Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

  

  Previous versions of yauyi's message #8565755 « 5D2 looks "digital" compare to 5D? »

  

yauyi
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
5D2 looks "digital" compare to 5D?


Peter Figen wrote:
Breitling - Your first sunset with the tree and the bird formation is a great example of how a digital capture can look, well, digital. The giveaway of is the yellow concentric band around the sun and how that transitions into the surrounding sunset. It\'s also that most digital captures have a shortage of midtone contrast compared to film and a much harsher transition from highligihts into specular highlights. Shoot that on film and see how much better that will look on a similar sunset. There is also the raw converter used, and if you haven\'t tried RawDeveloper (http://www.iridient.com/products/rawdeveloper.html) specifically for those types of images, you\'re missing out on what your files are capable of delivering. What RD can do for a sunset, once you\'ve figured out the myriad of options available to you will make you think you had used a different camera.

Most of what makes digital images look \"digital\" is the person doing the post production. While the 5D did have a very nice look, I don\'t prefer those files over those from the 1DsMKII and MKIII I have owned. But maybe a well exposed ISO 100 image from the original 1Ds.


wait, what you described sounds more like a monitor/display issue, if you change your display property from 32bit to 16bit(or lower) you\'ll see a heck lot more of those type of harsh transition!!



Jun 13, 2010 at 06:09 PM
yauyi
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
5D2 looks "digital" compare to 5D?


Peter Figen wrote:
Breitling - Your first sunset with the tree and the bird formation is a great example of how a digital capture can look, well, digital. The giveaway of is the yellow concentric band around the sun and how that transitions into the surrounding sunset. It\'s also that most digital captures have a shortage of midtone contrast compared to film and a much harsher transition from highligihts into specular highlights. Shoot that on film and see how much better that will look on a similar sunset. There is also the raw converter used, and if you haven\'t tried RawDeveloper (http://www.iridient.com/products/rawdeveloper.html) specifically for those types of images, you\'re missing out on what your files are capable of delivering. What RD can do for a sunset, once you\'ve figured out the myriad of options available to you will make you think you had used a different camera.

Most of what makes digital images look \"digital\" is the person doing the post production. While the 5D did have a very nice look, I don\'t prefer those files over those from the 1DsMKII and MKIII I have owned. But maybe a well exposed ISO 100 image from the original 1Ds.


ah i see, i guess it depends on what you are shooting and it has a lot to do with the processor, i suppose a camera with higher dynamic range shouldn\'t have that kind of problem you mentioned



Jun 13, 2010 at 06:02 PM





  Previous versions of yauyi's message #8565755 « 5D2 looks "digital" compare to 5D? »

 




This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.