Jan. First, some of your examples are absolutely stunning. Congratulations. I have found the same thing as you in low light/high IOS/dark shadow detail on the R5II vs the R5. My feeling is that these situations are relatively few and the files are still very workable, nevertheless. The biggest difference is that, as you say, the AF is so much more robust on the R5II - and - coupled with other features like pre-capture I am getting shots on the R5II I couldn't have on the R5. It is a very acceptable trade-off. As for preferred noise reduction software I find myself relying more and more on Adobe LR than the other software I won (Topaz and DxO). You can tell a slight difference when pixel peeping, but at normal size I find the difference negligible. Staying in LR also saves me the round trip.
Jan, great video. Your examples are always so educational and helpful. I definitely plan to sign up for your LRC class when I get some free time. I do all my editing in LRC (and noise reduction), except for occasional use of Photoshop (via right click 'Edit in' command from LRC) when needed for challenging object removal/cloning/clutter/canvass expand/etc... I've been using the R5II for several months now and I really like it. I love the faster fps and pre capture (although I wish that latter feature could be activated by a simple button push). I also like the AF much better than the R5I for the reasons you have already commented on. BTW on the R5II AF, with multiple subjects, I find that if I first focus/track the desired subject with zone AF (programmed back button -- triple back button focusing) and then switch to eye tracking AF programmed back button, the R5II does a better job at locking on to the desired subject's eye/body and sticking on it. I also find the wireless communications of the R5II to be easier to use and more reliable, compared to the R5I. Lastly, I do like that the R5II has less rolling shutter, although I have noticed recently when taking panning BIF photos of ducks when they fly past me, that the background trees are still slightly bent. So rolling shutter is still there in the R5II, but much better than the R5I. Kind regards
Thank you Jan. I too have the R5 Mark II. For Photo AI there are 2 workarounds: 1) In LrC, export your photos to DNG files which you add to your catalog. From there Photo AI works. 2) In LrC, use right-click, then Edit with > Photo AI. In this case however, RAW Denoise won't appear (TIFF file). I just photographed a guitar band in a very dark café with only candlelight, resulting in ISO 12.800-40.000 1/80-1/200 f2.3 pictures. LrC Enhance and Photo AI helped a bit, but I still had to keep the darks dark to avoid the resulting noise to appear. Luckilly the exports didn't have to be more than 1200px at the longest side.
Jan, Thanks for the tutorial showing how you optimize the high ISO performance of the R5 MKII . I think that you know how to jump through the hoops like many of us do to get beautiful images from today's modern camera bodies. Your explanation helps those of us who will move to the R5 MKII. However, I think that the noise removal from the original R5 is easier at high ISO values. In controlled situations I think that you can get very good final edits from both the R5 MKII and the original R5. I think that the original R5 is about a stop better in many cases. The R5 MKII is better when you have more motion due to the faster readout and the R5 gives you better results in shadow areas. Overall, the R5 gave us a huge step forward in image quality and great autofocus. The R5 MKII improves autofocus again and gives us faster readout speed with some increased noise at high ISO. Overall, a good improvement but maybe not worth twice the price for everyone. Thanks again and I would love to see a direct comparison using the best editing practices compared for the R5 MKII and R5 at high ISO side by side. All the best.
Hey Jan, great video. Just a FYI, there is a hot pixel in your video whenever you are doing talking head shots. Take a look at the 3 min 46 sec mark (3:46) as an example. White dot near your hat. Canon cameras have that pixel mapping feature I hope.
Unfortunately no, Canon does not have pixel mapping feature. It can be done only if you send it in to a Canon service. Don't ask me how frustrating is that. I tried everything but no, is not working.
Give it another year or two and stacked sensor cameras will start to show improvements in high dynamic range and iso performance, as manufacturers figure out work arounds in the camera.
I think there is a bit of a difference in high ISO performance between the original R5 and the Mark II, which is not surprising considering the stacked sensor of the Mark II but nothing DxO can't easily take care of. To me it seems to be 1/3 of a stop difference in most scenarios.
