DPR isn't as good as Imaging Resources, (and I have friend who works for DPR , so don't even try and bend that one.) Go to DxO. the 645z is still second on the list for DR after hasselbad. I just report the sources I trust. I'm not going to invest in making up stuff. Why you ask does the 645z still hold up you ask? Optical physics. Everyone else has tried to go for more MP. You will never see the kind of DR of the Nikon/Pentax (both of who used SNony sensors) again. Pentax K-5, (Nikon 7000) Pentax K-1 (Nikon D 800, D810) are the kings of Dynamic range, because they were design for the best compromise between resolution and pixel density. It's physics, not opinion. The laws of physics don't change.
"It is akin to comparing a 2008 EOS 5D Mark II vs a 2015 EOS 5Ds R that have at par DR even when former has 21.1MP while the later has 50.6MP.... difference was 7 years of R&D..."
Those cameras were way behind in DR, way behind their Nikon/Pentax counterparts. Canon didn't catch up in DR before mirrorless. SO you have your EOS 5D Mkii against the 5D both of which were pretty pathetic compared to cameras with Sony sensors. Honestly go to DxO and look.
Pentax 645z a total score of 101. The best Canon EOS R3 at 96. (And in my experience, you can see difference of 5 points or more, less than that is toss up.) DR of my K-1 14.6. DR of raw R3 14.7.. Canon improved over the 10 years, but still only matches the 645z with a 24 MP seamer as compared to 42 MP for the 645z. Not only that , my K-1 is 36 MP to Canoan leading 24 MP with the same DR. Canon is still behind, just not as badly.
The highest rate Canon is 19th on the list, with the same score as the Pentax K-1 and Nikon D800e. So ya, a lot of companies are producing product as good as anything Canon produces. If you want to push Canon, thier lens section is fantastic, they have always had great AF, and they have always been leaders in FPS. DR has always been their weakness. They aren't #2 (behind Apple as camera manufacturer) for no reason. Fact is DR just isn't that important. It's nice to have not have to have. But for the reason suggested, low light performance is critical, and larger pixels have better low light performance.
To me the camera to buy today for what you say you want, indoor iamges with no additional lighting, a quick Look at DxO suggests a second hand Nikon D850 might be your best bet. I don't own, one, and never have, but have run into people shooting with one, and from my experience it's probably the very top of the "most functional "camera field. Imperceptibly better than 645z and also 45 MP, so same DR as 645z and same resolution. Now that's an engineering feet that defies the physics and the Z7 is right behind it. The Canon R3 is up there, but with half the megapixels as the leaders. But the peak was the D850, and it's been all downhill from there. The D850 is still top 5 in DR and overall rating. And by the way, Im not even promoting the camera I use. I've never bought a Nikon. But Pentax and Nikon have used many of the same Sony sensors over the years and test within few points of each other.
I won't use a DR rating from site that doesn't have all cameras tested with the same protocols. DR rating from DxO compares all cameras with the same test. Imatest is different depending on the version used and who does the testing. Even so, the quoted test was a full stop of DR less than the leaders. The other thing IR has that others seem to ignores is comparison images taken in the same setting, and the actual test charts shot to produce their lw/ph numbers., lw/phh is the real test of resolution, not MP.) SO, as I said, when I have the whole picture, Imaging Resources reports on DR, lw/ph (Line width per picture height ) and side by side image comparisons, then I can make a more final determination, for myself. Before making final judgement I want to see if the lw/ph (real resolution) justifies the price, the DR and low light performance are excellent, and do I like the look of the images. But I wouldn't buy camera for any of that. Lens availability a the ergonomics top my list, A good photographer can take great images with any camera. (The corollary is a bad photographer can't take a good image with any camera, I've met a few.) Ease of use and an intuitive menu system are the most critical elements for many of us. With film people sometimes shot 7 EV DR and low resolution. Our standards have changed. But many of those old images are still really good.
Recognizing that DR is rarely an issue, even for shooting indoors in natural light, the Highest rating I've seen for the Fuji is 12.4 considerably under the D850's 14.8. 2.5 stops. Those number are from different sites with different testing methods, but that's the best I've seen.
Check it out.
www.dxomark.com
DR is the rating they call "Landscape."
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/42/42060-f597479f8fd78d4bb4d17e7686fb0812.jpg?1734176459)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/37/37604-7ad625e983f92f880eb65a264eeef5e4.jpg?1734170732)
