This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 20095D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
p.15 #15D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
David Baldwin wrote:
OK,
I've read most of this thread, and I have to admit I can no longer see the wood for the trees on this. I would like to run my own test on my own 5D2 to see if I can replicate the problem.
Could someone please advise me, EXACTLY please, what I need to do to check this on my own camera?
Thank you.
Take a picture. Print, and enjoy. End of story.... If the image quality of the 5D2 isn't good enough for you then you need to look at $40k digital medium format rigs. Seriously. And the fact that we can get IQ like this for less than $3k? Awesome. And if you have to go looking for problems in the shadows of the corners of your prints because somebody on this forum told you to, then you've spent waaaay too much time on this forum and not nearly enough time out taking photographs. The 5D2 is a remarkable value, although of course it isn't perfect. There isn't a perfect camera for everybody for all situations. Now go out and enjoy the art of photography!
Chris Miller
www.imagineimagery.com
OK,
I've read most of this thread, and I have to admit I can no longer see the wood for the trees on this. I would like to run my own test on my own 5D2 to see if I can replicate the problem.
Could someone please advise me, EXACTLY please, what I need to do to check this on my own camera?
Thank you.
Take a picture. Print, and enjoy. End of story.... If the image quality of the 5D2 isn't good enough for you then you need to look at $40k digital medium format rigs. Seriously. And the fact that we can get IQ like this for less than $3k? Awesome. And if you have to go looking for problems in the shadows of the corners of your prints because somebody on this forum told you to, then you've spent waaaay too much time on this forum and not nearly enough time out taking photographs. The 5D2 is a remarkable value, although of course it isn't perfect. There isn't a perfect camera for everybody for all situations. Now go out and enjoy the art of photography!
Chris Miller
www.imagineimagery.com
Feb 07, 2009 at 07:20 PM
p.15 #25D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
ChrisDM wrote:
I've read most of this thread, and I have to admit I can no longer see the wood for the trees on this. I would like to run my own test on my own 5D2 to see if I can replicate the problem.
Could someone please advise me, EXACTLY please, what I need to do to check this on my own camera?
Thank you.Take a picture. Print, and enjoy. End of story.... If the image quality of the 5D2 isn't good enough for you then you need to look at $40k digital medium format rigs. Seriously. And the fact that we can get IQ like this for less than $3k? Awesome. And if you have to go looking for problems in the shadows of the corners of your prints because somebody on this forum told you to, then you've spent waaaay too much time on this forum and not nearly enough time out taking photographs. The 5D2 is a remarkable value, although of...Show more →
+1
I absolutely fully agree with this statement!
David Baldwin wrote
OK,I've read most of this thread, and I have to admit I can no longer see the wood for the trees on this. I would like to run my own test on my own 5D2 to see if I can replicate the problem.
Could someone please advise me, EXACTLY please, what I need to do to check this on my own camera?
Thank you.
+1
I absolutely fully agree with this statement!
Feb 07, 2009 at 07:36 PM
p.15 #35D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
brainiac wrote:
I don't have lightroom. I'm using DPP.
Interesting. Perhaps the issue is raw converter/processor related.
I don't have lightroom. I'm using DPP.
Interesting. Perhaps the issue is raw converter/processor related.
Feb 07, 2009 at 07:42 PM
p.15 #45D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
retrofocus wrote:
I've read most of this thread, and I have to admit I can no longer see the wood for the trees on this. I would like to run my own test on my own 5D2 to see if I can replicate the problem.
Could someone please advise me, EXACTLY please, what I need to do to check this on my own camera?
Thank you.Take a picture. Print, and enjoy. End of story.... If the image quality of the 5D2 isn't good enough for you then you need to look at $40k digital medium format rigs. Seriously. And the fact that we can get IQ like this for less than $3k? Awesome. And if you have to go looking for problems in the shadows of the corners of your prints because somebody on this forum told you to, then you've spent waaaay too much time on this forum and not nearly enough time out taking photographs. The 5D2 is a remarkable value, although of course it isn't perfect. There isn't a perfect camera for everybody for all situations. Now go out and enjoy the art of photography!
Chris Miller
www.imagineimagery.com+1
I absolutely fully agree with this statement!
+1, people looking for perfect is right but don't screw up anyway
ChrisDM wrote
David Baldwin wrote
OK,I've read most of this thread, and I have to admit I can no longer see the wood for the trees on this. I would like to run my own test on my own 5D2 to see if I can replicate the problem.
Could someone please advise me, EXACTLY please, what I need to do to check this on my own camera?
Thank you.
Chris Miller
www.imagineimagery.com
I absolutely fully agree with this statement!
+1, people looking for perfect is right but don't screw up anyway
Feb 07, 2009 at 07:50 PM
p.15 #55D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Bottom line. You have one person who incorrectly exposed his image and posted a low res example of his post work and then a million posts saying "You don't understand, blah blah blah". You have others who chime in and say, "Yeah, I noticed this too", but the majority have shot you down. All this fuss for nothing.
So much pontification, so much drama. Unhappy? Sell your camera, stop bitching. Move on.
So much pontification, so much drama. Unhappy? Sell your camera, stop bitching. Move on.
Feb 07, 2009 at 07:51 PM
p.15 #65D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
>...one person who incorrectly exposed his image...
I am going to try to explain my reasoning again. It's all I can do. The scene, unusually, did not contain bright highlights, and was a very low contrast scene. A more general scene would not allow exposure further to the right, as you suggest, since it would likely contain much brighter highlights, which would likely blow out. The shadows would remain the same even if there were strong highlights outside the window. Now this is the important point: the image has not been pushed or pulled in post. That means that WHENEVER an image contains dark tones like the ones in the crops and is shot at iso 200 on my 5D, those darker tones will look like this, assuming that it is not possible to overexpose, which it usually isn't. That is why I say that this exposure is not the optimal exposure FOR THIS SCENE, but it is the 'correct' exposure in the general sense, i.e. it is the exposure of shadows that you will most often be forced to use. Clearly, many people do not understand that point. Feel free to ask any questions about that.
BTW, I should point out that I am not the only person who has noticed this limitation of the camera. Diglloyd has been explicit about this issue too. I was skeptical of his experience until I had it myself. Check his blog if you don't believe me:
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/PushingTheBlacks/index.html
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2009-01-blog.html
As regards your "stop bitching, move on" comment, I don't think I'm bitching. I think I'm just reporting my experience switching from a 1Ds3 to a 5D2 for the benefit of others. Some people aren't having this problem, apparently, and I am happy for them. I don't see any bitches here. Take your own advice.
I am going to try to explain my reasoning again. It's all I can do. The scene, unusually, did not contain bright highlights, and was a very low contrast scene. A more general scene would not allow exposure further to the right, as you suggest, since it would likely contain much brighter highlights, which would likely blow out. The shadows would remain the same even if there were strong highlights outside the window. Now this is the important point: the image has not been pushed or pulled in post. That means that WHENEVER an image contains dark tones like the ones in the crops and is shot at iso 200 on my 5D, those darker tones will look like this, assuming that it is not possible to overexpose, which it usually isn't. That is why I say that this exposure is not the optimal exposure FOR THIS SCENE, but it is the 'correct' exposure in the general sense, i.e. it is the exposure of shadows that you will most often be forced to use. Clearly, many people do not understand that point. Feel free to ask any questions about that.
BTW, I should point out that I am not the only person who has noticed this limitation of the camera. Diglloyd has been explicit about this issue too. I was skeptical of his experience until I had it myself. Check his blog if you don't believe me:
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/PushingTheBlacks/index.html
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2009-01-blog.html
As regards your "stop bitching, move on" comment, I don't think I'm bitching. I think I'm just reporting my experience switching from a 1Ds3 to a 5D2 for the benefit of others. Some people aren't having this problem, apparently, and I am happy for them. I don't see any bitches here. Take your own advice.
Feb 07, 2009 at 08:58 PM
p.15 #75D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Don't be too hard on yourself
brainiac wrote:
I am going to try to explain my reasoning again. It's all I can do. The scene, unusually, did not contain bright highlights, and was a very low contrast scene. A more general scene would not allow exposure further to the right, as you suggest, since it would likely contain much brighter highlights, which would likely blow out. The shadows would remain the same even if there were strong highlights outside the window. Now this is the important point: the image has not been pushed or pulled in post. That means that WHENEVER an image contains dark tones like the...Show more →
brainiac wrote:
Earlier quote
>...one person who incorrectly exposed his image...Feb 07, 2009 at 10:09 PM
p.15 #85D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
brainiac wrote:
I am going to try to explain my reasoning again. It's all I can do. The scene, unusually, did not contain bright highlights, and was a very low contrast scene. A more general scene would not allow exposure further to the right, as you suggest, since it would likely contain much brighter highlights, which would likely blow out. The shadows would remain the same even if there were strong highlights outside the window. Now this is the important point: the image has not been pushed or pulled in post. That means that WHENEVER an image contains dark tones like the...Show more →
Brainiac: I am sorry to hear here about your trouble with your 5D MkII camera. I think your test is fairly valid - I never had a 1D camera series, so I can't say anything for the comparison here. I can only say that my 5D MkII camera sometimes has some noise especially in dark red shadow areas under certain illumination conditions. I got rid of the noise by either using the in-camera CF tool or the luminance/chrominance tool in DPP without losing sharpness. Otherwise as stated in another post of mine here, I like the performance of the 5D MkII a lot.
I disagree with a lot of details mentioned in digiloyd's blog, e.g. in his post about 5D MkII and optics. It's just not true that the 70-200 f4 lens which he specifically mentions has problems with depth of field and edge/corner sharpness. Sorry, I find his blog not very reliable comparing with my own experience. I also think that his shadows/highlights adjustment for the 5D MkII test was not done perfectly or fully correctly.
Earlier quote
>...one person who incorrectly exposed his image...Brainiac: I am sorry to hear here about your trouble with your 5D MkII camera. I think your test is fairly valid - I never had a 1D camera series, so I can't say anything for the comparison here. I can only say that my 5D MkII camera sometimes has some noise especially in dark red shadow areas under certain illumination conditions. I got rid of the noise by either using the in-camera CF tool or the luminance/chrominance tool in DPP without losing sharpness. Otherwise as stated in another post of mine here, I like the performance of the 5D MkII a lot.
I disagree with a lot of details mentioned in digiloyd's blog, e.g. in his post about 5D MkII and optics. It's just not true that the 70-200 f4 lens which he specifically mentions has problems with depth of field and edge/corner sharpness. Sorry, I find his blog not very reliable comparing with my own experience. I also think that his shadows/highlights adjustment for the 5D MkII test was not done perfectly or fully correctly.
Feb 07, 2009 at 10:53 PM
p.15 #95D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
retrofocus wrote:
I disagree with a lot of details mentioned in digiloyd's blog...
So do I, often, but in this case he has described exactly what I have been seeing.
I disagree with a lot of details mentioned in digiloyd's blog...
So do I, often, but in this case he has described exactly what I have been seeing.
Feb 08, 2009 at 06:51 AM
p.15 #105D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Interesting reading - it's certainly made me think twice about upgrading from a 5D to a 5DII as I use almost exclusivley 100 and 200iso. I've never found the 5D to be partucularly good at digging out clean shadow detail compared to a 1DsII.
Feb 08, 2009 at 07:07 AM
p.15 #115D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Hey, you know Chuck Westfall is easily available to ask about such things. Just go to his Tech Talk column on www.digitaljournalist.org and submit a question about it. I've done it twice and he's answered me within a couple of business days by return email.
Feb 08, 2009 at 11:51 PM
p.15 #125D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
RDKirk wrote:
Hey, you know Chuck Westfall is easily available to ask about such things. Just go to his Tech Talk column on www.digitaljournalist.org and submit a question about it. I've done it twice and he's answered me within a couple of business days by return email.
Good idea - I just emailed the query to Tech Talk. Cheers.
Hey, you know Chuck Westfall is easily available to ask about such things. Just go to his Tech Talk column on www.digitaljournalist.org and submit a question about it. I've done it twice and he's answered me within a couple of business days by return email.
Good idea - I just emailed the query to Tech Talk. Cheers.
Feb 09, 2009 at 03:44 AM
p.15 #135D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Here are a couple of iso 100 samples of the 5D2 noise pattern, showing the criss cross texture:
pushed 1 stop in DPP, minimum contrast:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/crisscrossa.jpg
pushed 2 stops in DPP, minimum contrast:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/crisscrossb.jpg
pushed 1 stop in DPP, minimum contrast:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/crisscrossa.jpg
pushed 2 stops in DPP, minimum contrast:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/crisscrossb.jpg
Feb 09, 2009 at 07:33 PM
p.15 #145D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
I don't see how you would ever need to push a file 2 whole stops if you where shooting correctly. I find that in my many years of shooting I may have moved a image a stop in post. I do see your cross pattern in the 2 stop push but in the one stop push I find it looks good. I have fooled around with many images I have shot in real world shooting now for the past 2 weeks and find the camera every bit as good as my 1Dmark3 in image quality comparing noise from 100-1600, does better in the higher end. I can say I'm real happy with it and you can look at some of my wildlife shooting I have taken with it. The cropping that I can do is amazing I think and the focus has been better then I expected. Ron
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/737682
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/737682
Feb 09, 2009 at 08:40 PM
p.15 #155D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
OK kazman...I've checked out your pictures...they are NOT GOOD but they are OUTSTANDING...
kazman442 wrote:
I don't see how you would ever need to push a file 2 whole stops if you where shooting correctly. I find that in my many years of shooting I may have moved a image a stop in post. I do see your cross pattern in the 2 stop push but in the one stop push I find it looks good. I have fooled around with many images I have shot in real world shooting now for the past 2 weeks and find the camera every bit as good as my 1Dmark3 in image quality comparing noise from 100-1600, does...Show more →
kazman442 wrote:
I don't see how you would ever need to push a file 2 whole stops if you where shooting correctly. I find that in my many years of shooting I may have moved a image a stop in post. I do see your cross pattern in the 2 stop push but in the one stop push I find it looks good. I have fooled around with many images I have shot in real world shooting now for the past 2 weeks and find the camera every bit as good as my 1Dmark3 in image quality comparing noise from 100-1600, does...Show more →
Feb 09, 2009 at 09:13 PM
p.15 #165D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
You don't, if you present the picture as is. However, as you already know, many photographers do a lot of post production to their images to achieve their look. This is where most of the problem lies.
Feb 09, 2009 at 09:59 PM
p.15 #175D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Seems like Richard is not the only one who is having problems with the 5D2
http://www.afashionshooter.com/2009/02/08/canon-5d2-so-long/
http://www.afashionshooter.com/2009/02/08/canon-5d2-so-long/
Feb 10, 2009 at 12:02 AM
p.15 #185D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Andrew Gough wrote:
Seems like Richard is not the only one who is having problems with the 5D2
http://www.afashionshooter.com/2009/02/08/canon-5d2-so-long/
True, but also be sure to read the comments after that post, as some photographers strongly dispute the criticisms at the top of that page. I wouldn't think any knowledgeable photographer would consider the 5DII to be a great choice for fashion photography.
Me, I'm keeping my 5DII. It's definitely no 1-series wrt to focus or ruggedness, but I knew that going in.
But I do wish Nikon would introduce a D700x so we could see what kind of low-noise 20-plus-megapixel camera Nikon can make relatively affordably (Sony's not an option for me because I shoot mostly at ISO800-1600.)
Seems like Richard is not the only one who is having problems with the 5D2
http://www.afashionshooter.com/2009/02/08/canon-5d2-so-long/
True, but also be sure to read the comments after that post, as some photographers strongly dispute the criticisms at the top of that page. I wouldn't think any knowledgeable photographer would consider the 5DII to be a great choice for fashion photography.
Me, I'm keeping my 5DII. It's definitely no 1-series wrt to focus or ruggedness, but I knew that going in.
But I do wish Nikon would introduce a D700x so we could see what kind of low-noise 20-plus-megapixel camera Nikon can make relatively affordably (Sony's not an option for me because I shoot mostly at ISO800-1600.)
Feb 10, 2009 at 12:10 AM
p.15 #195D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Nikon has. It's called the D3X. Noise control is SUPERB. Neither the 5D II nor 1Ds III (or D3 for that matter) can match it for low-noise low-ISO performance.
RalphJ wrote:
But I do wish Nikon would introduce a D700x so we could see what kind of low-noise 20-plus-megapixel camera Nikon can make relatively affordably (Sony's not an option for me because I shoot mostly at ISO800-1600.)
RalphJ wrote:
But I do wish Nikon would introduce a D700x so we could see what kind of low-noise 20-plus-megapixel camera Nikon can make relatively affordably (Sony's not an option for me because I shoot mostly at ISO800-1600.)
Feb 10, 2009 at 12:56 AM
p.15 #205D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Andrew Gough wrote:
Seems like Richard is not the only one who is having problems with the 5D2
http://www.afashionshooter.com/2009/02/08/canon-5d2-so-long/
"The AF is still pretty bad on this, my second 5D2 body in anything but the brightest of light."
"I am used to the 1-series bodies, which have never given me issues - the AF on the 1Ds3 has been superb. I get nearly 100% in-focus shots on the 1Ds3, as opposed to 50-70% typically in focus with the 5D2. Even my original 5D bodies have more consistent AF."
I found the center AF point to be pretty good in One Shot... even in low light. On par with my 1Ds3. AI Servo in low light was pretty bad. AI Servo in good light with the center AF point + 6 assist points was good. It had a great deal of trouble tracking my black dog though... Something that my 1Ds3 has no (or way less) trouble with. The AF on the 5D2 was faster to acquire focus than the 5D. It was also more accurate with larger apertures than my 5D's were.
"People right and left are reporting failures in damp conditions/light rain."
I have read the stories and got some feedback on this from Canon. I would feel uncomfortable using this cam in drizzle/light rain. Questionable weathersealing IMO.
"There is also banding in shadow areas, even at 200 ISO and with the firmware update. I do not have any banding issues on my 3 other Canon cameras."