Hi Jan, Nice to see validation of my frustration. I always shot AUTO ISO with the R5 but now I am having to limit Auto and really think about shutter speed. Not so many "keepers" and was starting to lose confidence with the camera. 1. Just wondered if you tried in camera "High ISO Speed NR" Low/Standard/High .. and your thoughts ? 2. What +exposure would you recommend exactly. + ? on exposure compensation ? Cheers, Steve
Great video as always, with some helpful suggestions for my bird photography in dark environments. While I have been happy with some of the improvements of the R5 II over the R5, this is the first camera I ever purchased where the next generation didn't deliver equal or better results in all areas. I've been happy with results after editing, but the high ISO performance is frustrating when I know I could be using my R5 and getting easier to edit results.
Thank you for your interesting video. I normally use Lightroom only. Your Masterclass of Lightroom is fantastic. I prefer a faster shutter speed in wildlife photography. Best wishes Roland
Great and informative video, Jan. And wonderful images. I am many times in really challenging light conditions here in the Atlantic rainforest, so it was a lot of good tips in this video. Can i ask you, which mirrorless camera of all you have tried have the best low light perfomance? Wishing you and yours a great week/weekend Cheers, Bjoern
There are worse cameras for high ISO performance and with the current gen of sensor, it's a trade off for speed as you noted. I found DXO Pure Raw 4 sorts them pretty well as long as you're prepared to tweak it's sharpening (which seems to cause the most trouble). I was impressed with how fast DXO got its R5 ii profiles out, but the LrC R5 ii colour profiles are a bit ordinary. I really think the bleating about the R5 ii high iso performance around the net is a bit exaggerated especially when compared with the other high end fast cameras on the market at the moment which really aren't any better.
Jan, what do you think about that? The LightRoom is not updated yet to open the RAW file from R5II and of course is not the case with RAW files from R5 and because of that the raw file from R5II looks noisier than that one from R5, with one stop, as you said. I think it is worth to try to open both files with Canon software, NR disabled, of course, and why not to do the same with another software like DxO, for example. What if you are simply wrong about this statement as the R5II files are noisier than R5 files, but this is just because the software is not updated for the newer camera?
You suggested a couple of times to get more of the subject in focus. But you didn't say how. I would stop down from wide open unless you're using the RF 200-800 F/9 or something similar. Wide open narrows the depth of field too much.
Really interesting. Really interesting, thanks. I have a brand new R5 II and this is very helpful. Unfortunately I am currently an ON1 user, so will have to wait until they add R5 II support to fully appreciate some of the editing techniques you are showing. But I do have a question - At about 1:54 you show a bird (Sulphur-crested Cockatoo?) with light and dark background - how did you get the background to switch? It looks like the color/darkness of the bird changed the tiniest bit and the branch as well along with major change in the background. Was this done with a camera adjustment or in post but before applying noise reduction. Thanks,
Thanks Jan, again a great video. In the future, could you imagine using a lower megapixels body in really challenging conditions (starting at 12800 ISO), or maybe keep an R5 Mark I for such situations? You mention that in term of noise, we lose almost one stop between an R5 and R5 Mark II, that's a lot...
Neither is a great solution. For the rifle bird with 24MP the files would’ve become quite small and the old R5 would’ve had a lot more trouble to focus on
Totally off topic: there seems to be a spec of dust on your sensor (or the front of your lens) of the camera you filmed this with! I can only see this dust spec against your black cap / hat, around the rim area above your left eye (right hand side of video image). I thought I was going crazy when I could not get the dust off my monitor. Then suspected a dead pixel. Then connected an external monitor...and still the 'bright pixel' / dust was there! You can see it where the shot is of you, for example at 21:32
Hi Jan, you're once again using awesome birds to make your point 👍 As a user of DxO PhotoLab, I'm more afraid of the extra culling work the R5ii will give me compared to the extra noise editing 😛 Besides making comparisons for this channels, are there still cases where you prefer grabbing the R5 when you'd expect the high ISO DR to outweigh the better AF, precapture and rolling shutter reduction from the R5ii ??
