LOL

File: FB_IMG_1500621913577.jpg (122KB, 944x960px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 944x960px

>>3118185

>>3118185
>>3118186

>+6ev

Fuck off with this meme tier garbage nobody uses Sony shill

Dpr have the worst testing methodology. Half the fucking test scene is out of focus most of the time, and they've admitted as much.

>>3118185
>MUH DUH-NA-MIK RANGEZ!

The only reason you would ever need +6ev is if you royally fucked up your exposure. I would not avoid a 6D2 over DR any more than I would avoid a D5 or a 5Ds.

Why do review sites and shills push this meme so hard?

Yeah this is bad. I might go for Nikon, not sure yet. I hate the thought of selling everything and then buying everything again. I just got a Sigma 20mm 1.4. Fuark.

I'm using a 6D, it's still fine. But I'm starting to miss a better AF system.

>>3118394
True but this is for shadows and highlights also you fucktard.

And jesus, there is no excuse why this shit is so bad. They could use the 5DIV sensor.

>>3118426
>True but this is for shadows and highlights also you fucktard.
In what situation fucktard? And don't reply with "muh landscapes" because you start to lose tonal separation around +3ev on any sensor, meaning you're betting off blending 2 frames or going GND filter.

>And jesus, there is no excuse why this shit is so bad. They could use the 5DIV sensor.
>t. Not An Engineer

Why the hell would you need to push shadows 6 stops? Get it right in camera retard

>>3118485
That's not even a "get it right" situation. That's "dear fucking christ, at least get it in the same zipcode".

>>3118423
Get the 5d4 then. No reason to change systems just because.

>>3118185
So the sensor isn't iso invariant. Whoop-dee-doo.

>>3118485
SINGLE SHOT """HDR"""

as our chief purveyor of shit photos you should know that

>>3118423
I believe it's to prove a point: Canon is still way behind in shadow recovery. "Getting it right in camera" means you have to work around the camera you have, and if your camera is getting in the way of the shot it can be quite annoying.

People typically expose for highlights and lift shadows on digital so it's annoying when Canon is like "no goy, be a good shill and take high contrast photos with hardly any shadow detail, then yell at other people to 'get the exposure right lmao'"

>>3118185
Why would you try to push 6 ev in post?

>>3118485
>>3118602
Pushing the entire image by 6 EV is obvious insanity, but being able to heavily push shadows is useful for shots taken in bright sunlight to reduce the need for reflectors and flash.

File: 1465777723205.gif (408KB, 500x345px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 500x345px

>>3118185
>+6EV

File: .png (639KB, 577x570px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 577x570px

I never really got what people meant by "Canon colors" before, but now looking at the 1st 6D, it's just super saturated. Like wow.

>>3118614

>but being able to heavily push shadows is useful for shots taken in bright sunlight to reduce the need for reflectors and flash.

lol no it isn't.

it always, always looks like shit no matter how fucking clean it is. friends don't let friends tone map.

>>3118465
aren't d810s and the newer fuji iso invariant?

>>3118600
>I believe it's to prove a point: Canon is still way behind in shadow recovery.
Uh, no. The 5D4, 1DX2, 80D, and M5/M6 are comparable to their peers. The reason everyone is bitching about the 6D2 is because it's a step backwards from Canon's recent releases in DR. Kind of like the Nikon D5.

>People typically expose for highlights and lift shadows on digital so it's annoying when Canon is like "no goy, be a good shill and take high contrast photos with hardly any shadow detail,
Except for the 5D3 (banding), even old Canon sensors were good for +3ev. That's quite a bit of shadow detail.

>>3118640
+2 or +3ev looks fine. +6ev is over the top and looks wrong even if it's clean.

>>3118640
>raising shadows is hdr
How about trying to take some photos first, you fucking idiot. If you have never had to choose between shadows and highlights you haven't shot enough.

>>3118648

I didn't say it was hdr, i said it was tone mapping, fucktard. how about you learn the difference before you speak up and look like a moron in front of the board.

if you think 6ev boosted shadows look good, you fucking suck and should give up now.

