Dynamic Range Test

[David W. Jones]

Well my opinion may have little weight here since I'm a commercial whore, and not a "serious film maker" with a project so special only an unavailable camera is good enough to capture my vision. But I'll chime in anyway. I could give a rats ass that my competitor across towns new Alexa has a higher dynamic range than my AF100. I have owned the AF100 for less than a week and it has already paid for itself. I doubt my competitor can say the same thing about their $80k purchase. The AF100 was a no-brainer for me shooting low and mid budget TV spots. If I need something more than the AF100 or the Red One, I can have it here overnight.
It seems to me that there is always going to be a crop of people who are more concerned with comparing the specs of a working camera against the subject-to-change specs of the next big unavailable camera, instead of actually getting to work. In my case I have purchased 4 cameras since the announcement of the Red Scarlet, and not bothered to shoot a step chart on any of them.

All the Best!

Dave

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

Well, i may have a bit more to say about dslrs, being that i co-wrote a best selling book about dslr film making.

Anyone who doesn't believe that the af-100 kicks dslr's ass just does not live on the real world.

Period.

 

[mkfotos.com]

If DSLR's are 11 or 12 stops of DR then I'd expect a "professional" product that costs 3000-4000$ more to have 14 or 15 stops of DR as compared to its consumer level nonprofessional brethren.

No offense, but this is seriously flawed logic, and asking for a camera with 15 stops of DR is ridiculous because one probably doesn't exist, at any price; maybe NASA has a unique, ultra-specialized camera with 15, that cost them $20,000,000 or whatever to have made, or maybe there's something sitting on a bench in MIT... maybe. There's a technological limit we've been up against for some time now (Moore's Law clearly doesn't apply to sensor sensitivity), with only incremental improvements being made. Then there's the law of diminishing returns. Last but not least, my ~$2500 5DII has ~12, and so does a ~$50,000 digital medium format camera; shouldn't the 20X more expensive DMF have, dunno, 20 stops?

 

[joesiv]

No offense, but this is seriously flawed logic, and asking for a camera with 15 stops of DR is ridiculous because one probably doesn't exist, at any price; maybe NASA has a unique, ultra-specialized camera with 15, that cost them $20,000,000 or whatever to have made, or maybe there's something sitting on a bench in MIT... maybe. There's a technological limit we've been up against for some time now (Moore's Law clearly doesn't apply to sensor sensitivity), with only incremental improvements being made. Then there's the law of diminishing returns. Last but not least, my ~$2500 5DII has ~12, and so does a ~$50,000 digital medium format camera; shouldn't the 20X more expensive DMF have, dunno, 20 stops?

Oh boy could you imagine the posterization ( banding on these boards ) you would get trying to squeeze 15 stops of dynamic range into 255 levels in each color channel? Oh... Now you need 10+ bits per channel... Oh no now we're saturating SD bandwidth... So I guess we need p2 Orr something greater not to mention the extra hardware requirements to process 10 bit in camera. Awe heck might as well be raw video eh?

Oh wait... Now we're talking about a camera that would cost 4 or more times as much and media that costs even more... I can't afford that.... I guess i'll just keep complaining about every new camera that comes out until I can get it all for the price of a 7D...

 

[Dino]

I care about what it LOOKS like and the only reason I'm personally concerned about the numbers at the moment is because I was expecting a very CLEAR VISUAL superiority in DR in the AF100 over the other DSLR's like canons and gh1. But thus far what I have seen shows a very similar (sometimes slightly less, other times slightly more as in the af100/gh2 comparison video) dynamic range and so I am forced to turn to the numbers hunt to see where they all stand.

Why don't you go to a reseller and demo the camera to your satisfaction or lack thereof? It is early days for me and these cameras, but I had Adam Wilt and Art Adams over yesterday doing tests the our AF100's, and we're getting some insight into the beast. I'm not going to disclose findings, as they might want to do further testing, write an article, etc.

So, here is my view, and I'm comparing the AF100 to an HPX170, not a DSLR: noise is similar, real resolution better, light sensitivity/usability at higher gains much better, DR similar. Let's assume the AF100 were no better than a DSLR image quality wise(we already know aliasing, skewing and moire is much improved, great audio, the codec is better), you need to ask yourself if the professional features, ergonomics, reliability and lack of workarounds in post is worthwhile in itself. To a professional DP, it's a no brainer, but YMMV.

Yesterday, first thing in the morning, I got a call from a client who is primarily a post house, but also does some corporate production. They had bought a Canon 7D and 5D and lots of accessories--they were "all-in" to DSLR's last I had heard. The client said he was done with DSLR's, was so tired of being afraid of what clothing issues would crop up with talent due to aliasing. He said he can deal with the on-set workarounds, although improper monitoring was a big problem because he couldn't see what he really had, he could deal with post workarounds and extra time, although that was really adding up and he isn't able to invoice his clients for that time, but the image artifacts were a show stopper for him.

