Thanks, @Claes, another non-Bayer sensor, from a quick research (thank @paperdigits for pointing that)
LX3 is Bayer.
1 Like
Life of camera sensor? never heard of that!
Morning, Rei,
Do you need more samples?
If you want, I could dig up the old
Canon EOS 600D (itās Bayer!) and
perform the testā¦
Have fun!
Claes in Lund, Sweden
Itās called banding. My Canon 5D (first version) had banding all the time - since purchase. Saw the same artefacts in 5D II and III series. Itās most likely the way those Canon cameras are. Do you need to worry about it? Probably not.
Good morning, Claes.
If that wonāt give you too much trouble, Iād really appreciate to see a dark frame from that one.
Thanks @shreedhar for bringing that. So the strong, uneven banding seems to be more of a defect.
Or itās just the way it is, according to @mosaster experience.
As for worrying about it, yes, probably I shouldnāt.
But I didnāt expect to find such well defined pattern in deep shadow areas, which leads me to think that I will have to take extra care/planning when shooting in circumstances similar to the dog picture I posted above.
Out of curiosity, below is a dark frame from a Canon Powershot A3100 (2010) and its huge amounts of random noise, but almost no banding. Not sure however if the comparison applies, being it a dng file out of chdk add-on.
If you have Canon then you might want to try Magic Lanrern. If I remeber correctly they had some kind of solution to mitigate banding. In my experience banding was uneven and, yes, it appeared if shadows were pulled up strongly or at high ISO mark. There are plenty of examples out there actually. Might attach one here so you can make sure itās quite a common artefact in old models of cameras.
Actually it was the first thought I had as soon as I got my hands on it, but it appears that 5DI isnāt fully supported (thereās seems to be a mod, but with only a subset of all functionality). Maybe I give it a try anyway.
No need for that. Thanks anyway!
@Peter wow! I love those camera hacks! Very interesting, thanks! Iāll investigate if I can do something with that.
Sorry to bump a not so important thread, but looking at this image from @obe kind of makes me cool down my concerns. Iām referring to the banding clearly seen at the bottom left corner, which maybe isnāt so strong as the one shown on the dog image, still clearly seen. And his camera is not so old as mine, so, banding seems to be something we all have to deal with.
Maybe I had great expectations to the saying that digital sensors behave better in the darks, compared to film, which perform better in the highlights (example here). Right, there are lots of recoverable details in very dark regions of digital images, but that comes with the price of banding - and to me, that kind of makes the digital advantage useless, regarding darks performance.
But after some months, Iām already used to this limitation when shooting, so, everything is fine.
