A proposito del sensore della R: non so quanto possa essere affidabile la conversione da RAW a DNG di Jared Polin (mia fonte di ispirazione per le T-shirt, peraltro), ma qualcuno ci ha smanettato per anticipare i risultati con le metriche DXO, ed è venuta fuori una gamma dinamica molto vicina a quella della 5DIV.
I -0.2 EV a 100 ISO potrebbero benissimo essere sample variation , ovvero dovuti a condizioni specifiche di uno scatto.
I numeri tra parentesi sono quelli della 5DIV
“ ISO 100
FRO_0007 - 13.46 EV (13.60)
FRO_0150 - 13.25 EV (13.61)
FRO_0181 - 13.42 EV (13.61)
ISO 250
FRO_0078 - 12.91 EV
ISO 400
FRO_0230 - 12.99 EV (12.99)
ISO 3200
FRO_0201 - 10.97 EV (10.98)
ISO 6400
FRO_0362 - 10.13 EV (10.24)
ISO 10000
FRO_0380 - 9.48 EV „
Fonte:
www.canonrumors.com/come-play-with-the-canon-eos-r-raw-files/
Poi il forumer-DR-Tester ha scritto cose che non capisco, riservate ai tecnici esperti di aree mascherate:
“ Since likely both cameras also share the same physical base ISO (the real ISO related to the labeled ISO 100) the comparison is fair.
The ISO 100 and 6400 pictures were underexposed, but that has been accounted for (assumed always a max saturation of 16383). These results are from the green channel (the EOS R has different read noise in each channel, just as the 5D4 did, likely due to some white balance correction done in the RAWs, which Canon never did in the past and neither has done in the 1DX2 -at least to this degree-).
The EOS R has a "masked" left area (the photodetectors at the left not exposed to the light) of 144 pixels width, compared to 136 in the 5D4. Same for the top (46 compared to 42). So maybe this sensor could be a new design (with similar technology, though). For those that have not heard about them, these extra pixels are not used by all manufacturers, but are a good habit from Canon, because allow good raw converters to improve the noise characteristics.
The 6D2 achieves 11.90 EV of dynamic range at ISO 100 with this same test. „