Threads
The danger of high resolution and sharpness
- By Eldar
- Canon General
- 79 Replies
I have just made a 6 image stitched panorama of the view from a house I´m renting, in a hill above Chania og Crete. I used my newly acquired 5DSR. The resulting image is about 270MP and the resolution and detail and sharpness and ... , whatever you´re after, is astonishing, fantastic, awesome, impressive, almost beyond belief ... etc.
I tried to export from LR on a format I could use on CR, but it refused to use "only" 4MP :
But then it struck me, what are we after?
One of my other passions in life is music. Many would probably call my an audiofile. At a certain point in my strive for the absolute sound, I realized that I was not listening to music anymore. I was totally consumed with resolution, dynamics, with, height, depth, sound stage, over harmonics, bass punch, instrument positioning, voice texture etc. etc. Until I one day realized; I have to re-learn how to listen to music. I will not tire you with how I did that, but I did. So today I have a fantastic hifi setup, where I enjoy lots of great music.
Photography is about to end up in a similar situation. We pixle peep and read test charts, we want resolution, we want dynamics, we want less noise, we want contrast, color, no CA etc. etc. But is that what a photograph is about?
The other day I went through some of my older images and I found one, shot with the 50mm f1.2L. Not the EF version, but the FD version. Shot on a Canon New F1 in 1987, with Kodachrome 25. If you held this photograph up, next to one shot with a 5DSR and the Otus 55/1.4, it would (technically) look like a poor image, shot by a technical imbecile. Resolution, edge sharpness and all the rest of it would end up in the dust. But the picture is still a great picture. Firstly because the composition is good and secondly because it has great light. (It is very private, so you can´t see it
)
So the question is; Are we losing track of why we are doing this, in all this technical progression? Are we losing our ability to see a good picture in our strive for technical perfection?
I tried to export from LR on a format I could use on CR, but it refused to use "only" 4MP :
But then it struck me, what are we after?
One of my other passions in life is music. Many would probably call my an audiofile. At a certain point in my strive for the absolute sound, I realized that I was not listening to music anymore. I was totally consumed with resolution, dynamics, with, height, depth, sound stage, over harmonics, bass punch, instrument positioning, voice texture etc. etc. Until I one day realized; I have to re-learn how to listen to music. I will not tire you with how I did that, but I did. So today I have a fantastic hifi setup, where I enjoy lots of great music.
Photography is about to end up in a similar situation. We pixle peep and read test charts, we want resolution, we want dynamics, we want less noise, we want contrast, color, no CA etc. etc. But is that what a photograph is about?
The other day I went through some of my older images and I found one, shot with the 50mm f1.2L. Not the EF version, but the FD version. Shot on a Canon New F1 in 1987, with Kodachrome 25. If you held this photograph up, next to one shot with a 5DSR and the Otus 55/1.4, it would (technically) look like a poor image, shot by a technical imbecile. Resolution, edge sharpness and all the rest of it would end up in the dust. But the picture is still a great picture. Firstly because the composition is good and secondly because it has great light. (It is very private, so you can´t see it
)So the question is; Are we losing track of why we are doing this, in all this technical progression? Are we losing our ability to see a good picture in our strive for technical perfection?
5Ds R Err 20
I got an Err 20 with my 5DS R.
It occurs when I try shooting stills after taking video. This happened during a party.
I was able to resolve it the first time by reinserting the battery, as stated in the screen.
On the second go I simply turned off then turned on the camera.
Although I do not expect this camera to be used primarily to do videos with I hope it gets resolved through future firmware.
It occurs when I try shooting stills after taking video. This happened during a party.
I was able to resolve it the first time by reinserting the battery, as stated in the screen.
On the second go I simply turned off then turned on the camera.
Although I do not expect this camera to be used primarily to do videos with I hope it gets resolved through future firmware.
Canon L lens shooter gets trampled by the Queen's Guard
- By vjlex
- Canon Lenses
- 1 Replies
For lack of a place to post this, I found this video hilarious. https://youtu.be/NTr50aHGDnI
Of course, couldn't help but notice his big white lens. Hmm... I wonder if it's anyone on this forum. :
Of course, couldn't help but notice his big white lens. Hmm... I wonder if it's anyone on this forum. :
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM - my experience (and comparison with 50mm f/1.8 II)
- By pj1974
- Canon Lenses
- 9 Replies
Hi everyone
Please … let me share my little story of excitement with you all.
A few weeks ago I bought the 50mm STM. I was perhaps the first person in my city (Adelaide, South Australia) to get one. During my lunch break I went in to the largest camera store in Adelaide, to check if they had this lens. This store is also usually the first local bricks and mortar store to get new stock. Well, as it was, they had some arrive just the day before.
