Previous versions of brainiac's message #6185529 « 5DmkII less sharp than 5D! »
brainiac Offline [X]
Re: 5DmkII less sharp than 5D!
Daan B wrote:
I agree with you... The posted high 5D2 samples I have seen so far appear to have been (heavily) processed by in-camera NR. And it doesn\'t look very pretty to me...
But this is all done with JPEG\'s. I wonder how the RAW files will look. Will the in-camera NR affect the RAW files or not? And if so, how will that look in comparison to 1Ds3 RAW files? Since both cams use basically the same sensor, I don\'t expect differences in noise levels in RAW files to be beyond marginal though. But only time will tell
Well, I correctly predicted, in November last year, that the 1Ds3 would have a comparable noise performance (providing you want to make pictures, not crops) to the D3. I am going to be bold and make another prediction here: the 5D2 iso 12800 noise performance, optimally processed from raw, will look pretty much the same as that from the 1Ds3. Why?
(1) because Canon likely made some effort with the 1Ds3 sensor, so tweaks are unlikely to radically transform its performance, and
(2) sensor design and fabrication is a very expensive business in which costs are acutely sensitive to volume, so Canon would be foolish not to aim to use its latest sensor in more than one model at different price points, if it can get away with it, and
(3) Canon has stated that the 5D2 sensor is derived from the 1Ds3 design, and
(4) no detailed explanation has been offered of how the 5D2 sensor differs from that in the 1Ds3, and
(4) because 5D2 high iso performance is looking awfully familiar to me - it looks exactly like what i would get if I shot my 1Ds3 and didn\'t optimally process the files.
So basically the 5D2 is a 1Ds3, without all the fancy stuff. The fact that it does 3.9 fps suggests that the 1Ds3 could have done 7.8 fps if they had wanted to offer that, and that as we all know, these cameras are not the best that they can be in every feature, but are tailored to distinguish themselves from each other in the way that the marketing department wants them to. For instance, the 1Ds3 could have had a 6400 and 12800 iso setting, but Canon knows that pixel peepers and DPReview, in their ignorance, would have been scornful due to the lack of good in-camera NR.
Sep 19, 2008 at 09:01 AM
Previous versions of brainiac's message #6185529 « 5DmkII less sharp than 5D! »
