"simple and ridiculous" dragon vs Mx test..

[Denis Buhot]

A lot has been written about the difficulty of testing and the likeliness of misleading results. All true. However, here is a suggestion for a very simple test. Ridiculously simple. Virtually no time asked from any of you. It would not adress all our needs, but it would adress quite a few of mine and presumably of others who work in uncontrolled lighting environment. How about the same shot, in dim enough light so that the histogram would be correct, show no noise bar, on both cameras, when not viewed raw of course. MX would be set at iso 800, Dragon would use a combination of high frame rate + shutter speed that would require iso 2000 to get a similarly centered histogram. And both results would be posted for us to compare.

Ok, I know... that test is a very basic, awkward one, scientifically questionable. Not totally despicable from a matter of fact standpoint. Anyone with my needs would see its usefulness, I guess. And no one would ask from that test results or conclusions that it obviously cannot provide.

So... any of you having your hands on both cameras ?

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Have you checked out this?

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?109565-Dragon-Epic-comparison

 

[Denis Buhot]

Sure, Gunleik...

Sure, Gunleik...

Have you checked out this?

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?109565-Dragon-Epic-comparison

I did. Very interesting, I see your point. But your methodology is slightly different, more sophisticated and most of all, the whole of it is so far from my shooting marks in dim natural light that I don't really know what to think (although I do see some difference in noise). 10 k is not a cheap upgrade, and I'd better play safe on that one. May I just ask again ? Natural, dim light, same shot, whatever that shows no big contrast, iso 800 needed for the MX, 2000 for the Dragon, and full size jpegs to judge about the noise... Anyone ? You, Gunleik ? Matter of minutes, and I'd trust your results.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I would, if I had the cameras in now.

Mid February is a good hunch, but by then I have a lot of additional info to the info you ask about.

 

[Denis Buhot]

great...

great...

I would, if I had the cameras in now.

Mid February is a good hunch, but by then I have a lot of additional info to the info you ask about.

I'll stay tune, then, waiting... I understand that most epic users need much more, but basically, the info I need is all about what to think exactly about the initial claim : as clean at 2000 as, etc... To me, extra info, extra specs, they may be all bonus to that, but I am not yet sure they are deal-makers.

 

[luigivaltulini]

I did. Very interesting, I see your point. But your methodology is slightly different, more sophisticated and most of all, the whole of it is so far from my shooting marks in dim natural light that I don't really know what to think (although I do see some difference in noise). 10 k is not a cheap upgrade, and I'd better play safe on that one. May I just ask again ? Natural, dim light, same shot, whatever that shows no big contrast, iso 800 needed for the MX, 2000 for the Dragon, and full size jpegs to judge about the noise... Anyone ? You, Gunleik ? Matter of minutes, and I'd trust your results.

ciao Denis,
Wednesday I return my Epic and my Carbon,
if you need some files can help you.
Tell me exactly what you want!
example:
1. Epic 800iso outside natural light during the day
Dragon 800 iso natural outdoor light during the day
both shots at the same aperture?

2. Epic 800iso daylight or tungsten light very low
Dragon 800iso daylight or tungsten light very low, I might even do some shooting in the house or externally favorite?

I misunderstood?
do me a detailed list of the settings that you want

I'm sorry, but I'm not good with English.

luigi

 

[Denis Buhot]

thanks Luigi, great offer...

thanks Luigi, great offer...

ciao Denis,
Wednesday I return my Epic and my Carbon,
if you need some files can help you.
Tell me exactly what you want!
example:
1. Epic 800iso outside natural light during the day
Dragon 800 iso natural outdoor light during the day
both shots at the same aperture?

2. Epic 800iso daylight or tungsten light very low
Dragon 800iso daylight or tungsten light very low, I might even do some shooting in the house or externally favorite?

I misunderstood?
do me a detailed list of the settings that you want

I'm sorry, but I'm not good with English.

luigi

I am sending you a private message with details ! Thanks again, Denis

 

[paul schefz]

ciao Denis,
Wednesday I return my Epic and my Carbon,
if you need some files can help you.
Tell me exactly what you want!
example:
1. Epic 800iso outside natural light during the day
Dragon 800 iso natural outdoor light during the day
both shots at the same aperture?

2. Epic 800iso daylight or tungsten light very low
Dragon 800iso daylight or tungsten light very low, I might even do some shooting in the house or externally favorite?

I misunderstood?
do me a detailed list of the settings that you want

I'm sorry, but I'm not good with English.

luigi

a lot of people have been asking for this....simple comparison...outside same lens, same aperture (same compression or same file size since compression is more efficient with dragon?) same iso....well exposed, even histogram i would love to see iso 400, 800, 1600 and 3200....
i don't even need tungsten or studio....but would love to see a person, preferably backlit....
i am so looking forward to seeing those raw files!

