Soft files from the 1dx2?

[Loswr]

Here's one of the runs I did with the manual calibrations in FoCal, thanks for the tip Neuro, and it's way better than the automatic calibrations. I can't remember how high it went on the 1dx, but I thought it was around 1900 or something..

Unless your set up is exactly the same – and I mean exactly, target and lighting not touched or moved, exact same distance, everything – then you really can't compare the quantitative values between runs. If you want to make something of a comparison like that, you need to test everything back to back, historical data don't really work.

 

[Viggo]

Thanks for everyone's input! Much appreciated all the great help. I think I will just try to forget this issue and make the best of it, I'll forget how sharp the 1dx files were when the mkII files are all I have lol.

Here's a duck and a digger from today's testing round. Liked these and that hot exhaust fumes behind the digger.

 

[tron]

A friend of mine has sent me this link a few months ago...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/cameratruth2/29941484954/

 

[Viggo]

A friend of mine has sent me this link a few months ago...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/cameratruth2/29941484954/

That's funny, he's having trouble were mine is epically better than the 1dx

 

[Jack Douglas]

One has to be careful about any one individual or camera as far is good-bad is concerned. There may or may not be issues, no matter how elite the person's opinion of themselves is. It's not unlike reading reviews on Amazon, where someone is really ticked.

A couple people in that thread had this comment(fair or unfair I don't know):

"I was about to say the same thing. After almost four years of TVstaff complaining about the 1DX, why does he now want his 1DXII to be more like that? At least we can hopefully stop hearing about 1DX sensor spots when shooting at f32."

I have, independently so far observed that my 1DX2 seems to tend toward front focusing but I'm nowhere near up to speed and neither have I used it enough in the dead of winter, to be certain. I appreciate threads like this since it's a lot of money and this will be the one and only 1 series new camera I'll be buying.

Jack

 

[Viggo]

One has to be careful about any one individual or camera as far is good-bad is concerned. There may or may not be issues, no matter how elite the person's opinion of themselves is. It's not unlike reading reviews on Amazon, where someone is really ticked.

A couple people in that thread had this comment(fair or unfair I don't know):

"I was about to say the same thing. After almost four years of TVstaff complaining about the 1DX, why does he now want his 1DXII to be more like that? At least we can hopefully stop hearing about 1DX sensor spots when shooting at f32."

I have, independently so far observed that my 1DX2 seems to tend toward front focusing but I'm nowhere near up to speed and neither have I used it enough in the dead of winter, to be certain. I appreciate threads like this since it's a lot of money and this will be the one and only 1 series new camera I'll be buying.

Jack

One thing I have learned is that when a camera tracks and misses it's 90% in front, so for me it's not so much frontfocus as it is missed or lost focus.

One thing is though, which light you calibrate under and that tracking depends on absolute correct afma value, meaning for me +1 might look dead on, but tracking sucks, then +2 sticks everything. Sometimes 8 point is perfect and sometimes I think that will work, but spot af is better, every camera enough different to kill your spirit trying to nail focus.

And this is of course why I spend the first 5000 frames getting to know the camera, I would go insane spreading that knowledge over the lifespan of camera.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Viggo, I sometimes AFMA to a little back focus depending on subject and distance since the point of interest - often an eye, is generally not the most forward part of the body and often it's challenging to get a spot on an eye.

Just discovered another annoying item - with camera OFF if you remove a lens or card for more than a few seconds the camera reverts to #1 card - CF.

In other words, I have shot to the Cfast with CF installed. I shut off the camera, remove Cfast, check the photo on my computer, reinstall in camera, turn camera on and VOILA it's now shooting CF!!

Now I know, I can change it back but what a dumb set up, including defining Cfast as #2.

Jack

 

[Viggo]

Viggo, I sometimes AFMA to a little back focus depending on subject and distance since the point of interest - often an eye, is generally not the most forward part of the body and often it's challenging to get a spot on an eye.

Just discovered another annoying item - with camera OFF if you remove a lens or card for more than a few seconds the camera reverts to #1 card - CF.

In other words, I have shot to the Cfast with CF installed. I shut off the camera, remove Cfast, check the photo on my computer, reinstall in camera, turn camera on and VOILA it's now shooting CF!!

Now I know, I can change it back but what a dumb set up, including defining Cfast as #2.

Jack

Hmm, yeah that's weird... I only have CF atm, it works brilliantly, so awaiting price decrease

 

[Jack Douglas]

It takes perhaps 3 or 4 minutes for this switch to occur, not if your just swapping out cards immediately. Goes to show power off doesn't mean power off.