The AF100 is going to work very well for many, many of my clients right now. I've got many days of bookings, including double bookings already. For some, they will need to step up to an F3 or RED One or Scarlet or whatever. If the difference in price between an AF100 and a 5D is a big deal, that tells me your 5D isn't being supported properly, because a typical DSLR setup requires lots of tinker toy rods support stuff, out-board monitor, viewfinder magnifier, audio recorder, external ND filters, etc. Why do DSLR users not complain about these things, which easily add up to the cost of an AF100?

I think you need to level set your expectations. There has been some hyperbole about this camera on this forum, for sure, as there is with many cameras when they are first released, but to expect DR that is greater than an Arri Alexa at a tiny percentage of the price is pure fantasy.

 

[LightMast]

Well my opinion may have little weight here since I'm a commercial whore, and not a "serious film maker" with a project so special only an unavailable camera is good enough to capture my vision. But I'll chime in anyway. I could give a rats ass that my competitor across towns new Alexa has a higher dynamic range than my AF100. I have owned the AF100 for less than a week and it has already paid for itself. I doubt my competitor can say the same thing about their $80k purchase. The AF100 was a no-brainer for me shooting low and mid budget TV spots. If I need something more than the AF100 or the Red One, I can have it here overnight.
It seems to me that there is always going to be a crop of people who are more concerned with comparing the specs of a working camera against the subject-to-change specs of the next big unavailable camera, instead of actually getting to work. In my case I have purchased 4 cameras since the announcement of the Red Scarlet, and not bothered to shoot a step chart on any of them.

All the Best!

Dave

+1

Us commercial whores need to stick together.

 

[Barry_Green]

In reality if the DSLR's are 8 and AF100 is 10 then that warrants it's several thousand dollars more expensive price tag. If DSLR's are 11 or 12 stops of DR then I'd expect a "professional" product that costs 3000-4000$ more to have 14 or 15 stops of DR as compared to its consumer level nonprofessional brethren.

If this is honestly how you feel, and that DR is the only thing you think is different between them, then...

PLEASE... I beg of you ... do NOT get an AF100. Because you just don't get what it's about. It's not going to go giving you massive DR boosts over the DSLRs. My test showed 10.5 stops, and Art Adams' test of the 5D on the same type of chart showed it getting just over 10 stops. They're the same.

There are many, many dozens of reasons why the AF100 is embarrassingly superior to the DSLR, in workflow, workability, professionality, and in image. But DR is not one of them. And if that's all you care about, then ... your question is answered. If you're basing a decision off DR, they are the same, so -- if that's all that matters to you, you have your answer. And as such, you can leave the AF100 forums in peace.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Hehe, if you want 15 stops, then time for an Epic with HDRx You get 18 stops I believe.

 

[mkfotos.com]

Hehe, if you want 15 stops, then time for an Epic with HDRx You get 18 stops I believe.

Ha! If you believe the hype. I don't.

Also, it's worth mentioning that the sensor itself doesn't have that much range (it probably has ~12, like eeeeveryone else), it simply does two exposures, the 2nd one being much shorter, to get more highlight detail. In theory, something similar could be done with the AF100 - shoot in 60fps mode, underexposing every other frame shot. Firmware hack, anyone?

The best article I could find for HDRx: http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/Awilt/story/red_visit_21_september_hdrx/

 

[Fotojorno]

Even if the DR is the same as say a 5D, the fact that now I have zebra's again so I can reliably tell when I'm clipping is enough of a advantage for me. Not to mention the dozen other things it does better. This, because it's a "real" video camera.

I just got a offer for a "5D job" and now Im having to educate the client on why the AF is the cam for the job.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Ha! If you believe the hype. I don't.

Also, it's worth mentioning that the sensor itself doesn't have that much range (it probably has ~12, like eeeeveryone else), it simply does two exposures, the 2nd one being much shorter, to get more highlight detail. In theory, something similar could be done with the AF100 - shoot in 60fps mode, underexposing every other frame shot. Firmware hack, anyone?

The best article I could find for HDRx: http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/Awilt/story/red_visit_21_september_hdrx/

I downloaded the Las Vegas clip, and I was impressed just like the reviewer was, I thought it looked better than it should. I knew how it had to work because before they even released it I was trying to figure out how to do it and was going down the same path as them. I really see no other way to do HDR unless you used multiple sensors with different sensitivities and we knew they weren't doing that. I think its pretty cool.

 

[Jay Birch]

People seem to be getting a bit obsessed with large DR numbers since the whole HDRx/18 stops announcement. Even Jannard himself has said that wont work in all scenarios and should only be used if really needed.

10.5 stops is VERY respectable for a camera of this price. The F3, at around 12 stops, is the next step up the ladder and that is 2.5x the price (which is also VERY respectable for the price). I can imagine that by the end of the year we will see cameras coming out with 11/12 stops for under $10k.... amazing times.

