skibum5
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off
|
gfiksel wrote:
ejmartin wrote:
gfiksel wrote:
Well, here is a Color Checker shot at ISO 100, defocused.
Developed in LR3beta, at 100% and 200%, sharpness at 25 (default) and 150 (maximum)
In addition, mRaw is shown for comparison.
What can I say... Yes, at 200% and sharpness all way up one can see the mazing. At normal sharpness level and magnification it appears to be normal. The mRaw option exhibits it even to a lesser extend
Your jpeg compression level of 6 has inadvertently done a bit of NR for you; that is why the 100% view doesn't show the artifacts as much as 200% view, and even the 200% view has smeared them substantially (BTW this is why I use png's for this sort of demonstration -- there is no compression in png's, it is a lossless format; I wish this site would enable its software to display png, since it is a common, open format for web display).
mRAW will iron out the artifacts because it is downsampling below the scale at which they are resolved. It has always been the case that the artifacts can be avoided by smearing the data and lowering the resolution. For me the issue has always been, is there a way to avoid the artifacts while maintaining the full 18MP of resolution.
I don't think it's compression. First, it was level 7, not 6 
Second, I see the same in uncompressed images as well. Here's the same at compression 10:
I understand your argument about the mRaw format. However, its an attractive shooting option for many.
one thing to keep in mind is that the exact shade can make a difference in how noticeable the mazing is, on my CCC some squares show it strongly some only minorly
another thing is what settings did you use?
I used ACR settings for pre-sharpening and NR of 20 sharpness, 0.5 radius (to maximize the finest details in my images), 25 detail, 0 masking, 0 luma NR, 9 Chroma NR (for ISO100) and then did a multi-pass sharpening in CS4 (it shows using both my normals methods the agressive and slightly more toned back settings, although more apparent with the former).
Again, with an old 20D/50D color checker, if I do that, ALL squares simply looks silky smooth and noisless as to be expected of a smooth, slightly OOF surface taken at ISO100.
Of course maybe the 7D does need some special thigns to be done, so maybe it is not fair to use ACR 5.5, but at least it is fair to note that the 7D wont play well with quite a few demosaic algorithms that had worked fine for almost any camera before.
Even Canon's own DPP definitely shows left over signs of the problem that do not appear when I use it on files from other cameras.
C1v5 perhaps does the best, especially at default settings (although at default it doesn't bring as much fine micro-contrast and detail as it did with older cameras or can be gotten otherwise form a 7D, that said it might be possible to turn luma NR down and boost sharpening to get it to a reasonable level without bringing back too many issues, still need to play around with it more, a side note is that I don't like that C1 doesn't filter out, at all, any of the extreme black or white dots, in fact with the 7D it seems to work an awful lot like DPP only it allows many more fine tunings of settings).
anyway i'm waiting on ACR 5.6 now, DPR pics appeared promising, but it is hard to say really.
|
: 
. But I guess fake 18mp + fake high ISO = better sales after all. 