p.4 #2 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
gdanmitchell wrote:
I'm hoping that your requests is somewhat tongue-in-cheek...
Indeed, I haven't had serious problems with the IQ of the 5D2 so far.
Dawei Ye wrote:
Frame came out pitch black. Had to push significantly in post (approx 4-5 stops). Photographer error yes, and noisy image as a result fine, but the patterned noise is most distressing
Btw the banner is a smooth gloss finish, but here it looks like it's made out of checkered cloth
Thanks Dawei, I would try to use the dust&scratch filter in PS and then edit-fade/lighten. You probably agree though that this is rather a good sample
p.4 #3 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
Seems to me that we talk a lot about the latitude (or lack thereof, according to some) when "pushing" the 5D II files. I think we also ought to discuss "pulling," ie correcting for overexposure, and I mean really severe overexposure.
It appears that the 5D II files contain a wealth of detail in shots that you might, at first, think were beyond ruin due to things being so bleached out from overexposure. Not true. One of the strengths of the 5D II, I've just discovered, is its ability to recover from overexposure.
I will post images later but, for now, it's pretty safe to assume that you can go as much as 2-3 stops overexposed and still pull the detail out of the shot.
This being so, it then renders the whole "issue" of pattern noise and banding as moot. If you're experiencing a scene or situation with high contrast, deep shadows, etc, then overexpose and pull back in pp. No highlights lost. No pattern noise. No banding. No having to lift shadows beyond their stretching point.
The only other cameras I've owned that had a similar ability were the 40D and the Sigma SD9.
As I say, I will post samples later. My mother's in the hospital. Busy time for me ....
p.4 #4 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
veroman wrote:
I will post images later but, for now, it's pretty safe to assume that you can go as much as 2-3 stops overexposed and still pull the detail out of the shot.
Yep, I do this with my 40D all the time, and will with the 7D when I get it: a converter with good highlight recovery abilities and you're good to go.
One of the reasons I like Raw Therapee so much is that it has excellent highlights functionality - it can recreate details from what's left in any one of the channels if the other two are blown: sometimes colours aren't perfect, but that hasn't been a problem for me.
p.4 #6 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
Daan B wrote:
It is for me
If you are unlucky you get huge hue shifts by doing this.
Yes, but don't you think that color shifts are a lot easier to deal with than pattern noise or any other severe noise? Besides, I seem to be working with color shifts all the time, no matter what the exposure! No Canon or Nikon I've ever used gets the colors right upon file opening (D2x comes closest, I think).
p.4 #7 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
Doo-bop wrote:
Thanks Dawei, I would try to use the dust&scratch filter in PS and then edit-fade/lighten. You probably agree though that this is rather a good sample
^Thanks heaps for the tip, I'll give that a go
keithreeder wrote:
Looks like ACR to me, and - even if not pushed - it looks like a PP problem along the lines of "posterisation" caused by overly-heavy compression...
Here's a 100% crop with proof it's DPP and not pushed. Artifacts seem especially bad in this shot for some reason - maybe its my monitor calibration
Screenshot was taken, saved as a 24bit BMP, opened in photoshop then saved as a max quality JPG
EXIF indicates ALO and NR to be on at time of capture, but these were manually disabled in DPP
p.4 #8 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
veroman wrote:
Yes, but don't you think that color shifts are a lot easier to deal with than pattern noise or any other severe noise? Besides, I seem to be working with color shifts all the time, no matter what the exposure! No Canon or Nikon I've ever used gets the colors right upon file opening (D2x comes closest, I think).
- Steve
The problem is the hue shifts need seperate color correction treatment. Which will be hard because you have lost a lot of data in the 1st place. This will be totally different from correcting WB for an image. Even though opening up shadows can be quite noisy, you have more data to perform corrections on (if needed). I'd rather clean up shadow noise than spending hours correcting hue shifts in PP. Dfine2 or even the LR NR tool do a splendid and fast job of correcting noise. YMMV
p.4 #10 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
Greg Schneider wrote:
I was pretty bummed about this one. AF is not a strong point of the 5D2, although the center point is fairly capable.