I asked the sales person (whom I have bought some goods off before) if any people had purchased any 50mm STMs yet. He replied not yet, but one customer had requested one put on hold, and they expected more people would come in on late night trading and the weekend.
Naturally I asked what price the store was selling for… and he indicated the price. Seeing as he knew I had bought goods there before (he looked me up on the system) he was able to work out a discount for me if I was interested (who wouldn’t be). I got a great deal which was equal to the lowest Aus ‘raw’ online price (without shipping) that I’ve seen. Naturally I prefer a bricks and mortar store – as they also have a great returns policy (that I’ve used in the past). The price I was given was cheaper than the current price of the old 50mm f/1.8 II in some other stores, so that’s a no-brainer! :
I have owned two copies of the 50mm f/1.8 II previously – back when I lived in Europe. I exchanged one (which had a consistent front focus issue). My 2nd copy of that lens was better, but AF accuracy was far from perfect. I was never happy with the inconsistent and inaccurate focus – this was my major ‘bug’ with that lens… on both copies I had owned, plus 2 other copies I have tried – one that I borrowed from a friend and 1 that I tried extensively in store.
In addition, I found the 50mm f/1.8 II’s bokeh was quite harsh (busy – and at times ugly at the critical transition points) and pentagon shaped when stopped down. While the image quality was sharp and contrasty (particularly between f2.8 and f8…) the lens just never really cut it for me, causing me more frustration than enjoyment. So seeing as these are systemic issues (and reading what others have written on the interweb with similar experiences about the 50mm f/1.8 II at the time) I eventually sold my 2nd copy (in Australia) – for $100 AUD some years ago.
Anyway… back to ‘now’ (ie early June 2015) – and the 50mm STM. I took about 20 to 30 sample photos using the 760D that was instore. I have only handled the 760D once previously, it’s not bad – but nowhere near as nice as my 7D. The 50mm STM’s focus was smooth, relatively quick, and quiet - but more importantly for me: it appeared to be very accurate.
I had read the technical details of the 50mm STM online before I was in store, as well as a few early reviews that sprung up. So I knew what I was getting. Seeing as the AF was clearly better, as well as the bokeh (7 circular blades vs 5 straight ones) – and a very mild IQ enhancement (a slight yet noticeably sharper and higher contrast wide open…). Plus I remember finding the 50mm f/1.8 II’s minimum focussing distance (MFD) of 45cm somewhat limiting, and I know from experience that a 35mm MFD making a substantial difference (improvement).
While I was surprised that Canon actually released this 50mm STM lens, it does not mean I am disappointed as such. (I was expecting more of a refresh to the current f/1.4, somewhere between f/1.4 and f/2 – USM and IS… like the 35mm f/2 USM IS…). But, as I considered that should Canon release such a ‘better’ 50mm sometime in the future, I could still sell my 50mm STM without much financial loss. For example if Canon releases an improved 50mm f/nooneknows USM IS after 1 or 2 years, the amount I sell for, would I expect, be a minimal amount to own the lens in that time, AND improve my appreciation, composition and skills with a fast 50mm on an APS-C (and potentially a FF in the future).
Therefore I decided to pull the plug, bite the bullet (and any another alliteration… do you see what I did just there) and buy this baby (my bank balance said ‘bonus’ too!)
I haven’t been disappointed
Having had my EF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens for a few weeks now, here are some notes (& comparisons to the nifty-fifty EF 50mm f/1.8 II) in summary paired with my 7D:
- Definitely much improved AF…
o slightly faster, with less hunting in low light / low contrast areas
o smoother & quieter (I don’t really need it STM for video, though handy to have available)
o most importantly accurate and consistent
- More pleasing, smoother bokeh (not top quality, but a notable improvement from my old 50mm II’s, particularly between f/2.2 and f/5.6)
- Closer minimum focal distance really appreciated
- Acceptable sharpness wide open across most of the frame (on APS-C)
- Very sharp between f/2.8 and f/8. Capable of extremely great IQ at these apertures
- Contrast between f/1.8 and f/2.2 benefits well from a little boost in post-processing (PP)
- CA’s visible at f/1.8 – but reduce fairly rapidly so by f/2.5 they are no longer there
- Vignetting wide open just noticeable on APS-C (looking forward to the DxO module to correct this and CA’s automatically)
- No apparent de-centring issue at this stage
- Required a AFMA of about -3 (this might not be the final figure… as I have not conducted final testing on this)
Looking forward to your comments, folks!
Paul
Please … let me share my little story of excitement with you all.
