Sorry I have posted this here before but I just wanna do it again since I did not get many replies the last time.

To owners of 1D2N, I wonder if you have tried similair shots as following from your 2N with 17-40L? If you have, did you notice some wierd dark shadows?

Pic #1, 1D2N * 17-40L@17, f4, 1/13s, iso400



100% crop of the marked area from 1D2N



100% of a similiar crop from 1D3, 17-40L@17, f4, 1/50. iso3200



100% of a similiar crop from 1Ds2, 17-40L@17, f4, 1/30. iso1600



100% of a similiar crop from 20D, EFs10-22@12, f4, 1/13s, iso400



Not really a fair comparison but it shows the weird "shadow" I am having trouble with.

Pic#2, 1D2N * 17-40L@17, f4, 1/40s, iso400



100% crop of the marked area



Pic#3 1D2N * 17-40L@17, f7.1, 1/30s, iso500



100% crop of the marked area, check the "SEIKO"



I have tried to take the same shots with both my 1D3 and 1Ds2 and the pix are great, without those shadows.

Really appreciate your opinions about what causes those shadows. Thanx in advance.

Edited by ivanshusky on Dec 14, 2007 at 09:27 PM GMT

Moire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moir%C3%A9_pattern

It can happen sometimes.

I think you'll find instances where the opposite is true. It really depends on the pattern you're looking at in relation to the sensor's resolution.

What appears to be happening there is that in some parts of the image the frequency and angle of the divisions in the ceiling pattern matched the pitch and angle of the sensor sites creating the moire pattern. That is one of the reasons the sensor has anti-alias filter over it which slightly blurs the image. It is random and not much you can do about it.

Thank you very much for your fast replies.

I am not sure if it is moire. Check another example here

1D2N * 17-40L@17, f5, 4s, iso100





I dont have these shadows from my 20D with EFs10-22@13.

I have tried with at least 5 different 1D2N bodies and they all have the shadows. That makes me think this could be a thing with 1D2N.

Maybe we're not getting what you actually have a problem with. Are you talking about the "shadows" around the lights, which sort of look like sharpening halos?

Yes, its the "shadows" around the lights. All these pix were taken in raw and those shadows are visible when viewing the raw file without any sharpening.

Edited by ivanshusky on Dec 14, 2007 at 09:23 PM GMT

I think that is just some sensor blooming artifact.

What problems do you see with pics #1 and #3?

In pic #2, both in the full image and the 100% crop, there's moire on the ceiling at the top of the image.

So is 1D2N more likely to have sensor blooming than other models? Cuz as I mentioned earlier other cameras I own do not exhibit the same phenomenon.

Okay, I see what you're talking about now that you're posting the comparisons. That's a really, really strange effect and I'm at a total loss to explain it.

Hope I am not taking too much bandwidth here.

Ths is the last example which in under relatively better lighting condition and the lens is stopped down to f7.1

1D2N * 17-40L@17, f7.1, 1/30s, iso100



100% crop



I really think this "shadow" effect is a 1D2N thing since all the 5 different 1D2N bodies I tested have it.

What you are referring to is banding correct? I had severe banding in my 1D Mark IIN (large image that showed up at high iso and more mildly, like yours, at ISO 400

http://www.pbase.com/gaocus/image/88689922/

Try ISO 1600 and see if it intensifies

I had my body serviced by Canon - it took two rounds - and they fixed it. They basically replaced the sensor assembly (which I believe included the sensor), some PCB, and some flexible circuit boards.

Gene

Hi Gene, its not the banding I am referring to. Please have a look at the 1D3, 1Ds2 and 1D2N comparison. Those black dots are not shown in other models but the 1D2N.

I have had one of my 1D2N in Canon in the past 5 MONTHS and they just cannot fix and refuse to give me my money back.

Watch the 1DMKIII thread it's mentioned there too by "andregold".

Look here

dIggO

Thank you very much dIggO. I am glad I am not the only one noticing this 1D2N shadow thing. This is crazy!

Yes, I see what you are talking about now. On the monitor I am at right now it looked like some banding in that airport photo - maybe it is runways


ivanshusky wrote:
Hi Gene, its not the banding I am referring to. Please have a look at the 1D3, 1Ds2 and 1D2N comparison. Those black dots are not shown in other models but the 1D2N.

I have had one of my 1D2N in Canon in the past 5 MONTHS and they just cannot fix and refuse to give me my money back.

Yes, its actaully the runways.

This shadow thing is driving me crazy. Since my 1D3 has the AF issue so its only the 1D2N I can use for sports and this phenomenon with 1D2N is just not acceptable.

I am really curious why no one noticed this before, afterall 1D2N has been around for some time already. Or maybe only a few batches of 1D2N suffer from this issue??

Oh wow, that's really weird. Thanks for posting the additional comparison images. I have no idea what that is...

I notice that all the pics are from the 17-40. Does it happen with other lenses too?

Can someone reproduce this with the N (maybe from another batch, differnet serial number?) and another 17-40?

How about the MK II and 17-40?

Your not using a UV filter or anything are you?
Gene

This shadow thing is not only limited to the 17-40L, but it shows the most with that lens. At least its the lens I used for testing.

I have also noticed pix with shadows from both 70-200 f2.8 IS L, and 400 f2.8 IS L.

No UV was used for all of those pix. The Canon lens protector filter was used. I have also tested without the protector filter on and it really does not make any difference, shadow wise.

I noticed this at a second glance in your images. I guess I would describe it as a "dark echo". I assume with the verticals you have tilted your camera 90 degrees to the left, as the dark echo is on the right of light sources in landscape mode?

For some reason, the sharpness of your 20D, 1Ds2 and 1DMkIII shots pale in comparison to your 1D2N shots. Not just in sharpness but the 1D2N shots even lack the halos seen in the equivalent 1DMkIII shot, they have a very different quality about them, they look more technically correct if you will. It also means I don't feel your equivalent shots from the other bodies are equivalent enough.

At this point I'm thinking it's the RAW converter but need better equivalents from the other 2 bodies to prove or deny it. Specifically I'm thinking that, for same reason, your RAW converter is for some reason grabbing pixels too far from home during the demosaicing process. Which RAW converter are you using? And is there anything in your workflow that is giving the 1D2N shots such a different feel?

Hi photogenix, those pix are not to compare the iq of each body but to show those wierd "shadows".

Just checked, all of the pix are converted from ACR. Those shadows have nothing to do with raw converter. I can see them by using DPP as well.

ivanshusky wrote:
This shadow thing is not only limited to the 17-40L, but it shows the most with that lens. At least its the lens I used for testing.

I have also noticed pix with shadows from both 70-200 f2.8 IS L, and 400 f2.8 IS L.

No UV was used for all of those pix. The Canon lens protector filter was used. I have also tested without the protector filter on and it really does not make any difference, shadow wise.

OK. The sensor is highly reflective and can project back on the filter resulting in ghosting under low light high contrast. Very odd what you see.

Gene