Here's usable DR for an iPhone 14 from a good source:
Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting.
"For more cameras (derived from DxOMark data) see
DxOMark Photographic Dynamic Range Chart. However, data on this chart, when available, is considered to be more accurate.”
Considered by who? Defintiely not DxO.
What exactly is the problem with DxO testing? If they apply the same standards to all cameras then, their results should bre good for comparing cameras. I actually know of Canon shooters who were demanding enought to switch to Nikon, back in the day, although Canon seems to have produced sensors capable of more DR, in the mirroless offerings. It’s just so odd to see the Canon cameras in a discussion about dynamic range, when everyone I know concerned about dynmaic range , left Canon years ago. The world is full on conundrums.… I know people who work professionally with Pentax 645z as landscape photogrpahers, with amazing dynamic range. I guess being as demanding as you are, that’s what you shoot? Or ae you someone who buys a camera, then tries to justify your choice?
I suspect that you just took what you believe and then found the site that promoted your own beliefs. In ny case, I can’t beleive any site would calim to know anything, if it producesd afwew modules and then used someone else’s research where they dudn’t have it on their own.
Believe what you want, I don’t care but Im not buying it. I don’t look at number then decide I like the iamge. I look at the image, and try and find out why it is what in this. In this cae, the image posted is crap. As tested on many sites, most film never had a DR more than 7. S, maybe you’re right and Apple isn’t much better than film.
Even with Imatest, different testing protocols done by different people can produce very different results. I look at the images and decide. And my Pentax gear has as much or more DR than anything you’re shooting unless you shoot Nikon, where Pentax always seem to be able to squeezae a tiny bit more DR out of the same sensor. You shoot something inferior for DR and complain about Apple. You can’t make this stuff up. Get back to me, when your boys have tested all the cameras they post DR charts for. No legitimate lab would compare their results to someone else’s on a comparison. That’s just junk science.
Looking at that image, it has serious issues. Show me your camera's chart for the same exposure. Wait, these fools used natural light. Uncontrollable and unrepeatable. How convenient, you can’t check thier work because you're never have the same light and the same setting. You do understand the value of repeatability in science don’t you? Pure Mickry Mouse, despite your attempt to paint DxO as the unreliable party.
If you judge photos by test chart number, you’re neither an artist or photographer. You're a technologist. I work backwards from you, if I like the images, I try and figure out why. Problem for guys like you being, because I decided I like the images first, regardless of any technical gobbledygook, I still like the images, even if you’re right, and Apple DR is terrilbe, I still like the image I take with it. Techincal specs don’t change that.
The advantage to testing in albm is you can test full range of colour, on a stessed iamges like that one, you have no idea what a perfect curve would look like.
I rest my case, have at her.