skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off
|
ejmartin wrote:
skibum5 wrote:
ejmartin wrote:
These are ACR 5.5 vs 5.6 with the 7D? The second of each pair clearly has much less artifacting, though there is some still left, which is intrinsic to ACR's demosaic method.
I'd be interested to see ACR 5.6 with the 7D vs the 50D.
yeah 5.5 vs. 5.6 with the 7D using the DPR ISO100 test scene
yeah i would be interested in seeing the 50D DPR test RAW since the real question is whether it really does at least deliver 50D detail without artifacting i suspect it can but can't be sure
i didn't check for general noise, for all i know whatever they did still leaves extra noise, but at least it is of a nice form and its not THAT critical at low ISO if it is of a nicer looking form
i sold my 50D so i can't make a test scene mysef
Why not use the Imaging-Resource test scene? That should be available for the 50D.
ok, after looking at the IR image (their copy mazed quite a lot) sample in 5.5 and 5.6 as expected 5.6 still solves the mazing however i am starting to think it does ever so slightly soften up the micro-contrast/detail at times, with some text on one of the bottles it seemed like i needed to use about three passes of 75%, 0.2 radius smart sharpen to truly even up the crispness of the bite. It's not too major though. Of course some of it alos might be different defauly curves and contrasts too.
it is pretty slight so i don't at all think we are anywhere near down to 40D levels of detail by any stretch, i think at most it could be the difference between 18MP and 15MP, but it might eat up any reach over a 50D (and remember the linear resolution differences between these cams are slight so it doesnt much to give it all back which is why you do need to peep to see if any actually deliver any more reach than the rest), i still have feeling it won't do worse than the 50D though and may even do a trace better in the end, which is all that matters but you really need to convince DPR to also release their 50D RAW test scene file if you want to know for sure
even left as is with same sharpening on both (7D and 50D) the 5.6 7D still did pull in more noticeably detail than the 50D, however, then again IR also placed the 7D closer to the subject  so that is sort of worthless. i will still post them up later. the 50D did appear to have a touch more of that micro-bite like 7D acr 5.5 vs acr 5.6 but i think the 18MP vs 15MP would be enough to make up for it.
it is also possible they did something fight moire a bit more and maybe that is the reason for the touch less crispness at times and not the re-balancing of things
as far as i could tell acr 5.5 vs. 5.6 make no difference whatsoever with the 50D files so i think only the 7D part of it has any new code at all
in the end so long as it at least delivers 50D reach with acr i guess it won't matter and i'm still thinking this is the case but the QC/design still seems to be perhaps a little reckless to me since DPP still doesn't handle many 7Ds all that well and they do seem to trade a touch of micro-crispness away (unless it really is all in tone curves) and it probably makes it a pain in the neck for raw developers. If you applied a few small radius passes i'd think you'd eliminate any SNR gain you made so i still don't know that i see the point of it although i'm sure there is one. I mean it is starting to seem like it will turn out to be no big deal in the end but I don't see what the whole point of it was either.
ACR 5.5 seems to make 7D images about 1/3 stop darker
i noticed that IR used 1/3 stop longer exposure for their 7D image (then again their lights seem to change a bit each time) and the 50D image still seemed a trace brighter (but this also brings acr into play really need to look at the raw)
ACR 5.5:
ACR 5.6:
also:
|
) using ACR 5.6:
.