Whoa, That should be on its way to warranty service. That is not normal, or acceptable at all.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I don't have time to post the pictures right now, but I did a quick test, as much of an extreme real-world one as I could think of that I'd ever want to do. I took a high-noon picture looking into a garden shed entirely in shadow. I exposed for the exterior, and underexposed by a couple stops. In DPP, after moving the exposure and shadow sliders all the way to the right, the interior of the shed was clean as a whistle. Even in Camera Raw, after boosting the exposure and shadows more than I'd ever want to do, it didn't take too much noise reduction to tame the noise.
If I have too much free time later, I might post some of it. But, as far as i'm concerned, all this nonsense about insufficient dynamic range is a tempest in a teapot. Get the exposure right and you'll be fine. Heck, get the exposure off by a stop or two and you'll be okay. There's more than enough clean information in there for any reasonable kind of post-processing. Any situation where you'd want more, you should have either done your job as a photographer to get better light on your subject or you should have shot HDR.
What were the shot parameters in terms of sharpening and NR? DPP applies these automatically, so when the photo was processed and saved as TIFF/bitmap, this is effectively similar to applying NR in LR and exporting a TIFF back into the catalog before playing with it. Right? Don't mean to be pessimistic, just want to make sure I have the facts straight.
I cancelled my D800 order after seeing the low light video samples. Would love to see the 5DM3 excel at stills as well, but I'm cautious.
Let me be the idiot to say that I don't see the problem here. As a crop shooter I would love to bring that much out of the shadows.
QuotePlus with LR your 5D3 files get the bonus feature of that soft look.
...glad i don't own that POS (LR that is).
I hope that was a joke
Well I just tried DPP 3.11.26. Initially I thought the image looked cleaner but that's because it's applying luminance noise reduction which actually makes the image appear softer than in LR. You can get a similar effect in LR by applying luminance NR. The banding is still there in my images, even in DPP. I doubt it's doing any additional intelligent subtraction to get rid of banding (or if it is, LR is doing just as much, since I see pretty equivalent amounts of banding). DPP's sharpening is useless & introduces weird artifacts (puts a weird texture all over the image when raised).
Anyone else want to give this DPP vs. LR comparison a try to see how shadows are handled?
Matt, it's possible your particular 5D3 sensor just has less banding...?
Unfortunately everything to me seems to be SOFT lol, maybe its just me.
Im really eager to see results from people who use LR4 RC2 which states on top that it uses Adobe Camera Raw 7.1 (98% sure) which is a different revision to LR4 RC1 which may make a difference.
I did bring up my RAWs in DPP but I still think its soft so maybe its just me, better wait till more people can test.
Would be also great to Compare to the 1DX which was announced like last year LOL maybe it will come out before 2013
Is this with LR 4.1 RC1? Or LR 4.1 RC2 that came out a short while ago?Interesting, I don't think I got wind of that. Let me check it out and update if necessary.
Can I ask a question: do you get the same result if you push the exposure in DPP rather than using shadows in Photoshop?
Can you try pushing the exposure in DPP and LR by a similar amount and posting a 100% crop of an area that's very dark?
This is VERY interesting!
Matt, that's very interesting! Do you think DPP is just doing more noise reduction, or perhaps using the top rows of the RAW data to offset vertical banding? Those shadows look much cleaner than what LR is producing, as you yourself have noted.
I haven't even tried DPP yet... perhaps it is time to.