>>3118652
Are you underage?
Being able to heavily push shadows obviously doesn't mean 6ev, you fucking idiot. Badly done hdr and tone mapping look the same, but I wouldn't expect you to know anything about taking or processing a photo. You "look like a moron in front of the board" every day.

>if you think 6ev boosted shadows look good, you fucking suck and should give up now
Nice projection from someone who doesn't even take photos.

>>3118185
Hmmmm...

The question is how much noise reduction is being applied to the better looking examples?

>>3118656

Nice backpedal and ad homs my man.

Even a 3-stop push looks like shit, by the way.

>>3118669
loooooooooooooooooooooool dude can any software save the sorry ass mess of garbage that is the 6D MKII shot? its fucked to hell with no recovery.

It's not just bad at 6EV, it's still comparatively worse than others at lower levels. Yes, get it right in camera, but there's no way this thing's going to compete with the raw DR anything else FF on the market has.

>>3118675
>Even a 3-stop push looks like shit, by the way.
Idiot. The 6D2 at +3ev looks better than any camera at +6ev. So either the 6D2 is fine at +3ev, or Sony/Nikon are useless shit at +6ev. Which is it?

>>3118684
>it's still comparatively worse
It's absolutely fine up to +3ev. The difference between it and the competition there amounts to a touch of NR.

Total DR is probably ~12ev? With 3ev of shadow push. That's more than 99% of photographs will ever need. The DR meme is being pushed by review sites because resolution arguments are dead and high ISO arguments are nearly so. If all that's left is to recite feature lists then there's no reason for you to visit them.

File: Capturemuhev.png (3MB, 1728x896px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1728x896px

>>3118675
>t. photographer with no camera

>>3118689
Ignore this troll.

>>3118185
l-literally no one shoots at iso100 and push shadows 6 stops except autists.

>>3118681
I'd have to see the full resolution images to tell.

>>3118692
what's this dogshit photo?

this is worse than most smartphone snapshits

>>3118645
what do you mean by except for the 5d iii? in what respect?

>>3118689

Keep your arguments straight, buddy. I'm saying that a 3EV boost in the shadow looks like shit regardless of how clean or degraded it is. It's a matter of aesthetics.

>>3118738
Don't reply if you have no idea how modern sensors work.

>>3118741

Sick non-argument.

File: are you a magnet.jpg (77KB, 531x513px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 531x513px

>>3118675
Did you call someone out for ad hominem after calling them a fucktard, a moron, and saying they fucking suck?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	28 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	28 dpcm
Image Created	2010:04:23 14:55:45
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	531
Image Height	513

>>3118768

It's not ad hominem if it's a demonstrable fact.

>>3118769
Yet you ignored the provided proof that in fact even a raise of over 3 stops looks fine.

File: 308F4342.jpg (2MB, 2464x1648px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2464x1648px

>>3118639
COLOURS

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1D
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.4.0
Serial Number	0000021256
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:16 19:07:30
Exposure Time	1/400 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/22.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2464
Image Height	1648
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Exposure Mode	Manual
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Unknown
Saturation	Unknown
Contrast	Unknown
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	Manual
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	External Flash
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
White Balance	Flash
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	192
Camera Actuations	4712
Color Matrix	3

File: 132839152937.png (64KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 200x200px

>>3118185
>tfw the 'new' 6D Mk2 is noisier than the OG 6D, kek.

File: its octuplets.gif (3MB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 300x225px

>>3118769

>>3118639
I wish there was a setting in literally every photo editing software to very quickly increase saturation without image quality deteriorating whatsoever. Oh well, maybe some day.

>>3118639
>all that moire
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

the things digislugs will put up with, wow.

>>3118738
Then you don't know how to push shadows 3ev.

>>3118726
The 5D3 had pretty awful banding. Honestly, I felt like I could push an original 7D 2.5-3ev easier than a 5D3.

>>3118774

but that's an exposure boost. he didn't compress the dynamic range of the scene by 3 to 6 stops, which is what we're talking about.