Switch back and forth between the 25600 image and the 6400 image and you know where to look.
What do you guys think about this. Am i seeing ghosts, or do we have a 5D mark II like problem?
Those bands seem absent at ISO 3200, become barely visible at ISO 6400, and get worse as the ISO increases. Not good, unless this is some sort of processing artifact.
RobAmy wrote:
The EOS R had a banding also issue too and I believe a firmware fixed it or at least improved it I believe. Maybe the same here also.
The R banding was a holdover from the 5D4 sensor it used, or at least that's how it was explained. This is more worrisome because it's a brand new sensor and this is the last behavior we should be seeing before this thing ships with their own custom JPEG engine creating these files.
RoamingScott wrote:
The R banding was a holdover from the 5D4 sensor it used, or at least that's how it was explained. This is more worrisome because it's a brand new sensor and this is the last behavior we should be seeing before this thing ships with their own custom JPEG engine creating these files.
Good point I was not thinking about the new sensor.
Besides the banding, that 800mm lens is not looking good at all. More like the old version 1 400 DO than anywhere close to the vII. Even when downscaled to 24MP the 800 is soft with very low contrast.
As for the banding, I sure hope it's a case of the user selecting silent shutter, as mentioned above. DPR does great in their reviews but are just terrible when it comes to doing sample galleries. Their best gallery shooter was Rishi, but I don't think he works with them any longer?
Of note, all of these images were shot in 2 second timer mode, and Auto Exposure Bracketing was enabled. I don't actually know whether LENR would be enabled here?
Edit: On my EOS R, these settings do result in LENR being applied.
There was a video out. Not sure if it as the July 9th presentation or another where someone showed 12,800 ISO shots that looked very good. I have been looking for a few days but I can't find it. I'll try again.
JohanEickmeyer wrote:
Besides the banding, that 800mm lens is not looking good at all. More like the old version 1 400 DO than anywhere close to the vII. Even when downscaled to 24MP the 800 is soft with very low contrast.
As for the banding, I sure hope it's a case of the user selecting silent shutter, as mentioned above. DPR does great in their reviews but are just terrible when it comes to doing sample galleries. Their best gallery shooter was Rishi, but I don't think he works with them any longer?
JohanEickmeyer wrote:
Besides the banding, that 800mm lens is not looking good at all. More like the old version 1 400 DO than anywhere close to the vII. Even when downscaled to 24MP the 800 is soft with very low contrast.
I'm not sure I agree. Fro's sample images from the zoo were sharper than I expected. Contrast is so-so, but for 800mm at under $1000, the quality seems quite good. https://froknowsphoto.com/r5r6animalaf/
AvianScott wrote:
I'm not sure I agree. Fro's sample images from the zoo were sharper than I expected. Contrast is so-so, but for 800mm at under $1000, the quality seems quite good. https://froknowsphoto.com/r5r6animalaf/
I was going by the DPR samples, which look bad. Did Fro post converted shots or just the RAW files? I can't open any R6 or R5 files in any RAW converter I have.
JohanEickmeyer wrote:
I was going by the DPR samples, which look bad. Did Fro post converted shots or just the RAW files? I can't open any R6 or R5 files in any RAW converter I have.
He somehow found a way to convert them to DNG so they can be processed in LR.