A few weeks ago I bought the 50mm STM. I was perhaps the first person in my city (Adelaide, South Australia) to get one. During my lunch break I went in to the largest camera store in Adelaide, to check if they had this lens. This store is also usually the first local bricks and mortar store to get new stock. Well, as it was, they had some arrive just the day before.
I asked the sales person (whom I have bought some goods off before) if any people had purchased any 50mm STMs yet. He replied not yet, but one customer had requested one put on hold, and they expected more people would come in on late night trading and the weekend.
Naturally I asked what price the store was selling for… and he indicated the price. Seeing as he knew I had bought goods there before (he looked me up on the system) he was able to work out a discount for me if I was interested (who wouldn’t be). I got a great deal which was equal to the lowest Aus ‘raw’ online price (without shipping) that I’ve seen. Naturally I prefer a bricks and mortar store – as they also have a great returns policy (that I’ve used in the past). The price I was given was cheaper than the current price of the old 50mm f/1.8 II in some other stores, so that’s a no-brainer! :
I have owned two copies of the 50mm f/1.8 II previously – back when I lived in Europe. I exchanged one (which had a consistent front focus issue). My 2nd copy of that lens was better, but AF accuracy was far from perfect. I was never happy with the inconsistent and inaccurate focus – this was my major ‘bug’ with that lens… on both copies I had owned, plus 2 other copies I have tried – one that I borrowed from a friend and 1 that I tried extensively in store.
In addition, I found the 50mm f/1.8 II’s bokeh was quite harsh (busy – and at times ugly at the critical transition points) and pentagon shaped when stopped down. While the image quality was sharp and contrasty (particularly between f2.8 and f8…) the lens just never really cut it for me, causing me more frustration than enjoyment. So seeing as these are systemic issues (and reading what others have written on the interweb with similar experiences about the 50mm f/1.8 II at the time) I eventually sold my 2nd copy (in Australia) – for $100 AUD some years ago.
Anyway… back to ‘now’ (ie early June 2015) – and the 50mm STM. I took about 20 to 30 sample photos using the 760D that was instore. I have only handled the 760D once previously, it’s not bad – but nowhere near as nice as my 7D. The 50mm STM’s focus was smooth, relatively quick, and quiet - but more importantly for me: it appeared to be very accurate.
I had read the technical details of the 50mm STM online before I was in store, as well as a few early reviews that sprung up. So I knew what I was getting. Seeing as the AF was clearly better, as well as the bokeh (7 circular blades vs 5 straight ones) – and a very mild IQ enhancement (a slight yet noticeably sharper and higher contrast wide open…). Plus I remember finding the 50mm f/1.8 II’s minimum focussing distance (MFD) of 45cm somewhat limiting, and I know from experience that a 35mm MFD making a substantial difference (improvement).
While I was surprised that Canon actually released this 50mm STM lens, it does not mean I am disappointed as such. (I was expecting more of a refresh to the current f/1.4, somewhere between f/1.4 and f/2 – USM and IS… like the 35mm f/2 USM IS…). But, as I considered that should Canon release such a ‘better’ 50mm sometime in the future, I could still sell my 50mm STM without much financial loss. For example if Canon releases an improved 50mm f/nooneknows USM IS after 1 or 2 years, the amount I sell for, would I expect, be a minimal amount to own the lens in that time, AND improve my appreciation, composition and skills with a fast 50mm on an APS-C (and potentially a FF in the future).
Therefore I decided to pull the plug, bite the bullet (and any another alliteration… do you see what I did just there) and buy this baby (my bank balance said ‘bonus’ too!)
I haven’t been disappointed
Having had my EF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens for a few weeks now, here are some notes (& comparisons to the nifty-fifty EF 50mm f/1.8 II) in summary paired with my 7D:
- Definitely much improved AF…
o slightly faster, with less hunting in low light / low contrast areas
o smoother & quieter (I don’t really need it STM for video, though handy to have available)
o most importantly accurate and consistent
- More pleasing, smoother bokeh (not top quality, but a notable improvement from my old 50mm II’s, particularly between f/2.2 and f/5.6)
- Closer minimum focal distance really appreciated
- Acceptable sharpness wide open across most of the frame (on APS-C)
- Very sharp between f/2.8 and f/8. Capable of extremely great IQ at these apertures
- Contrast between f/1.8 and f/2.2 benefits well from a little boost in post-processing (PP)
- CA’s visible at f/1.8 – but reduce fairly rapidly so by f/2.5 they are no longer there
- Vignetting wide open just noticeable on APS-C (looking forward to the DxO module to correct this and CA’s automatically)
- No apparent de-centring issue at this stage
- Required a AFMA of about -3 (this might not be the final figure… as I have not conducted final testing on this)
Looking forward to your comments, folks!