@@jan_wegener yeah, I sure get that ! Because of that and warping wings in ES, I moved to EFCS earlier this year .. which meant like getting 4 times fewer shots from a battery, or even less since beyond halfway the battery you're not even reaching 12 fps any more. The fact ES is so much more usable with the faster sensor, which has a huge impact (at least for stills) on how much batteries one needs for a day looks to me as huge bonus which is hardly mentioned. Earlier this week, my local camera store had its first delivery of R5ii's, at last! So I called my German friend, and he expects I can get mine in a month or so, in time for Costa Rica in February 😀 In your last show with Glenn, you mentioned still discovering new exciting hidden options, and then I think about the speed boost button and store/recall focus position recently mentioned by Duade. Is your Setup Guide getting updates, do you provide them to people who bought the earlier version ? Could be interesting after every major firmware update ..
Hey jan! I love you channel and have been watching from around 25k subs. I am heading off to Borneo next year and was wondering what your preferred camera would be for a deep dark rainforest environment like Danum Valley that where the animals are high up in the trees and its difficult to photograph them. Thanks Jan! your the best bird photographer on yt i reckon
@@AJ_Brimson It's funny, because I am almost tempted to say R5 II, because of the good low light AF. Otherwise R3 or R1 would probably do a decent job, too, but 24MP might be too light
Great video! What's your opinion on R5 12bit ES vs R5ii 14bit ES at high ISO, in terms of IQ. Meaning: Does the 2bit difference help at all (at high ISO)? Or is it helpful in any other way?
Hi Yan, is it possible to share with us the file that you just transform because before I rent Lightroom and Photoshop, I want to see if it's too complicated for me...
In using Deep Prime XD2, have you ever increased the "Force Details" slider to try to avoid losing that detail? I have tried and it seems to sometimes do the job...Otherwise, i find the DP XD2 to be too waxy.
I thought that the "noise problem" is not that kind of a big deal because of the higher color depth in electronic shutter mode compared to the original R5? Am I wrong? By the way thanks for comparing the different noise reduction programs.
Could you do a video and compare the video capabilities to the R5? And see if you notice worse quality in the 4k 60fps in the R5 Mark ii camera. Cause I've heard it's worse than the canon R8.
Great video, thanks. I think you contradict yourself at one point. You say "shoot as far to the right as possible", and then "shoot as low iso as possible, even if that means underexposing". I think the latter is a bad idea in general.
That’s not how I tried to bring it across. The underexposing only referred to certain situations where you can’t do anything else since you’re already shooting wide open and using very high iso and still have a too slow shutter speed. I’d never purposely underexpose. It’s more that it happens sometimes
@wilduntamedphotography1260 You're wrong. I just researched the difference between the two, here's the information I found when using key word search "Global shutter vs stacked sensor, are they the same or different?" Global shutter and a stacked sensor are different concepts, although they can sometimes be found together in a camera sensor: a global shutter refers to the way an image sensor captures light, where all pixels are exposed at the same time, while a stacked sensor refers to the physical design of the sensor, where multiple layers of circuitry are stacked on top of each other to achieve faster processing speeds; essentially, a stacked sensor can have a global shutter functionality, but not all stacked sensors do, and not all global shutters are on stacked sensors. Key differences: Function: global shutter captures the entire image at once, preventing distortion in fast-moving scenes, while a stacked sensor primarily focuses on faster data processing by stacking different layers of the sensor circuitry. Impact on image quality: While a global shutter can sometimes lead to slightly lower image quality due to its design, a stacked sensor can improve image quality by enabling faster readout speeds and potentially better low-light performance. Example: A high-end camera like the Sony a9 III utilizes a stacked sensor design and also incorporates a global shutter feature, allowing for fast continuous shooting with minimal rolling shutter distortion.
You're right, and that's a result from the public/youtoubers' overly critical complaints about rolling shutter. Most have never even noticed rolling shutter in their own photos, but clamor for the sensors that solve that at the expense of high-iso noise. In truth, noise isn't nearly the problem it used to be. So, as usual, much ado about nothing.
I don’t know why you didn’t use flash with birds in a dark situation as you encountered here in this video or you just making a point on the ISO possibility. I know you have flash in the past , what is your position on using flash these days?
