to what avail, if the single button alternative produced excellent, not to say preferable results ?

You seem to assume that better HDR tonemapping would not achieve superior results. That remains to be seen, especially for more extreme scenarios.

Obviously, being able to salvage underexposed image content is very useful. But it will never beat the quality of better exposure (more photons), if practical (which it sometimes isn't, and sometimes is).

Cheers,
Bart

[stevesanacore]

Let's also keep in mind that Sony is going to upgrade the firmware to lossless raw compression in the near future. It may make a difference in extreme underexposure performance.  I've also found that in the present releases, Capture One seems to do a better job than LR of image processing on the Sony files.  I had an issue with high contrast highlights posterizing on one shot last week in LR. I opened it in C1, and the highlights were perfectly rendered. I hope Adobe deals with that quickly.

There is no Canon or Sony issue for me. The Sony bodies are a great addition to my Canon system!

[Manoli]

That's not what's going on. Using equipment+technique to achieve superior results is.

Hi Bart,

I couldn't agree more - especially with the technique part where practicable and feasible. That is the point I was making to Hans (who seems to be taking this very personally).

You seem to assume that better HDR tonemapping would not achieve superior results.

And no, I don't assume that, nor did I intimate that. I'm not a landscape photographer, Hans is. HDR is of  limited practicality when I'm shooting 'live' subjects as compared to exposing for highlights and recovering shadows - for me.

But it will never beat the quality of better exposure (more photons), if practical (which it sometimes isn't, and sometimes is).

We agree!

Best,
M

[dreed]

btw, it is worth remembering that on digital cameras, ISO levels outside of the native range are an effective underexposure pushed up. So if native ISO ends at 6400, 25600 is 6400 under exposed by two stops and then pushed in software to make it up. Thus a 3 stop pull of shadows at 25600 is the same as pulling shadows by 5 stops at 6400.

[Hans Kruse]

Hi Bart,

I couldn't agree more - especially with the technique part where practicable and feasible. That is the point I was making to Hans (who seems to be taking this very personally).

And no, I don't assume that, nor did I intimate that. I'm not a landscape photographer, Hans is. HDR is of  limited practicality when I'm shooting 'live' subjects as compared to exposing for highlights and recovering shadows - for me.

We agree!

Best,
M

I was not taking this personal in any way. Why should this be personal? I was asking Michael a question, that was all. There was no need to repeat what was already discussed. Yes, I shoot landscapes, but that's not only what I shoot and I very well aware of limitations to different techniques. Shooting BIF would need a very different technique than landscapes and I have done that. I would never bracket and blend to HDR for such shots.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My take is that HDR is very workable many times. With a sensor having great DR, HDR is many times avoidable. In my shooting with Sony cameras I have seldom found HDR beneficial, but now that we have a decent quality HDR implementation in LightRoom I use it quite often. In either case, utilising sensor DR or combining several shots into HDR the resulting high dynamic range image needs to be mapped into the device space of our viewing environment. Within a set of conditions, LightRoom is doing a good job on that.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Manoli,

That's not what's going on. Using equipment+technique to achieve superior results is.

You seem to assume that better HDR tonemapping would not achieve superior results. That remains to be seen, especially for more extreme scenarios.

Obviously, being able to salvage underexposed image content is very useful. But it will never beat the quality of better exposure (more photons), if practical (which it sometimes isn't, and sometimes is).

Cheers,
Bart

[brandon]

Well, some of the criticism of this review seems a little off target to me. First of all, it is not intended as a full comparison of these cameras, just a comparison of DR. 

+1 this is explicitly part 1 of a series. Looking forward to seeing the rest, thanks.