In this part of the shootout, I'll be presenting a rough but practical comparison of dynamic range based on highlight and shadow detail retention in the RAW files. The methodology will be similar to that in Part 2 of the shootout with a few exceptions mentioned below.

All cameras were set to f/4.5 and ISO 100, except for in the last comparison, which was shot at ISO 400. Since the G9 was at 35mm equivalent and the other two cameras at 28mm equivalent, the subject distance was increased for the G9 images in order to keep the field of view similar. This caused the composition to change slightly, though this did not affect the results in this comparison.

In order to truly push the limits in terms of both the highlights and shadows, highlights were tested at 1/125s and 1/250s, shadows at 1/500s and 1/1000s. Thus highlights and shadows were not tested from a single exposure as was done in Part 2. All images were taken within the same short time frame at noon on a cloudless day, so there was no significant variation in the available light.

G9 and D-LUX3 images were processed from RAW using Adobe Lightroom, latest version (same engine as ACR). All settings were at default except for specified EV adjustments. DP1 files were processed from RAW using SPP (latest version, Mac), all settings at default except for specified EV adjustments. G9 and D-LUX3 16-bit TIFFs were downsized to match the native size of the DP1 output (4.6MP) before cropping. This downsizing had a positive impact on the apparent shadow detail/noise ratio for those files.

The test scene is below. The approximate areas examined for shadow and highlight performance are depicted by the yellow boxes.



We'll start by looking at the highlight performance. The following crops were taken at 1/250s. Each crop is accompanied by a second crop to the right, showing what highlight detail could be recovered with a -2EV adjustment during RAW conversion.



As you can see, the G9 clipped badly in the grass but was able to recover a good amount of highlight detail at -2EV. The D-LUX3 and DP1 had a somewhat better showing here. Now lets see what happens when we get a stop brighter at 1/125s:



At this point, all three cameras blew out the grass. However, the DP1 and D-LUX recovered partially at -2EV, whereas the G9 fared less well. This is a good time to point out that the DP1 files are somewhat oversharpened at the default SPP settings. This oversharpening isn't helping with the DP1 highlight performance in the grass. Also, don't be fooled into thinking that the DP1 is capturing the most overall detail! The differences in sharpening make a big difference in apparent detail, an area of performance that will be addressed in a subsequent part of the shootout.

Next, we'll turn our attention to the shadows. The following crops were taken at 1/500s. Each crop is accompanied by a second crop to the right, showing what shadow detail could be recovered with a +2EV adjustment during RAW conversion.



The DP1 is clearly outclassing the competition here. The D-LUX 3 shadows are darkest and seem to contain the least information, but they are also significantly less noisy than the G9 shadows. This is consistent with earlier reports that Panasonic has implemented on-chip noise reduction in the shadows of LX2/D-LUX3 images. Next we'll see what happens when we get a stop darker at 1/1000s:



The G9 digs deep but comes up empty on shadow detail, and the D-LUX3 seems to have given up altogether. Meanwhile, the DP1 continues to find some reserve at this setting. As I mentioned in Part 3, the degree to which this "pushed" DP1 shadow detail lacks luminance noise suggests that SPP is doing some noise reduction here, though there is no setting for this. Some patchy chroma noise is evident in the pushed DP1 crop.

Finally, let's see how these cameras handled the same scene at ISO 400. First the highlights, before and after a -2EV adjustment in RAW:



At this ISO, the DP1 is the only one of the three able to largely recover highlight detail at -2EV. Interestingly, the DP1 highlight recovery in in RAW at -2EV was better at ISO 400 and 1/500s than at ISO 100 and 1/125s (same apparent exposure). This suggests, as I've mentioned before, that the high ISO DP1 files represent a somewhat "pushed" state. Again, the D-LUX3 has outperformed the G9 in highlight detail capture. Below is the shadow detail from the ISO 400 images:



Some desaturation is present in the ISO 400 DP1 crop, but this is easily addressed by increasing saturation in SPP.

As always, the RAW files are available for your interest/investigation:







Stay tuned for Part 7, coming soon.