I don’t like using it anymore and the rifle it’s basically absorb the whole flash and you end up with weird reflections on them without much gain. The magnificent on Eis also too skittish for it. I still use it sometimes, but prefer not to anymore
R3 stack sensor has no issue with ISO, R5M2 does... Canon tech failure? Sony / Nikon do not have that problem on their high mp stacked sensors. Sorry Canon but im not getting R5M2. Not only for this, but forcing new battery, linked to features is clearly illegal practice, from Apple salesbook.
Did you even watch the video? Jan did an extremely good job showing us the noise of r5 ii compare to other cameras, and how to fix them. Stop trolling .
Jan, I want to show my appreciation for your videos I love the details you provide.
Glad you like them!
Jan. First, some of your examples are absolutely stunning. Congratulations. I have found the same thing as you in low light/high IOS/dark shadow detail on the R5II vs the R5. My feeling is that these situations are relatively few and the files are still very workable, nevertheless. The biggest difference is that, as you say, the AF is so much more robust on the R5II - and - coupled with other features like pre-capture I am getting shots on the R5II I couldn't have on the R5. It is a very acceptable trade-off. As for preferred noise reduction software I find myself relying more and more on Adobe LR than the other software I won (Topaz and DxO). You can tell a slight difference when pixel peeping, but at normal size I find the difference negligible. Staying in LR also saves me the round trip.
A bit of a different video than normal, I found it excellent thank you
Glad you liked it!
Jan, great video. Your examples are always so educational and helpful. I definitely plan to sign up for your LRC class when I get some free time. I do all my editing in LRC (and noise reduction), except for occasional use of Photoshop (via right click 'Edit in' command from LRC) when needed for challenging object removal/cloning/clutter/canvass expand/etc... I've been using the R5II for several months now and I really like it. I love the faster fps and pre capture (although I wish that latter feature could be activated by a simple button push). I also like the AF much better than the R5I for the reasons you have already commented on. BTW on the R5II AF, with multiple subjects, I find that if I first focus/track the desired subject with zone AF (programmed back button -- triple back button focusing) and then switch to eye tracking AF programmed back button, the R5II does a better job at locking on to the desired subject's eye/body and sticking on it. I also find the wireless communications of the R5II to be easier to use and more reliable, compared to the R5I. Lastly, I do like that the R5II has less rolling shutter, although I have noticed recently when taking panning BIF photos of ducks when they fly past me, that the background trees are still slightly bent. So rolling shutter is still there in the R5II, but much better than the R5I. Kind regards
thanks for sharing!
Thanks for your tips and tricks Jan!
Thank you Jan. I too have the R5 Mark II. For Photo AI there are 2 workarounds:
1) In LrC, export your photos to DNG files which you add to your catalog. From there Photo AI works.
2) In LrC, use right-click, then Edit with > Photo AI. In this case however, RAW Denoise won't appear (TIFF file).
I just photographed a guitar band in a very dark café with only candlelight, resulting in ISO 12.800-40.000 1/80-1/200 f2.3 pictures. LrC Enhance and Photo AI helped a bit, but I still had to keep the darks dark to avoid the resulting noise to appear. Luckilly the exports didn't have to be more than 1200px at the longest side.
Jan,
Thanks for the tutorial showing how you optimize the high ISO performance of the R5 MKII . I think that you know how to jump through the hoops like many of us do to get beautiful images from today's modern camera bodies. Your explanation helps those of us who will move to the R5 MKII. However, I think that the noise removal from the original R5 is easier at high ISO values. In controlled situations I think that you can get very good final edits from both the R5 MKII and the original R5. I think that the original R5 is about a stop better in many cases. The R5 MKII is better when you have more motion due to the faster readout and the R5 gives you better results in shadow areas. Overall, the R5 gave us a huge step forward in image quality and great autofocus. The R5 MKII improves autofocus again and gives us faster readout speed with some increased noise at high ISO. Overall, a good improvement but maybe not worth twice the price for everyone. Thanks again and I would love to see a direct comparison using the best editing practices compared for the R5 MKII and R5 at high ISO side by side. All the best.
