Geoff Hui wrote:
Some great landscape and travel photos by Emmanuel Nataf, taken with Canon EOS R5
Link below https://emmanuelnataf.com/lofoten-islands/
Some beautiful images here. Loving the dynamic range on many of these. Seems to be lots of details in shadows. Not sure how he processed them all but it didn’t look like much noise was introduced in shadows of sunset shots, high contrast shots, etc.
Couple snowy plovers from the beach last night. A testament to their camouflage that this was the first time the eye AF had a little trouble. was able to lock on the bird no problem but would move off of the eye even though the bird didn't change position. 100-400, crop mode.
I was curious how the 400 DO II was working on he R5? I plan on using mine whenever I get my R5. Also wondering if you had a chance to use the 2x extender on the DO.
The 400mm DO II works great with this camera. It is the best with the 2x so far that I have used. It will make a great lens/camera combo.
Out of curiosity, what sort of PP workflow are you using?
I was in ES actually. Not all have rolling shutter issues, many are very usable. My basic work flow is open in LR do basic color and cropping, send to PS and if needed I use Topaz Denoise and then sharpen last.
RobAmy wrote:
I was in ES actually. Not all have rolling shutter issues, many are very usable. My basic work flow is open in LR do basic color and cropping, send to PS and if needed I use Topaz Denoise and then sharpen last.
ES, impressive. I've been hearing doom and gloom over the ES and so far have been very pleased with the lack of the rolling shutter effect as compared to my a7riv which has a much slower read rate. In some circumstances, I am sure it will manifest but for the vast majority of applications, ES on the R5 is fine (other than a need to turn down the 20 FPS).
The reason that I was asking about the workflow is that I've been using DPP for the RAW conversion and then exporting as .tiff to other software for final editing. The RAW files look great, though I am a bit concerned that it appears DPP is cooking the files a bit. The files seem to require little other than some minor black/white point adjustment, etc. In other words they almost look like processed .jpgs. After I make the minor tweaks of the .tiff in the software and then export as .jpgs, the results have been less than spectacular. It's something that I need to troubleshoot a bit more as I haven't worked with DPP for years. Thanks for the thoughts and keep posting the great images.
Is a 100-500 a consideration? I have to tell you the R5 has made me fall in love with my 500 IS II again.
armd wrote:
ES, impressive. I've been hearing doom and gloom over the ES and so far have been very pleased with the lack of the rolling shutter effect as compared to my a7riv which has a much slower read rate. In some circumstances, I am sure it will manifest but for the vast majority of applications, ES on the R5 is fine (other than a need to turn down the 20 FPS).
The reason that I was asking about the workflow is that I've been using DPP for the RAW conversion and then exporting as .tiff to other software for final editing. The RAW files look great, though I am a bit concerned that it appears DPP is cooking the files a bit. The files seem to require little other than some minor black/white point adjustment, etc. In other words they almost look like processed .jpgs. After I make the minor tweaks of the .tiff in the software and then export as .jpgs, the results have been less than spectacular. It's something that I need to troubleshoot a bit more as I haven't worked with DPP for years. Thanks for the thoughts and keep posting the great images.
Is a 100-500 a consideration? I have to tell you the R5 has made me fall in love with my 500 IS II again....Show more →
I used DPP early on and really did not care for it. I think once I get the Adobe camera presets it will improve even more. I found ES very good, I have had a few that come out strange for sure but very usable. I did order the 100-500mm and Canon just fulfilled the order but no shipping yet. I will try it but honestly the 100-400mm with extenders works so well. I am not sure if it makes much sense at the cost. If lighter feels betterand a little more reach, maybe? I agree all the lens are better, Canon did very good imho.
Dave_E wrote:
Geoff those are some amazing shots with your usual magical light and backgrounds.
Dave
Thanks Dave. I have to give a big thanks to Pius for letting me borrow his brand new baby for not one but now two outings. Luckily he only has to slum it with a 1DXIII when I have the R5
RobAmy wrote:
The 400mm DO II works great with this camera. It is the best with the 2x so far that I have used. It will make a great lens/camera combo.
Thanks for the info Rob! Great to hear!
Hopefully, I won’t have to wait too long for my R5 to come.