Sweet.....a Skimmer on Lake Ontario.
Gregster, which AF point did you use on that shot and is that an FF image ?
I get that kind of shots here and there with any camera I've used....typically when I am not fast and incisive enough with aiming and focus placement including failure to prefocus.
Either way, based on an isolated shot like that I think it is near impossible for an onlooker to tell what might have gone wrong. A much larger shoot context and a number of image samples would be really needed for that.
I'm not sure if its me but it looks like more blotchy noise patterns in the first shot than I am seeing in the second example, would you happen to have a screen shot of the top left corner along with exif data? It looks like a compression issue more than anything else, IMO.
p.4 #13 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
jeremy_clay wrote:
Sweet justice.
? The noise patterns are clearly different from example to example. Again, this looks like processing issues NOT sensor issues. All of this talk about gridded pattern noise and yet there is none in the above example, rather blotchy 'noise' or compression artifacts instead. Of course the best way to find out is to DL the original file to have a look for yourself.
p.4 #15 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
M Vers wrote:
? The noise patterns are clearly different from example to example. Again, this looks like processing issues NOT sensor issues. All of this talk about gridded pattern noise and yet there is none in the above example, rather blotchy 'noise' or compression artifacts instead. Of course the best way to find out is to DL the original file to have a look for yourself.
p.4 #16 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
veroman wrote:
Oh please ... give us all a break....
- Steve
You're adorable. The issue is clear, if it doesn't affect you because high DR isn't something that matters to you, or every one of your shots is dead on perfectly exposed, then - congrats.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I've shot well over 10,000 frames with a 5D2 and I cannot point to a single shot that was "lost through pattern noise or whatever flaw" you are concerned about.
On the other hand, the 5D2 has performed admirably for me in a wide variety of situations and for shooting a wide variety of subjects: much landscape/seascape work including in alpine, seashore, desert environments with conditions including rain, snow, ocean spray, and dust storms; I have done significant amounts of night photography with the camera; I do a lot of urban landscape and street photography; although it isn't my thing, I even shot a wedding for a family member; I photographed several stages of the Tour of California bicycle race. I've made many prints from the images captured with the 5D2.
If you underexpose or improperly expose or apply extreme processes in post I can make images from my 5D or my 5D2 or any other camera I've used (including film cameras) look bad.
I'm hoping that your requests is somewhat tongue-in-cheek...
p.4 #19 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
jeremy_clay wrote:
.... The issue is clear, if it doesn't affect you because high DR isn't something that matters to you, or every one of your shots is dead on perfectly exposed, then - congrats.
You know full well that high DR matters to me and that most of my shots are near-correctly exposed. For the ones that aren't, the 5D II still works fine and even works miracles.
I will be the first to say that the pattern noise and banding can be replicated in quite a few of the low-ISO shots I've taken so far. But when pushed that far, they're not the kinds of shots I'd want to print or show to anybody. When these same shots are pushed responsibly, the pattern noise and banding cannot be seen.
I've looked pretty deeply into the pattern noise and banding phenomenon and can tell you this much: the 21MP Canon 5D II has been optimized for noise performance at high ISOs. The tradeoff was hidden banding and pattern noise at low ISOs. This is disturbing to some photographers, since 100% clean captures at low ISOs are of major importance to them (in which case they might be better off with a Nikon D3s).
It's of importance to me, too, since much of work is at ISO 400 and below. But because I have a camera that is ideally configured for world-class noise control at high ISOs, then I must be mindful of that and take more care with my exposures at ISO 100-400. And when I do, there are no issues whatsoever with banding and/or pattern noise.
p.4 #20 · 5DMKII flaws, post pictures which were lost because of the camera
Just curious, but how far do you have to push it before you run into problems? If you're pushing it two stops, you certainly can't complain if the image goes down the tubes. I would probably draw the line at one stop, but in between is the grey area...