If you ignore everything else, I think the original R5 would have an edge here
Hey Jan, great video. Just a FYI, there is a hot pixel in your video whenever you are doing talking head shots. Take a look at the 3 min 46 sec mark (3:46) as an example. White dot near your hat. Canon cameras have that pixel mapping feature I hope.
Unfortunately no, Canon does not have pixel mapping feature. It can be done only if you send it in to a Canon service. Don't ask me how frustrating is that. I tried everything but no, is not working.
I’ll check it out
Thanks for the tips--esp the light background.
Glad it was helpful!
Give it another year or two and stacked sensor cameras will start to show improvements in high dynamic range and iso performance, as manufacturers figure out work arounds in the camera.
I think there is a bit of a difference in high ISO performance between the original R5 and the Mark II, which is not surprising considering the stacked sensor of the Mark II but nothing DxO can't easily take care of. To me it seems to be 1/3 of a stop difference in most scenarios.
Great video as always!
Glad you enjoyed!
Hi Jan,
Nice to see validation of my frustration. I always shot AUTO ISO with the R5 but now I am having to limit Auto and really think about shutter speed. Not so many "keepers" and was starting to lose confidence with the camera.
1. Just wondered if you tried in camera "High ISO Speed NR" Low/Standard/High .. and your thoughts ?
2. What +exposure would you recommend exactly. + ? on exposure compensation ?
Cheers,
Steve
Great video as always, with some helpful suggestions for my bird photography in dark environments. While I have been happy with some of the improvements of the R5 II over the R5, this is the first camera I ever purchased where the next generation didn't deliver equal or better results in all areas. I've been happy with results after editing, but the high ISO performance is frustrating when I know I could be using my R5 and getting easier to edit results.
Thank you for your interesting video. I normally use Lightroom only. Your Masterclass of Lightroom is fantastic. I prefer a faster shutter speed in wildlife photography. Best wishes Roland
Great and informative video, Jan. And wonderful images. I am many times in really challenging light conditions here in the Atlantic rainforest, so it was a lot of good tips in this video. Can i ask you, which mirrorless camera of all you have tried have the best low light perfomance?
Wishing you and yours a great week/weekend
Cheers, Bjoern
Wise words- thanks for sharing. /Per
There are worse cameras for high ISO performance and with the current gen of sensor, it's a trade off for speed as you noted. I found DXO Pure Raw 4 sorts them pretty well as long as you're prepared to tweak it's sharpening (which seems to cause the most trouble). I was impressed with how fast DXO got its R5 ii profiles out, but the LrC R5 ii colour profiles are a bit ordinary. I really think the bleating about the R5 ii high iso performance around the net is a bit exaggerated especially when compared with the other high end fast cameras on the market at the moment which really aren't any better.
Jan, what do you think about that? The LightRoom is not updated yet to open the RAW file from R5II and of course is not the case with RAW files from R5 and because of that the raw file from R5II looks noisier than that one from R5, with one stop, as you said. I think it is worth to try to open both files with Canon software, NR disabled, of course, and why not to do the same with another software like DxO, for example. What if you are simply wrong about this statement as the R5II files are noisier than R5 files, but this is just because the software is not updated for the newer camera?
Lightroom is updated and supports the R5 II (actually over a month already)
I can open the R5 II files easily in Lr, like I did in this video. You need to update yours
Thank you Jan, great video! Just curious, why doesn't the R3 have this trade-off compared to the R6 Mark II?
I guess it's easier to make the sensor better when they have less MP, although I found the R6 II IQ a tad better than R3, but it's much closer
thanks for the edit info, like this type of video, getting the pic's is one think but good editing is another!
Yes, it works hand in hand
2:20 I agree with you but ISO levels are way different in your compared light - dark samples
Great videos as always. And love your Masterclass training videos as well. Question: Typically at what ISO do you start using PureRaw vs Enhance?
I hardly shoot below iso 1600, so I use it on almost all images
You suggested a couple of times to get more of the subject in focus. But you didn't say how. I would stop down from wide open unless you're using the RF 200-800 F/9 or something similar. Wide open narrows the depth of field too much.
