>>3349051>Resolution: they've been on par for 3 years.Wasn't talking about that, nobody really cares so much about resolution, we didn't see any improvement from photos starting out at 36mp or shit like that.
>High ISO: DxO can suck a dick, they've been on par the entire time.I agree, DxO sucks dicks, but they're on par only on paper because of the dynamic range issue. When I'm shooting crazy high ISO I always need shadow recovery, and if it bands after 2 stops because I was on the edge of usability, the shot is ruined.
And I've been doing 5 years of nightlife with a 7d and 5dII so I fully know what I'm talking about.
>DRIt matters man. Honestly it does, in the end. You're right when you say what you say, and we all know great photographers took amazing shots with slide film that allowed 1 stop of error, but honestly slide film didn't band when you fucked up. Digital limitations look horrid, much more than analog limitations. It's no excuse, we were all tired of being bullied by a fucking Pentax K-5. At least I know I was.
>If you're not pushing shadows 6 stops you're not going to see a difference between Canon's latest FF sensors and Sony's except of course for Sony's shit colors.I dunno what's your problem with colours since all my shots are raw and super flat before I start editing, but it's not 6 stops. Canon shat itself after 3 stops in the shadows under perfect conditions, which meant that on average in the real world you were looking at vomit inducing noise after 2 stops of shadow pull, because you might have fucked up a stop already at the beginning of the shot (which is why you need to recover in the first place.)
Anyways, Canon got their shit straight. Their sensors are now performing just fine, and I see no reason to switch other than IBIS and tilty screens. Which aren't such a big deal, luckily.