Paul
5DS, 5DS R, 1Ds mark III Studio comparison
Today I had an opportunity to participate on local Canon 5DS(R) presentation, play with production versions of both cameras and quickly compare to my 1Ds mark III.
I refused to do any outdoor comparisons and focused just on the studio shots (as there is lot of outdoor samples and RAW files in the wild already and the time was limited).
I've used Canon EF 2.8/100L Macro and Carl Zeiss Planar 1.4/85 ZE on all cameras. Files are processed in latest version of Capture One 8 (8.3.0.83). As the production RAW files probably slightly differ from preproduction samples, I refused to use included 5DS(R) profiles for C1 and used 1DsIII color profile with custom WB and adjusted all files to look as close as possible.
Default sharpening, chroma noise reduction down to 0, luminance 0, detail 100. Except adjusting WB and exposure to match on all images, no other adjustment was done.
As bonus, 5DS(R) JPEGs processed with latest DPP4 are included. I really do like the Fine Detail picture style and I hope, that my 1DsIII will be soon supported too in DPP4. DPP4 shows definitely better the differences in skin tones rendering between Canon and Zeiss lenses. I've applied DLO on EF 2.8/100L shots, to extract as much details as possible.
As there is currently not possible to process 1DsIII and 5DS(R) files in same version of Canon DPP, I processed the Planar shots with DPP3 and DPP4 with Standard picture style to compare the color rendering with Canon software.
Because the fullres 5DS(R) JPEGs are too big for my image hosting site, I offer only download of zipped full size JPEGs (~185MB).
http://www.mediafire.com/download/h47zsru133878xh/1DsIII_5DS_5DSR_Studio_Comparison_JPEG.zip
Because nobody cares about some other person JPEGs :, you can download RAW files too and play with them (~246MB, C1 and DPP4 settings included)
http://www.mediafire.com/download/q2a5f7qgnsb51su/1DsIII_5DS_5DSR_Studio_Comparison_RAW.zip
If you want to process the 5DS(R) files with DPP4, you need to download latest version 4.2.32.0, because the previous version 4.2.31.0 doesn't work with production RAWs.
File names are self explanatory and full EXIFs are included.
I do like the 5DS(R) output, it's very close to what I'm used to (1DsIII) and the resolution bump is significant. Unfortunately, I don't print bigger than A3, so I don't see a reason to upgrade anytime soon....
I refused to do any outdoor comparisons and focused just on the studio shots (as there is lot of outdoor samples and RAW files in the wild already and the time was limited).
I've used Canon EF 2.8/100L Macro and Carl Zeiss Planar 1.4/85 ZE on all cameras. Files are processed in latest version of Capture One 8 (8.3.0.83). As the production RAW files probably slightly differ from preproduction samples, I refused to use included 5DS(R) profiles for C1 and used 1DsIII color profile with custom WB and adjusted all files to look as close as possible.
Default sharpening, chroma noise reduction down to 0, luminance 0, detail 100. Except adjusting WB and exposure to match on all images, no other adjustment was done.
As bonus, 5DS(R) JPEGs processed with latest DPP4 are included. I really do like the Fine Detail picture style and I hope, that my 1DsIII will be soon supported too in DPP4. DPP4 shows definitely better the differences in skin tones rendering between Canon and Zeiss lenses. I've applied DLO on EF 2.8/100L shots, to extract as much details as possible.
As there is currently not possible to process 1DsIII and 5DS(R) files in same version of Canon DPP, I processed the Planar shots with DPP3 and DPP4 with Standard picture style to compare the color rendering with Canon software.
Because the fullres 5DS(R) JPEGs are too big for my image hosting site, I offer only download of zipped full size JPEGs (~185MB).
http://www.mediafire.com/download/h47zsru133878xh/1DsIII_5DS_5DSR_Studio_Comparison_JPEG.zip
Because nobody cares about some other person JPEGs :
, you can download RAW files too and play with them (~246MB, C1 and DPP4 settings included) http://www.mediafire.com/download/q2a5f7qgnsb51su/1DsIII_5DS_5DSR_Studio_Comparison_RAW.zip
If you want to process the 5DS(R) files with DPP4, you need to download latest version 4.2.32.0, because the previous version 4.2.31.0 doesn't work with production RAWs.
File names are self explanatory and full EXIFs are included.
I do like the 5DS(R) output, it's very close to what I'm used to (1DsIII) and the resolution bump is significant. Unfortunately, I don't print bigger than A3, so I don't see a reason to upgrade anytime soon....
Filter
Forum statistics
Gallery statistics
- Categories
- 1
- Albums
- 29
- Uploaded media
- 372
- Embedded media
- 1
- Comments
- 25
- Disk usage
- 1 GB