Camera RAW 5.6 Beta vs Camera Raw 5.5
Photoframd has posted some comparison images of various RAW converters for the EOS 7D files.
“The First” Feature Length Film….
…. made using the 7D
http://www.theaspectratio.net/….
Disclaimer: I do not fact check “The first” claims.
Darwin Wigget’s 7D Review… the counterpoint
Pro Photo Home has posted a retort to the claims made by Darwin Wigget and his review of the 7D.
Pro Photo Home seems to be doing tests at f/5.6 & f/16. I think the issue with the 7D was in the f/8 to f/11 area. Most seem to be saying that diffraction sets in with larger apertures on the 7D compared to the XSi.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but check it out.
http://www.prophotohome.com/….
Old News, I forgot to post it
Here is Lee’s solution to filtering (some filters) ultra wide angle lenses.
The bad news? You still can’t use a polarizer. There is a company working on a solution so you can actually polarize these lenses as well.
thanks James
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
most of these comparisons seem strange to me, it you do a simple filter in Photoshop of say one of the artistic one like fresco on a 3000×2000 image at the PS default setting then resize the original image to 300×200 and run the same filter at the same settings they look way different.
I think you are seeing the same thing. if you have more pixels and you run a filter weather it is fresco or a sharpening process in a raw converter the same applies you must use different settings for different size files.
I found out this long ago when a client wanted the “painter ly” look on a billboard and I was using a Kodak pro back and found that it looked best at around 2MP not the 16MP It was shot it at. so if you are going to do the apples to oranges thing you better find a slide rule . I would bet as in most things in photography a square is involved 1.41421356 (the magic number in photography)
The Pro Photo Home test did not look at increased ISO values (from what we can tell). Comparison’s in better lighting and low ISOs is not the critical environment I am interested in. Most cameras show well under ideal circumstances. We want to know how it fares when the going gets tough….
These DSLRs are too expensive and heavy, for the proconsumer, to be buying and carrying one for this environment and one for that. We need a camera that holds up well in several different environments, though it might really shine in one or two. I guess until that happens, you need a 5D for landscapes and a 7D for outdoor action (if the focusing is working) and….
all the 450D shots look out of focus. I have 4 canon cameras and the 35mm f/1.4L
If my shots looked like that I would be getting a refund
I could tell that prophotohome test was going to be awful as soon as I read the sentence where he called Darwin Wiggett a blogger. His shots looked terrible. I’m also wondering how he managed to get crops that were pretty much exactly the same view with one camera having 50% more megapixels than the other. He never said whether or not he downsized, but I’m assuming that he did. Although I have a tremendous amount of respect for Darwin’s work, I feel his review wasn’t really very good either.
I have yet to see a really good review of the 7D, not that it matters, because it’ll be a long time before I get the money to upgrade from my 20D and my Elan 7E.
You shots look like that with your 100mm macro. Get a refund. Better yet, sell your gear, buy Nikon and go troll to some other forum.
this filter “solution” is not worthy
you cant use high density filters because light lurks under the filters and all you get are nice unsharp reflections of your own lens
im talking about infrared and high neutral density
not better than any cokin system
plus filters in this size are simply to expensive
i have hoped to find a good solution after my disaster with testing the canon 16-35 which wasnt sharp in the corners at any aperture setting and 1,2k euros for this big piece of plastic and glass that you can use as paperweight
huh? please explain
Many people think they can review camears, but photographing a chip bag with a few lights. They say they are photogrphers, but they don’t want to show us their work nor we can not see their work. I would rather believe a review by a good photographer than an unknown guy.
What’s wrong with having two cameras?
There is no perfect do-it-all camera because some priorities will always get compromised to meet other priorities, and a perfect do-it-all camera would require a perfect do-it-all lens and we all know that is not gonna happen.
In reality, serious photographers need multiple lenses, so having a second (or third) body can be very practical for several reasons, including: 1. you don’t have to change lenses as often, just grab the other camera and shoot. 2. it’s much faster to grab the second body/lens and shoot than it is switching lenses so you have fewer missed opportunity shots. 3. security, if something happens to one you can keep shooting with the other camera. 4. you get the best of FF (5D2) and crop (7D).
Very well said. I regularly carry two cameras in outdoor conditions. Besides you avoid the dust exposition in many dusty conditions. For example some pollens are sticky. The more Mp camera has the more the dust is an issue. Another advantage is that you can set each camera indoor to some initial settings and use it fast when necessary without much thinking. Sometimes it’s wise to preset one camera more in automatic setting if you can predict what might happen. The same is valid when you shoot action as well as wildlife. The cameras should be different and used lenses should correspond to predicted/ planned situations. So don’t sell your old cameras, especially if you like them.
The difference in raw processing of 7D files is pretty amazing. It has already been reported that the early beta for Adobe lightroom needs more tweaks in the reds, but usually DPP has the best color rendition.
I need to try phase one out, I use lightroom rignt now.
You are wrong. The tests made by Drew Strickland are fully competent. He clearly had defined the issue and positively proved it. He used lighting, subject and backdrop difficult for digital cameras and RAW converters. So difficult that he could compare different software. For me it is very clever setting, only apparently simple. He used proper lens also. Read again the text carefully — it’s worth it.
You either got a dud 16-35, or you’re a major pixel peeper or you suck.
Pick one.
Both tests certainly make me appreciate my Xsi and made my decision to skip the 7D and shoot for the 5D Mark II or maybe III! Will invest in more fast L primes for now…
Nothing wrong with two cameras. I had an Xsi with my 40D. I sold the XSi to my daughter, since she wanted to go DSLR, and I was going to replace it with another, but I can’t find one that I like that slides in around $1200.