Jack

 

[Loswr]

Goes to show power off doesn't mean power off.

Look through the viewfinder with the camera 'powered off'. Then pull the battery and look through the VF again.

 

[BRunner]

Maybe Canon uses on 1DXII sensor stronger anti aliasing (AA) filter than on 1DX. Then you need to use more sharpening to get similar results at 100%. Same happened to me, when I switched from 1DsII (weak AA) to 1DsIII (strong AA). At 100% 1DsIII looks "softer", but after more sharpening, details are here.

Have you tried to compare both cameras on tripod on same subject and with same lens stopped down to f5.6 (I can see you have Zeiss MP 2/100 - this is perfect lens for this test). Then compare crops, if the 1DX still looks sharper. I unfortunately don't own 2/200L, but I quickly tried it in store and on 21Mpx 1DsIII it does not look wide open as sharp as mentioned Zeiss MP. Maybe the 18Mpx sensor was sweet spot for this lens WO.

 

[Viggo]

Maybe Canon uses on 1DXII sensor stronger anti aliasing (AA) filter than on 1DX. Then you need to use more sharpening to get similar results at 100%. Same happened to me, when I switched from 1DsII (weak AA) to 1DsIII (strong AA). At 100% 1DsIII looks "softer", but after more sharpening, details are here.

Have you tried to compare both cameras on tripod on same subject and with same lens stopped down to f5.6 (I can see you have Zeiss MP 2/100 - this is perfect lens for this test). Then compare crops, if the 1DX still looks sharper. I unfortunately don't own 2/200L, but I quickly tried it in store and on 21Mpx 1DsIII it does not look wide open as sharp as mentioned Zeiss MP. Maybe the 18Mpx sensor was sweet spot for this lens WO.

I have also been debating with myself about the AA filter, but have no idea if it's stronger or not.

Don't have the 1dx anymore so can't compare. The Zeiss lens is a gem and I bought it for 800 usd and must be one of the all time great bargains! But it's not as sharp as the 200, but they're more similiar than different apart from bokeh.

 

[arthurbikemad]

Viggo, I sometimes AFMA to a little back focus depending on subject and distance since the point of interest - often an eye, is generally not the most forward part of the body and often it's challenging to get a spot on an eye.

Just discovered another annoying item - with camera OFF if you remove a lens or card for more than a few seconds the camera reverts to #1 card - CF.

In other words, I have shot to the Cfast with CF installed. I shut off the camera, remove Cfast, check the photo on my computer, reinstall in camera, turn camera on and VOILA it's now shooting CF!!

Now I know, I can change it back but what a dumb set up, including defining Cfast as #2.

Jack

Off topic but Jack, never had this CF issue with changing a lens, or even leaving the camera bagged with no lens on, only time this happens is as was with other bodies like my 5D3 etc is when you close the card door, if the Cfast is removed and images downloaded etc then placed back into the camera the card selection remains the same, unless you close the card door, then it switches to what ever card remains in cam, re open the door and insert a Cfast card and the cameras card selection with remain on the last card selected, I.e the CF.

 

[scyrene]

The second shot is also pretty heavily sharperned

To the point of sharpening artifacts, which to me is too much.

To me, the parts of the images that are in focus look perfectly sharp. But at 200mm f/2 with fairly close subjects, you have only a few cm of DoF, so subatantial parts of your images are outside the DoF and appear soft.

I agree that there seems no problem regarding sharpness in this image. I honestly can't tell what the OP means, but it's of course entirely subjective what is acceptable or not.

 

[Viggo]

The second shot is also pretty heavily sharperned

To the point of sharpening artifacts, which to me is too much.

To me, the parts of the images that are in focus look perfectly sharp. But at 200mm f/2 with fairly close subjects, you have only a few cm of DoF, so subatantial parts of your images are outside the DoF and appear soft.

I agree that there seems no problem regarding sharpness in this image. I honestly can't tell what the OP means, but it's of course entirely subjective what is acceptable or not.

I'm just so used to the 1dx files and they are so sharp, but the total package the 1dx2 is a HUGE improvement.

 

[scyrene]

The second shot is also pretty heavily sharperned

To the point of sharpening artifacts, which to me is too much.

To me, the parts of the images that are in focus look perfectly sharp. But at 200mm f/2 with fairly close subjects, you have only a few cm of DoF, so subatantial parts of your images are outside the DoF and appear soft.

I agree that there seems no problem regarding sharpness in this image. I honestly can't tell what the OP means, but it's of course entirely subjective what is acceptable or not.