Yes, stopping down and your position. You could for instance be a bit further away from the subject or make sure it’s more aligned with your sensor
Really interesting.
Really interesting, thanks. I have a brand new R5 II and this is very helpful. Unfortunately I am currently an ON1 user, so will have to wait until they add R5 II support to fully appreciate some of the editing techniques you are showing. But I do have a question - At about 1:54 you show a bird (Sulphur-crested Cockatoo?) with light and dark background - how did you get the background to switch? It looks like the color/darkness of the bird changed the tiniest bit and the branch as well along with major change in the background. Was this done with a camera adjustment or in post but before applying noise reduction.
Thanks,
Thanks Jan, again a great video. In the future, could you imagine using a lower megapixels body in really challenging conditions (starting at 12800 ISO), or maybe keep an R5 Mark I for such situations? You mention that in term of noise, we lose almost one stop between an R5 and R5 Mark II, that's a lot...
Neither is a great solution. For the rifle bird with 24MP the files would’ve become quite small and the old R5 would’ve had a lot more trouble to focus on
Totally off topic: there seems to be a spec of dust on your sensor (or the front of your lens) of the camera you filmed this with! I can only see this dust spec against your black cap / hat, around the rim area above your left eye (right hand side of video image). I thought I was going crazy when I could not get the dust off my monitor. Then suspected a dead pixel. Then connected an external monitor...and still the 'bright pixel' / dust was there! You can see it where the shot is of you, for example at 21:32
I’ll check
Hi Jan, you're once again using awesome birds to make your point 👍
As a user of DxO PhotoLab, I'm more afraid of the extra culling work the R5ii will give me compared to the extra noise editing 😛
Besides making comparisons for this channels, are there still cases where you prefer grabbing the R5 when you'd expect the high ISO DR to outweigh the better AF, precapture and rolling shutter reduction from the R5ii ??
No, there hasn’t really be a moment where it has tempted me. The main reason are these annoying image wobbles I can’t stand
@@jan_wegener yeah, I sure get that ! Because of that and warping wings in ES, I moved to EFCS earlier this year .. which meant like getting 4 times fewer shots from a battery, or even less since beyond halfway the battery you're not even reaching 12 fps any more.
The fact ES is so much more usable with the faster sensor, which has a huge impact (at least for stills) on how much batteries one needs for a day looks to me as huge bonus which is hardly mentioned.
Earlier this week, my local camera store had its first delivery of R5ii's, at last! So I called my German friend, and he expects I can get mine in a month or so, in time for Costa Rica in February 😀
In your last show with Glenn, you mentioned still discovering new exciting hidden options, and then I think about the speed boost button and store/recall focus position recently mentioned by Duade. Is your Setup Guide getting updates, do you provide them to people who bought the earlier version ? Could be interesting after every major firmware update ..
Hey jan! I love you channel and have been watching from around 25k subs. I am heading off to Borneo next year and was wondering what your preferred camera would be for a deep dark rainforest environment like Danum Valley that where the animals are high up in the trees and its difficult to photograph them. Thanks Jan! your the best bird photographer on yt i reckon
From all systems?
@@jan_wegener uhhhhh, lets just say Canon but if theres one camera thats better than the rest mention that too and ill have a look :)
@@AJ_Brimson It's funny, because I am almost tempted to say R5 II, because of the good low light AF. Otherwise R3 or R1 would probably do a decent job, too, but 24MP might be too light
@@jan_wegener ok thank you very much! What about the R5 Mark I? I was thinking of taking the first version
@@AJ_Brimsonit will have very good IQ, but a bit more slow AF in low light
Great video! What's your opinion on R5 12bit ES vs R5ii 14bit ES at high ISO, in terms of IQ. Meaning: Does the 2bit difference help at all (at high ISO)? Or is it helpful in any other way?
It doesn’t seem to be that helpful, although without it would probably be worse
Thanks....
Hi Yan, is it possible to share with us the file that you just transform because before I rent Lightroom and Photoshop, I want to see if it's too complicated for me...
In using Deep Prime XD2, have you ever increased the "Force Details" slider to try to avoid losing that detail? I have tried and it seems to sometimes do the job...Otherwise, i find the DP XD2 to be too waxy.
