1dx mk2 files and Lightroom , can't get sharpness/detail still...

[Viggo]

Hi guys!

I have written about this before, but I was basically told I was too picky and a pixel peeper, but I'll try again since it's been a while and perhaps more people have gotten their cameras and have exerpienced the same issue.

The issue is simply lack of detail and sharpness. With the 1dx mk1 I could oversharpen and still see more and more detail, but with artifacts. The normal values I used with the 1dx mk1 looks completely soft like OOF with the 1dx mk2. I bump the values up to about 70-80 on amount, 0,8 on radius and 50 for detail, and still looks very soft with lots of details lost. The only ay to get sharper images is to resize to a smaller mp-value and use HighPass sharpening in Photoshop.....

Does anyone else experience this, and if not, are you using Lr?

Thanks! Please answer seriously or not at all as I'm pretty frustrated with this,,,,

 

[Jopa]

I also noticed something but didn't pay much attention before reading your post. What about Canon DPP? LR kind of sucks in general. The 5dsr files look awful in it, C1 or DPP work WAY better.

 

[Viggo]

I also noticed something but didn't pay much attention before reading your post. What about Canon DPP? LR kind of sucks in general. The 5dsr files look awful in it, C1 or DPP work WAY better.

Thanks for yout input. When you say the files suck in Lr, in what way do you feel they are better in DPP?

The reason I use Lr is because I know it, and the fact that all the others I have tried can't figure out how I can see my editing and I find no option to mask sharpening etc..

 

[Larsskv]

I have also noted (probably because you mentioned it) that the 1DXII files aren't very sharp at 100% view. However, I find them sharp enough and don't pay much attention to it. If I needed to make a large print, I would try DPP and the lens optimizer tool.

 

[Viggo]

I have also noted (probably because you mentioned it) that the 1DXII files aren't very sharp at 100% view. However, I find them sharp enough and don't pay much attention to it. If I needed to make a large print, I would try DPP and the lens optimizer tool.

Thanks! It's better that it is more of us than just me either way.

I downloaded DPP and tried, and, to me, it's much worse in handling the files, or at least getting the results I like. I can't live without my ColorChecker profiles and they look very jpeggy

 

[Jopa]

I also noticed something but didn't pay much attention before reading your post. What about Canon DPP? LR kind of sucks in general. The 5dsr files look awful in it, C1 or DPP work WAY better.

Thanks for yout input. When you say the files suck in Lr, in what way do you feel they are better in DPP?

The reason I use Lr is because I know it, and the fact that all the others I have tried can't figure out how I can see my editing and I find no option to mask sharpening etc..

Based strictly on the 5dsr RAW experience, I can tell the files opened in LR look much darker with excessively high contrast, compared to DPP or C1. I don't use DR optimization or any other "enhancements" (I know DPP would apply them automatically). I've ended up buying Huelight color profiles so LR could be usable (as an alternative to conversion in DPP -> LR).

 

[Viggo]

I also noticed something but didn't pay much attention before reading your post. What about Canon DPP? LR kind of sucks in general. The 5dsr files look awful in it, C1 or DPP work WAY better.

Thanks for yout input. When you say the files suck in Lr, in what way do you feel they are better in DPP?

The reason I use Lr is because I know it, and the fact that all the others I have tried can't figure out how I can see my editing and I find no option to mask sharpening etc..

Based strictly on the 5dsr RAW experience, I can tell the files opened in LR look much darker with excessively high contrast, compared to DPP or C1. I don't use DR optimization or any other "enhancements" (I know DPP would apply them automatically). I've ended up buying Huelight color profiles so LR could be usable (as an alternative to conversion in DPP -> LR).

Hmm, and this is after everything is reset in Lr? I know they apply all kinds of stuff when you first install, but the first thing I do is reset EVERY little bit of Adobe cooking. The "Adobe Standard" color profile s horrible and often will look too contrasty, but don't use it any way. I compared the opened and reset files in Lr and DPP and they look exactly the same. Maybe it's a default tone curve or something that's messing up for you in Lr?