I don’t expect a perfect single camera, but carrying two is challenging and expensive. And it is not something many consumers can afford to do, hence my interest in a good compromise camera that perhaps shines in a particular area.
I just need my second camera to be lightweight so my wife can carry it and use it herself. Yahhh…. that’s ticket.
We know paul smith is a very good world Brand .there are content many product. such as Paul Smith Shoes and paul smith bags .That all are popular for many people.
I kind of hate this whole discussion on megapixels or sharpness. Have you have enlarged a 35mm negative to the sizes that are possible now with digital and still retain sharpness, without expensive, professional software. Not even a Leica with their sharpest lens set at the perfect aperture could resolve as well as some of even the entry level dSLR’s. I don’t mind a little softness, and neither have any of my customers. I don’t mind a little noise, and with the right noise pattern, like the one that comes from my 30D, it’s easy to make it look like a tight film grain without much loss of detail, and is completely unobtrusive. The 7D is a perfectly capable camera, and so is the D300s, and the D90, and the K20d, oh yeah, and the E-3 or E-30. I have had a chance to use the G line of Panasonics and the new Sony cameras in the alpha series. Unless your client is making prints larger than 24″x36″ or 36″x48″, you really don’t need more than what these camera can offer in terms of image quality. I have made PERFECTLY great prints at 24″x36″ with my 30D with out any problem, from my perspective or my clients’. The whole argument comes down to weather it’s comfortable to use, and the EOS line and especially the 7D are very comfortable for me to use. I’m used to the EOS line and have test driven the 7D, I know the glass, I know the system, it’s comfortable. This whole discussion/argument over who or what is better when it comes to megapixels and sharpness should really just end. But that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Early in this year I bought EF 24-105/5 L IS USM for my 450D (Xsi) because it had very good test results and I thought that it would be a perfect mate. I was wrong, the lens is the kit lens for old 5D and 12 Mp on APS-C is to much for it, at least to my copy. Probably I should go for 24-70/2.8 but not L. The 7D has so many tempting features that I won’t give up for sure. I need to wait until the end of January, then the prices should be ripe.
Amen… You are exactly right… There are 2 types of photographers, old school photographers who knows the progression of film and digital photography and appreciates where we are now and new photographers who started in the game after the digital conversion and gripes about where we have come to regarding technology.
Agreed, I have both these for the use in weddings to save lens changes and in case of unseen probs. As a bonus they take the same batteries so I have 4 to mix around. 5DmkII with 20-105f4IS and 7D with 70-200 f2.8IS is my perfect setup.
just looks like the 7d is stuck on kenrockwell mode
Its been a couple of years since I used to Capture One for RAW conversion because I find DPP work better with my 40D files and I continue using DPP when I upgraded to the 5DMk2. After reading prophoto I decide to download the latest Capture One and my RAW files now look much enhanced with better DR.
believe me, a 17-55mm F2.8 is worth more than a 7d for your images unless your doing sports.
My posts were deleted? Why?
You need to calibrate your 24-105 or your camera or something. True that it was introduced as the kit lens for the original 5D, but it’s got all the resolution you need on a 1Ds3 too
co-signed
pixel peepers need to get a life
DPP is bloody horrible IMVHO. I’m dredding my trusty 20D dying one day as with a new camera comes new processing software as RSE wont work with newer RAW fils. I do not fancy using DPP.
Many people have alos become fans of Paul Smith Shoes since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like Paul Smith Wallets and Paul Smith Belts ,It designs very good.
I simply think that my copy of 24-105/4 was assembled by a robot which had a period that day, I mean some oil leakage, hehe.
what ???
Sure your copy of the lens is defective cause this lens is amazing.
I used it for a year on a Xsi and now on my 7D. Saying that 12Mp on a APS-C is “too much for it” makes NO SENSE.
Seriously, this lens is perfect on a 5D Mark II which is 21 Mp and amazing on a 7D which is 18 Mp. I can honestly tell that the 18 Mp revealed me the potential of this lens.
So make sure your camera and lens are well calibrate and… think twice before claiming a xsi is “too much” for a L lens…
For another opinion on the 7D check out http://www.juzaphoto.com.
Quote: “I bought a Canon 7D for myself. It will be my new main camera body, and I’ll keep the 1DsIII as second body…in the next days I’m going to explain why and to post the first part of the review!”
That review should make for some interesting reading when it comes out.
If you’re going to spam, at least spam with good English.
I have become a fan of shoving Paul Smith Shoes up the rear ends of the soulless spammers who promote them. It feels very good.
Thanks for the heads up.
I was honestly SHOCKED, to say the least, when I read what Juza wrote.
Wow. Really wow. Can’t wait to read his upcoming article.
Spam. Welcome to the internet.
I have a 5d(classic) and a 450d xsi…my xsi deliver photos way better than the crops posted on the review. The xsi samples look out of focus.
Oh well! Now I will wait for the CANON EOS MIX
It will have 7d AF
Full frame like 5d
Hight iso and speed 1d markIV
12 megapixels 450d xsi
video capabilities 5d mark II
Intuitive like n…ops
:)
It all depends on your priorities, T1i is light and compact, or wait for the 60D.
ken rockwell mode.. lulz!
that is no suprise to me as most of his shots are taken with a 500d because of the crop factor. the 7d exceeds the 500d so it would be the natural replacemnet.
I looked through his galleries including the one he put up recently for his Costa Rica trip.
And the camera he uses most is the 1Ds3.
The last one, you will see that he used the 500d 11 times and the 1ds mark III 10 times. he mostly use the 500d when he needs the extra reach while the 1ds is used when the object is either close enough or for micro shots.
Personally I heard that anyone who buys Paul Smith stuff gets eaten by lions. Avoid Paul Smith stuff unless you want to get eaten by lions!