I thought that the "noise problem" is not that kind of a big deal because of the higher color depth in electronic shutter mode compared to the original R5? Am I wrong? By the way thanks for comparing the different noise reduction programs.
You’d think so, but the R5 12 bit feel at very high ISO and in dark areas, beats the 14 bit file
Jan when comparing to the R5 is that 14bit Mechanical Shutter files or 12bit ES files? Thanks.
12 bit ES
Could you do a video and compare the video capabilities to the R5? And see if you notice worse quality in the 4k 60fps in the R5 Mark ii camera.
Cause I've heard it's worse than the canon R8.
For video overall the R5 II is significantly improved less overheating, clog2, etc. I don’t use 4K 60 a lot so I’ll have a look
Great video, thanks. I think you contradict yourself at one point. You say "shoot as far to the right as possible", and then "shoot as low iso as possible, even if that means underexposing". I think the latter is a bad idea in general.
That’s not how I tried to bring it across. The underexposing only referred to certain situations where you can’t do anything else since you’re already shooting wide open and using very high iso and still have a too slow shutter speed. I’d never purposely underexpose. It’s more that it happens sometimes
16:47 - Sony A9III does not have a stacked censor. It has a Global sensor.
The global shutter is a stacked sensor 😅
@wilduntamedphotography1260
You're wrong. I just researched the difference between the two, here's the information I found when using key word search "Global shutter vs stacked sensor, are they the same or different?"
Global shutter and a stacked sensor are different concepts, although they can sometimes be found together in a camera sensor: a global shutter refers to the way an image sensor captures light, where all pixels are exposed at the same time, while a stacked sensor refers to the physical design of the sensor, where multiple layers of circuitry are stacked on top of each other to achieve faster processing speeds; essentially, a stacked sensor can have a global shutter functionality, but not all stacked sensors do, and not all global shutters are on stacked sensors.
Key differences:
Function: global shutter captures the entire image at once, preventing distortion in fast-moving scenes, while a stacked sensor primarily focuses on faster data processing by stacking different layers of the sensor circuitry.
Impact on image quality:
While a global shutter can sometimes lead to slightly lower image quality due to its design, a stacked sensor can improve image quality by enabling faster readout speeds and potentially better low-light performance.
Example: A high-end camera like the Sony a9 III utilizes a stacked sensor design and also incorporates a global shutter feature, allowing for fast continuous shooting with minimal rolling shutter distortion.
This is the result of all camera companies compromising on the signal to noise ratio in an attempt to increase the readout speed of the sensor.
What made you an expert?
You're right, and that's a result from the public/youtoubers' overly critical complaints about rolling shutter. Most have never even noticed rolling shutter in their own photos, but clamor for the sensors that solve that at the expense of high-iso noise. In truth, noise isn't nearly the problem it used to be. So, as usual, much ado about nothing.
3200 is not high lmao
I don’t know why you didn’t use flash with birds in a dark situation as you encountered here in this video or you just making a point on the ISO possibility. I know you have flash in the past , what is your position on using flash these days?
I don’t like using it anymore and the rifle it’s basically absorb the whole flash and you end up with weird reflections on them without much gain.
The magnificent on Eis also too skittish for it.
I still use it sometimes, but prefer not to anymore
R3 stack sensor has no issue with ISO, R5M2 does... Canon tech failure? Sony / Nikon do not have that problem on their high mp stacked sensors. Sorry Canon but im not getting R5M2. Not only for this, but forcing new battery, linked to features is clearly illegal practice, from Apple salesbook.
It also only has 24 MP, maybe that’s the reason the R1 does too. To get good DR and high ISO performance
No.
(...and since the doctor ordered me not to consume clickbait, I stopped seeing at 00:02...)
Still, you took the time to add that comment...
Where’s the Clickbait?
Did you even watch the video? Jan did an extremely good job showing us the noise of r5 ii compare to other cameras, and how to fix them. Stop trolling .
@limbei996 life is taking care of him... he can't last any longer (than that stated 2 seconds) with any girls neither.... Oups. 😉