>>4213735>p2p's "PDR" is total bullshit, No it is not. If anything, he draws a more aggressive "line in the sand", i.e. demands higher IQ from the pushed shadows, hence the lower numbers than DxO.
>this stupid site says a fuji will look worse at the same ISO than a fool frame, Which it does. Oh, and you're confusing base ISO DR and high ISO noise again. You're also confusing stills RAW DR and LOG profile DR in video mode.
>but because it has less chroma noise it looks BETTER. Chroma noise is a non-issue and default color NR on a Bayer file will eliminate it. Fuji apsc does not have less noise than FF and does not look better at high ISO.
>photos to photons fucking lies and you know it. You're a sore Fujifag throwing accusations to deny hard evidence, and you know it.
>if it's not a stop test like pic related it is not a DR test. period. fucking period. ya got that?Retarded take that implies performance on a step wedge will be radically different from performance on a DxO or PtP test. It will not. Period. Fucking period. ya got that?
>HURR IF I TURN MY MONITOR BRIGHTNESS UP AND SQUINT REALLY HARD THERE'S TOTALLY MORE STOPS THEREThe opinion of someone who does not shoot and certainly does not push shadows. The detail can't look like dog shit once pushed or it's useless.
>SNR DOES NOT MATTER! Holy shit this is a retarded take. DR is literally SNR.
>the x-t3 has 17 real stops of dynamic range, ONE MORE THAN THE SNOY!Massive fucking COPE
