Finally got to the point where no new camera holds my interest(waiting for specific offering)

On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 11:22:31 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

But the digital DR of the output of the ADC is not the same as the
analog DR of the sensor. Nor is there any reason why it should be.

Well that's exactly what I said. If they are publishing the DR of the
sensor, why would any photographer care about that, if the DR is then
limited by the ADC? The usable output of any camera we buy is all we
care about.

There is no reason why the DR of the sensor should not be compressed
to make it fit within the limits of the ADC.

actually there are several reasons, but the only one that matters is
that the sensor data *isn't* compressed or altered in any way prior to
the adc.

It is inherent in the operation of an ADC that the full DR of the
sensor is incorporated in the bit band-width of the output.

what's inherent is that the adc is the limiting factor, unless the
sensor is crap, which is not the case in a d800.

It only affects the scaling of the DR.

arguing about a non-existent camera, one which is likely to never exist
at all, is pointless and actually, rather bizarre.

I thought we were arguing about what DxO have done when measuring the
DR of the various Nikon cameras you have cited.

yes, so why bring up a non-existent camera?

What makes you think I have?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens