arbitrage wrote:
Thanks Rob...please share some 400DOII/2xTCIII shots when you have the time. I'd be using that combo at least 75% of the time if I splurge on the R5. My R5 purchase is basically hinging on finding a local used 400DOII to buy right now.
You're the reason I bought a minty used 400DO II a few weeks ago. I started following several of you guys on Flickr and when you started talking about the potential of the 400DO II on the R5 I started looking out for one. Thanks!!
These look tack sharp too, until you enlarge them. Then they look like a mess. Looks to me like some sort of digital compression, they do not look soft when enlarged. But just a mess of pixels.
I don’t have an extension tube but will be testing this setup when mine arrives. Pieces are dribbling. Got the grip and 1.4x. Now awaiting the camera! Going to be a long wait I am afraid. I can’t wait to test that focus stack in camera option for macro and ultra wide landscape. Should be a lot more fun that doing it manually. Dunes would be another awesome subject with auto focus stacking. Would love it if someone could test out that feature to see how well it works.
Lassep wrote:
Its not that they look out of focus, it simply looks to me as if there is some kind of digital processing done to them. They are not pixel level sharp, none of them.
My guesstimate is the fact that none of the posters are using RAW yet. Its likely the inbody JPG engine causing this.
My R5 arrives Tuesday. I'm really looking forward to the chance to test this with various L glass plus the "kit" 24-105RF that's coming with it. Looking at the various Flickr albums and "pixel peeping," there's really no firm RAW processing being done yet (correct me if I'm wrong). For example, I'm a big fan of DxO and I'm sure I'll need to convert to dng files before working on my first images. Hopefully they'll add the R5 profiles soon. I'm guessing once a reliable workflow with raw files comes to fruition, images like the one shot on the D850 will be possible with really good glass. The D850 also has no AA filter which might help enhance detail, but with proper settings and post processing, the R5 images should be comparable. I'll also test my A7R4 and A7R3 with comparable glass (and no AA filter) against the R5 and see how they compare. Aside from the pixel peeping attempts, I think much of what we're seeing is people learning how to use this tool. As more information becomes available, I expect we'll see plenty of tack sharp images AND beautifully composed ones too! Dialing in the best settings takes time and practice. The R5 will be no different. And for the record, that shot done with the D850 and 400mm f2.8 is stunning in its detail.
Dragonfire wrote:
When I dropped my 1D IV and 400L 5.6 the mounting flange on the lens snapped and I called Toshio and asked if he could replace the flange.
Toshio said "If I have the correct flange" then he explained that Canon makes a series of flanges and that is how they adjust a lens.
So, now you know.
My guess is that is for phase detect AF because for contrast detect you don't need any adjustments.
aae991 wrote:
My R5 arrives Tuesday. I'm really looking forward to the chance to test this with various L glass plus the "kit" 24-105RF that's coming with it. Looking at the various Flickr albums and "pixel peeping," there's really no firm RAW processing being done yet (correct me if I'm wrong). For example, I'm a big fan of DxO and I'm sure I'll need to convert to dng files before working on my first images. Hopefully they'll add the R5 profiles soon. I'm guessing once a reliable workflow with raw files comes to fruition, images like the one shot on the D850 will be possible with really good glass. The D850 also has no AA filter which might help enhance detail, but with proper settings and post processing, the R5 images should be comparable. I'll also test my A7R4 and A7R3 with comparable glass (and no AA filter) against the R5 and see how they compare. Aside from the pixel peeping attempts, I think much of what we're seeing is people learning how to use this tool. As more information becomes available, I expect we'll see plenty of tack sharp images AND beautifully composed ones too! Dialing in the best settings takes time and practice. The R5 will be no different. And for the record, that shot done with the D850 and 400mm f2.8 is stunning in its detail.
Zenon Char wrote:
I hope you like your lens. Much better than the EF version 1. Mine will be glued to my R for many years.
I gave my original EF v1 to my daughter and son-in-law last year to go with the 80D is gifted them. I had a really sharp copy, but this new RF version does sound intriguing. I agree - it will probably be my main walk around lens. On my Sony bodies, the 24-105 G is on 80% of the time.
aae991 wrote:
I gave my original EF v1 to my daughter and son-in-law last year to go with the 80D is gifted them. I had a really sharp copy, but this new RF version does sound intriguing. I agree - it will probably be my main walk around lens. On my Sony bodies, the 24-105 G is on 80% of the time.
My EV v1 was sharp but was pretty bad at 24mm on a FF IMO. I never liked it for that. Here's the RF on my R.
Zenon Char wrote:
My guess is that is for phase detect AF because for contrast detect you don't need any adjustments.
I did forget to say I didn't know about the flange thingy. That is interesting.I always thought they did a mechanical or electric adjustment. One of my lenses needed too much MFA for my liking and Canon found an mis-calibrated board. That was a modern lens. I guess with older gear that makes sense. Interesting.
I would have purchased that lens if it had IS. I opted for the 300L F4 IS which reluctantly sold last week. It was my first telephoto and I loved it. Got a lot of good years out of it but I hardly used it after getting my 100-400 II. If Canon had released a 400 prime with IS I would have taken that over the zoom.
Lassep wrote:
Its not that they look out of focus, it simply looks to me as if there is some kind of digital processing done to them. They are not pixel level sharp, none of them.
My guesstimate is the fact that none of the posters are using RAW yet. Its likely the inbody JPG engine causing this.
One of the Flickr galleries linked by Zenon were images with the new RF 800mm. If you look at the EXIF, the photographer was shooting in the ISO 3200 range. There is certainly NR happening, whether they were in-camera Jpegs, or output RAW through a converter.
As was discussed earlier or in another thread, IMO, Canon's in-camera Jpegs have never been as sharp as the same images shot in RAW and carefully processed. Looking through the DP Review R5 sample gallery, even ISO 100 SOOC Jpegs clearly show signs of NR smoothing. If you compare their studio scene using RAW as source, IMO, R5 image sharpness is comparable to every other 45mp-ish sensor.
I think most agree and understand that with the increase in resolution, minor imaging defects that were otherwise hidden at lower resolutions will become more noticeable. Things like slight subject motion blur, camera shake, mis-focus. A lot of these undesired qualities, including some degree of in-camera image corrections, such as NR, will become effectively invisible in the majority of common viewing scenarios because the images will never be viewed at full resolution. Of course there are exceptions...
Dragonfire wrote:
I'm sorry BUT Rob's 1D XIII appear sharper and have more POP, IMO.
Have you resized his R5 images to the 1DXIII's pixel dimensions and based your conclusion on such observations?
There are so many variables at play. Consider a fair number of his images have pushed the 'reach' envelope of the system to a degree the 1DXIII could never match unless you stacked another tele-converter and thus added further optically induced image deterioration. I.e. R5 APS-C crop 600mm and 2x tele-converter.
Here are a few images I took yesterday evening when I was testing the camera...You can view them on Google Drive. I wasn't sure how to post them. All cropped. Put two larger files in there.
rscheffler wrote:
One of the Flickr galleries linked by Zenon were images with the new RF 800mm. If you look at the EXIF, the photographer was shooting in the ISO 3200 range. There is certainly NR happening, whether they were in-camera Jpegs, or output RAW through a converter.
As was discussed earlier or in another thread, IMO, Canon's in-camera Jpegs have never been as sharp as the same images shot in RAW and carefully processed. Looking through the DP Review R5 sample gallery, even ISO 100 SOOC Jpegs clearly show signs of NR smoothing. If you compare their studio scene using RAW as source, IMO, R5 image sharpness is comparable to every other 45mp-ish sensor.
I think most agree and understand that with the increase in resolution, minor imaging defects that were otherwise hidden at lower resolutions will become more noticeable. Things like slight subject motion blur, camera shake, mis-focus. A lot of these undesired qualities, including some degree of in-camera image corrections, such as NR, will become effectively invisible in the majority of common viewing scenarios because the images will never be viewed at full resolution. Of course there are exceptions...
Have you resized his R5 images to the 1DXIII's pixel dimensions and based your conclusion on such observations?
There are so many variables at play. Consider a fair number of his images have pushed the 'reach' envelope of the system to a degree the 1DXIII could never match unless you stacked another tele-converter and thus added further optically induced image deterioration. I.e. R5 APS-C crop 600mm and 2x tele-converter....Show more →
With 45mp I'm a little concerned about motion blur. I'm not the steadiest person and I it gets worse when I start to get tired. I need to stop drinking a Tim Hortons extra large coffee before I shoot. Did that shooting a wedding once. That was the last time I did that.