 

[Denis Buhot]

sustained...

sustained...

a lot of people have been asking for this....simple comparison...outside same lens, same aperture (same compression or same file size since compression is more efficient with dragon?) same iso....well exposed, even histogram i would love to see iso 400, 800, 1600 and 3200....
i don't even need tungsten or studio....but would love to see a person, preferably backlit....
i am so looking forward to seeing those raw files!

very similar. No reason not to ask again

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

When doing comparative tests it is advisable using same lens, iris and shutter. These values are exact and usable as a reference. Using small histogram of a camera monitor is not and may easily bring misleading results. Also, different S/N from these sensors is bound to show a different histogram.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I would like to point out that I did exactly what is requested here...

But it is good with many tests!

But stopping down in a controlled way with the same lights, lens and subject on both cameras with a fixed lighting scene equals shooting: 200/400/800/1600/3200 ISO if you adjust exposure for ISO...

I did it for 16 stops, but did not publish all of them.

I also did an 8-stop outdoor test. Cannot remember if I published that publicly.

I think not, as outdoor lights are changing, so it is not as controlled.


But WTF

That said, I really think all should test on their own.

 

[Denis Buhot]

yes...

yes...

When doing comparative tests it is advisable using same lens, iris and shutter. These values are exact and usable as a reference. Using small histogram of a camera monitor is not and may easily bring misleading results. Also, different S/N from these sensors is bound to show a different histogram.

that's right... but the purpose here is to get a quick, easy, and yet very informative test... Quite sufficient for me, at least to start with.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

At some point, how much more reassurance do people need that the Dragon sensor is an improvement over the (4-years-old?) MX sensor? Does anyone expect a test that shows that there is no improvement?

Personally, I'd rather see a test comparing it to the Sony F65, which is the Dragon's nearest competitor. Or the Alexa, which is the current dynamic range king. Once the conversions to Dragon have taken place at the rental houses, and the Dragon color science is done, and the new OLPF is installed, I don't see renting an MX-sensor Epic anyway so it's mainly just curiosity at this point to see it compared to the Dragon.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Agree. David.

Gonna participate in a F65/Alexa/F55/C300/Phantom Flex/Dragon/+++ thingy in February.

I do not think the Epic is even in there. (I do not pick the cameras)

 

[Joe Kleber]

Agree. David.

Gonna participate in a F65/Alexa/F55/C300/Phantom Flex/Dragon/+++ thingy in February.

I do not think the Epic is even in there. (I do not pick the cameras)

…done with the REVISED OLPF, I trust.

 

[Phil Holland]

…done with the REVISED OLPF, I trust.

I'm waiting for exactly that and one other thing before I do anything side by side (although I've already compared Dragon to the F65 at this point).

 

[luigivaltulini]

At some point, how much more reassurance do people need that the Dragon sensor is an improvement over the (4-years-old?) MX sensor? Does anyone expect a test that shows that there is no improvement?

Personally, I'd rather see a test comparing it to the Sony F65, which is the Dragon's nearest competitor. Or the Alexa, which is the current dynamic range king. Once the conversions to Dragon have taken place at the rental houses, and the Dragon color science is done, and the new OLPF is installed, I don't see renting an MX-sensor Epic anyway so it's mainly just curiosity at this point to see it compared to the Dragon.

I completely agree with you.
For now my only expectation is a direct competitor to Alexa, the F65 in my part does not exist, there is only Alexa, and some F55.
And honestly the only test I did between Mx and DRagon and see how much difference exists under tungsten light, and here I can confirm that DRagon is greatly amazing than MX. Everything else is better skintone by the dynamic range of colors, resolution, everything is much richer.
Just having the carbon with the new OLPF do testing with Alexa, this to me is the most important thing.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

…done with the REVISED OLPF, I trust.

If it is present.

I have not control over the timing of the test.

I would have preferred to have new colorscience and olpf.

But it is a test of the statues at the time the test is done.

F55 has released new functions and upgrades over the last year. The Dragon will improve.

That is kinda the nature of tech.

I decided it was better that I was part of the test than not.
Others may disagree with that assessment. And I fully accept that.

My point of being there. is to set up some of the tests and do my best to check that they are done in as similar premises as possible.
And if they are not, I can report on that.

If I can get the OLPF swapped, I would love to do that.

I have asked.

 

[luigivaltulini]

Agree. David.

Gonna participate in a F65/Alexa/F55/C300/Phantom Flex/Dragon/+++ thingy in February.

I do not think the Epic is even in there. (I do not pick the cameras)

great, I'll wait then your results

 

[Denis Buhot]

David..

David..

At some point, how much more reassurance do people need that the Dragon sensor is an improvement over the (4-years-old?) MX sensor? Does anyone expect a test that shows that there is no improvement?

... you're right, but do not miss the point here, please. No one expects Red failing to improve their sensor. The question is that we are very different people here, cost sensitive in different ways. For people like me, the question is whether the improvement is worth the amount of money. Besides, the iso thing is only one side of the possible and already appreciated improvements, and the point is trying to check on that particular question, because it is of vital importance for people shooting with no additional light source available. One very quick, simple test does not stop anyone to conduct any other he wants.