I'm just so used to the 1dx files and they are so sharp, but the total package the 1dx2 is a HUGE improvement.

Well if there is an issue, you might get used to it, especially if you no longer shoot with the 1Dx mark I. I found it initially hard to get used to the 5Ds files after 4 years with the 5D3, as the colour balance and noise characteristics were quite different with default settings, but now it's files from the older camera that look 'wrong'. Otherwise, there'll be a new 1Dx along in a few years

 

[tron]

The second shot is also pretty heavily sharperned

To the point of sharpening artifacts, which to me is too much.

To me, the parts of the images that are in focus look perfectly sharp. But at 200mm f/2 with fairly close subjects, you have only a few cm of DoF, so subatantial parts of your images are outside the DoF and appear soft.

I agree that there seems no problem regarding sharpness in this image. I honestly can't tell what the OP means, but it's of course entirely subjective what is acceptable or not.

I'm just so used to the 1dx files and they are so sharp, but the total package the 1dx2 is a HUGE improvement.

I am confused by this. You seem disappointed in 1DxII's sharpness but still consider it a HUGE improvement?

 

[Jack Douglas]

Viggo, I sometimes AFMA to a little back focus depending on subject and distance since the point of interest - often an eye, is generally not the most forward part of the body and often it's challenging to get a spot on an eye.

Just discovered another annoying item - with camera OFF if you remove a lens or card for more than a few seconds the camera reverts to #1 card - CF.

In other words, I have shot to the Cfast with CF installed. I shut off the camera, remove Cfast, check the photo on my computer, reinstall in camera, turn camera on and VOILA it's now shooting CF!!

Now I know, I can change it back but what a dumb set up, including defining Cfast as #2.

Jack

Off topic but Jack, never had this CF issue with changing a lens, or even leaving the camera bagged with no lens on, only time this happens is as was with other bodies like my 5D3 etc is when you close the card door, if the Cfast is removed and images downloaded etc then placed back into the camera the card selection remains the same, unless you close the card door, then it switches to what ever card remains in cam, re open the door and insert a Cfast card and the cameras card selection with remain on the last card selected, I.e the CF.

Thanks for the feedback. Here's what it takes, I had chosen the option,"auto switch card". Then with power OFF if you pop a card and reinsert, nothing changes, unless that card is out long enough, like taking a look at a shot on the computer, roughly 3 minutes, then it switches cards and you are stuck with manually switching it back. I have now selected "standard" and need to read up on what exactly is the best choice. All I want is for a full Cfast card to default to the second (CF) card.

Jack

 

[Deleted member 7828]

Maybe Canon uses on 1DXII sensor stronger anti aliasing (AA) filter than on 1DX. Then you need to use more sharpening to get similar results at 100%. Same happened to me, when I switched from 1DsII (weak AA) to 1DsIII (strong AA). At 100% 1DsIII looks "softer", but after more sharpening, details are here.

I suspect this is the issue going from the 5D3 to the 5D4. 5D4 files DEFINITELY need more USM tweaking (mostly fine sharpening), and in many cases I have to run USM on 5D4 files while similarly shot 5D3 files look fine out of camera. Although I'm sure part of it could have to do with the increase in MP as well. It really leaves me with mixed feelings because I really have come to find the extra cropping power of the 5D4 beneficial...but in certain instances (low light/contrast?) I feel 5D3 files come out a bit crisper. That said, the 5D4 does have less color noise and bleeding color issues at the ultra-high ISOs, so it's kind of a wash...

I don't have any experience with the original 1DX - but I did get the chance to test a 1DX II and take home some shots when I was still making that decision. Pics seemed to look fine to me, crisper than I expected actually given that most of Canon's newer cameras seem to err towards a softer default output anyway.

 

[Viggo]

The second shot is also pretty heavily sharperned

To the point of sharpening artifacts, which to me is too much.

To me, the parts of the images that are in focus look perfectly sharp. But at 200mm f/2 with fairly close subjects, you have only a few cm of DoF, so subatantial parts of your images are outside the DoF and appear soft.

I agree that there seems no problem regarding sharpness in this image. I honestly can't tell what the OP means, but it's of course entirely subjective what is acceptable or not.

I'm just so used to the 1dx files and they are so sharp, but the total package the 1dx2 is a HUGE improvement.

I am confused by this. You seem disappointed in 1DxII's sharpness but still consider it a HUGE improvement?

Oh yes absolutely ! Sharpness is the one thing that's not quite as good, but everything else about the files and the camera as a whole is MUCH better.