 

[awelgraven]

which by the way to me personally the raw NUMBERS of the dynamic range don't matter as much. what matters is the relativity of the tests what I mean is. I don't care of the af100 tests at 2 stops of DR or 18 stops because abstract numbers don't mean anything. I care about what it LOOKS like and the only reason I'm personally concerned about the numbers at the moment is because I was expecting a very CLEAR VISUAL superiority in DR in the AF100 over the other DSLR's like canons and gh1. But thus far what I have seen shows a very similar (sometimes slightly less, other times slightly more as in the af100/gh2 comparison video) dynamic range and so I am forced to turn to the numbers hunt to see where they all stand. In reality if the DSLR's are 8 and AF100 is 10 then that warrants it's several thousand dollars more expensive price tag. If DSLR's are 11 or 12 stops of DR then I'd expect a "professional" product that costs 3000-4000$ more to have 14 or 15 stops of DR as compared to its consumer level nonprofessional brethren.

I think DSLRs max out at 7 or 8 stops, don't they?

 

[PaPa]

I think DSLRs max out at 7 or 8 stops, don't they?

apparently it's closer to 10.

 

[joesiv]

apparently it's closer to 10.

Well depends on the sensor/electronics. For example most fourthirds sensors can pull around 10 stops (GH-1 being nearly 12) if you shoot raw and eek out every ounce of highlight and shadow detail you can. In JPG which is more similar to the workflow of something like an AF100, it's typically much less, though with features like dynamic range boosting you can get back some more, but never as much as a processed raw file.

Other bodies can pull 11 or 12 stops in the raw file. But realize that that's a high resolution still frames, as reduced HD resolutions, the apparent DR will be slightly less still. 10 or so stops is very respectable out of a microfourthirds sensor in video form.

 

[mkfotos.com]

I think DSLRs max out at 7 or 8 stops, don't they?

apparently it's closer to 10.

The very best consumer grade sensor has 13 stops: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Phase-One/P65-Plus

More reading from the same site: http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Sensor-rankings

A 5DII is rated at 11.9 by the same site, and a little optimistic compared with another site's findings of 11.1 ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/page25.asp ), so the 13 stop range measured by dxo might be a ~12.2 if measured by dpreview. Anyways, different copies of a body coupled with different testing methodologies will obviously yield different results, but there you have it, a high/low range.

 

[LoganMackay]

The very best consumer grade sensor has 13 stops: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Phase-One/P65-Plus

More reading from the same site: http://dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Sensor-rankings

A 5DII is rated at 11.9 by the same site, and a little optimistic compared with another site's findings of 11.1 ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/page25.asp ), so the 13 stop range measured by dxo might be a ~12.2 if measured by dpreview. Anyways, different copies of a body coupled with different testing methodologies will obviously yield different results, but there you have it, a high/low range.

I believe DR goes down for video as well.

 

[Homunculus]

guys calm down my rhetorical 15 stops of DR thing was just that, rhetorical in the sense that I said if DSLR's had 12 stops of DR then i'd expect af100 to have 2 stops more. but in reality my understanding is they have 8 something so i'd expect af100 to have 2 more thus 10 something. you get it yet? and yes af100 allegedly has 10+ but some people are claiming other DSLR's do too which i find hard to believe but if that's the case then i'd expect AF100 to have 11 or 12.

Red One Mysterium was 17,000 5 year old technology and had 11.5 or 12 stops so why can't something for 1/3 the price 5 years later have similar DR? There are computers now 1/3 the price of those 5 years ago that are ten times more powerful

 

[LoganMackay]

guys calm down my rhetorical 15 stops of DR thing was just that, rhetorical in the sense that I said if DSLR's had 12 stops of DR then i'd expect af100 to have 2 stops more. but in reality my understanding is they have 8 something so i'd expect af100 to have 2 more thus 10 something. you get it yet? and yes af100 allegedly has 10+ but some people are claiming other DSLR's do too which i find hard to believe but if that's the case then i'd expect AF100 to have 11 or 12.

Red One Mysterium was 17,000 5 year old technology and had 11.5 or 12 stops so why can't something for 1/3 the price 5 years later have similar DR? There are computers now 1/3 the price of those 5 years ago that are ten times more powerful

11.3 and a base ISO of 320.

 

[Barry_Green]

I said if DSLR's had 12 stops of DR then i'd expect af100 to have 2 stops more.

Your expectations are wrong. Just look at the reality. It is what it is.

and yes af100 allegedly has 10+

No, the AF100 DOES have 10+. Many people have verified this in many ways.

but if that's the case then i'd expect AF100 to have 11 or 12.

Your expectations are incorrect. So please, let it go.

Red One Mysterium was 17,000 5 year old technology and had 11.5 or 12 stops

Red One is three year old technology, not five years old. I know, I bought #364, and I received it in February of 2008. And it had a theoretical 11.3, which most people who used it were saying it was noise-limited to about 9 stops of real-world.


Your questions are now answered. Hopefully you can move on in your quest.