I have used three 5D2's. The only one that didn't give me (shadow) banding at lower ISO's was the one I used with FW 1.0.6. The one's I used with FW 1.0.7. gave much more noise and magenta casts/spots. The 1Ds3 and 5D's I have used have never given me this type of low ISO (shadow) noise/banding.
"Additionally I still feel the 5D2 files are not as pretty as the 1Ds3 files are. Maybe it’s the new low pass filter, maybe it’s something else…"
The 1Ds3 files have a "magical" quality. Shadows contain much more usable detail. Colors are much better. Definetely a step beyond 5D2 files. But the 1Ds3 costs 2,5 times as much. I would feel very bad if it was the other way around.
"anyway, with the grip and two batteries inside, it’s not noticeably lighter than the 1Ds3."
The battery lasts long enough. For that reason you don't need a grip. I would never want to use the 5D2 with a grip because it adds weight and size. OTOH, the "grip" without the added grip is not very comfortable because there is little room for my pinky. On top of that, with no added grip there is a lot of strain on the CF card door, which will creak once you use heavier lenses (like the 24-70L).
Sure, Richard is not the only one experiencing dissapointment on the 5D2. There are others like me and the writer of the article. Give it some time and there will be even more... There will always be more if Canon continues to produce with questionable QC.
The banding and noise at lower ISO's shouldn't be there. I can say this with confidence because I have used a (FW 1.0.6) 5D2 that didn't exhibit this "problem". There seems to be too much inconsistency in quality. IMO that is the main problem, because if everything works as it should, the 5D2 is a fine camera for sure. But in order to get a proper working one, you will have to play the good and old Canon lottery game... and that stinks
Seems like Richard is not the only one who is having problems with the 5D2
http://www.afashionshooter.com/2009/02/08/canon-5d2-so-long/
"The AF is still pretty bad on this, my second 5D2 body in anything but the brightest of light."
"I am used to the 1-series bodies, which have never given me issues - the AF on the 1Ds3 has been superb. I get nearly 100% in-focus shots on the 1Ds3, as opposed to 50-70% typically in focus with the 5D2. Even my original 5D bodies have more consistent AF."
I found the center AF point to be pretty good in One Shot... even in low light. On par with my 1Ds3. AI Servo in low light was pretty bad. AI Servo in good light with the center AF point + 6 assist points was good. It had a great deal of trouble tracking my black dog though... Something that my 1Ds3 has no (or way less) trouble with. The AF on the 5D2 was faster to acquire focus than the 5D. It was also more accurate with larger apertures than my 5D's were.
"People right and left are reporting failures in damp conditions/light rain."
I have read the stories and got some feedback on this from Canon. I would feel uncomfortable using this cam in drizzle/light rain. Questionable weathersealing IMO.
"There is also banding in shadow areas, even at 200 ISO and with the firmware update. I do not have any banding issues on my 3 other Canon cameras."
I have used three 5D2's. The only one that didn't give me (shadow) banding at lower ISO's was the one I used with FW 1.0.6. The one's I used with FW 1.0.7. gave much more noise and magenta casts/spots. The 1Ds3 and 5D's I have used have never given me this type of low ISO (shadow) noise/banding.
"Additionally I still feel the 5D2 files are not as pretty as the 1Ds3 files are. Maybe it’s the new low pass filter, maybe it’s something else…"
The 1Ds3 files have a "magical" quality. Shadows contain much more usable detail. Colors are much better. Definetely a step beyond 5D2 files. But the 1Ds3 costs 2,5 times as much. I would feel very bad if it was the other way around.
"anyway, with the grip and two batteries inside, it’s not noticeably lighter than the 1Ds3."
The battery lasts long enough. For that reason you don't need a grip. I would never want to use the 5D2 with a grip because it adds weight and size. OTOH, the "grip" without the added grip is not very comfortable because there is little room for my pinky. On top of that, with no added grip there is a lot of strain on the CF card door, which will creak once you use heavier lenses (like the 24-70L).
Sure, Richard is not the only one experiencing dissapointment on the 5D2. There are others like me and the writer of the article. Give it some time and there will be even more... There will always be more if Canon continues to produce with questionable QC.
The banding and noise at lower ISO's shouldn't be there. I can say this with confidence because I have used a (FW 1.0.6) 5D2 that didn't exhibit this "problem". There seems to be too much inconsistency in quality. IMO that is the main problem, because if everything works as it should, the 5D2 is a fine camera for sure. But in order to get a proper working one, you will have to play the good and old Canon lottery game... and that stinks
Feb 10, 2009 at 01:59 AM