It seems that some detail is still present in the soft images.

[altenae]

It seems that some detail is still present in the soft images.
Maybe to much sharpening for this jpg,but maybe a good sign for the RAW files.

Example (from the Canon website) and cropped and saved at quality 8 due to filesize.
The focus is on her left eye.

 

[munsoned]

well thankfully it's an eyeball that is in focus, coming from a 5d III. Maybe i don't have to cancel my preorder now.. i just can't believe they would give out such bad test files, wow.

 

[jaduffy007]

well thankfully it's an eyeball that is in focus, coming from a 5d III. Maybe i don't have to cancel my preorder now.. i just can't believe they would give out such bad test files, wow.

I hear ya. There are some new RAWs up at Imaging Resource...and they look quite good to me. Those first jpegs..scary.

 

[tt]

Just for kicks. Was curious if you went bak to prerelease 5D mark II what was happening - were people having the same issues before launch?


Back when the 5D mark 2 was being launched -
Threads about it being soft.
http://www.prophotonut.com/2008/09/20/canon-5d-mk2-high-iso-pictures/

Why not buy the Nikon D700 instead the old threads cried?
http://blog.kareldonk.com/canon-eos-5d-mark-ii-not-worth-it-save-your-money/

 

[awinphoto]

Just for kicks. Was curious if you went bak to prerelease 5D mark II what was happening - were people having the same issues before launch?


Back when the 5D mark 2 was being launched -
Threads about it being soft.
http://www.prophotonut.com/2008/09/20/canon-5d-mk2-high-iso-pictures/

Why not buy the Nikon D700 instead the old threads cried?
http://blog.kareldonk.com/canon-eos-5d-mark-ii-not-worth-it-save-your-money/

People crushed the 5d2 when it first came out saying it was soft... The complaints went away eventually but people will see what they want to see.