Burak Baysal wrote:
worked just fine. thanks!
It looks just as sharp in my setup and puts my images to shame.
I am more and more convinced I am having AF issues too. I take the same scene with OneShot, SpotAF and then LiveView at 5x. LiveView is dead sharp.
I am playing with LR 2.6RC too, and it looks so much better than DPP for me.
Phew, ACR 5.6 really makes the 7D much better in term of noise a low ISO. A quicky test seems to suggest that it rivals that of my beloved 5D which is all I could ever ask for. Clean blue sky even with ton of sharpening.
skibum5 wrote:
why should opening it (a TIFF produced by DPP) in LR2.6 make whatever DPP does (which does include some mazing) go away
I don't think that it necessarily should, but on the other hand why should what DPP does look so much more pronounced in Lightroom? The mazing in that image in DPP is really minimal compared with how it looks in Lightroom, and in 2.5 the TIFF looks exactly like the RAW. Why is that? I was beginning to think that part of the problem was related to how Lightroom displays the image. Now that doesn't seem to be the case. But, I'm still curious as to the display difference between DPP and Lightroom. There is no RAW processing happening to the TIFF, yet it looks very different. Just a point of curiousity. With Lightroom 2.6 here I'm going to try to forget that i ever heard of mazing.
Stoffer wrote:
Phew, ACR 5.6 really makes the 7D much better in term of noise a low ISO. A quicky test seems to suggest that it rivals that of my beloved 5D which is all I could ever ask for. Clean blue sky even with ton of sharpening.
Hmm, that's not what I'm finding. I can see absolutely no difference in low ISO noise between 2.5 and 2.6. But then again I don't see any problem with low ISO noise.
Zenon Char wrote:
So I have been going through the manual for C.Fn 4.1 to come up with a "back focus" set up that will work for me. The manual is poorly written regarding this IMO .
The shutter button can be switched to Metering Start. The AF-ON does not have a stand alone focus start so the choice here is Metering and AF Start.
For example I am in AI Servo. I am assuming based on what the manual says that when I press the AF-ON both Metering and AF start and then when I press the shutter button the metering is overwritten from the AF-ON function I pressed earlier. Am I on the right track? ...Show more →
Based on my same 7D setup for AI Servo, you are on the right track.
allebaug wrote:
Based on my same 7D setup for AI Servo, you are on the right track.
Thanks
Hmmm. I know people say it is great but I'm still trying to wrap my head around where the advantage is. I shoot a lot in AI Servo with the shutter button set to AF and Metering Start and I do very well. The metering is continually adjusting during this set up. Just seems like there is more thing to think about.
You also stated your set up for AI Servo. So your One Shot functions normally? AF and metering start? This must that registering part I read about in the manual.
ciprian.trofin wrote:
Some guy at DPR quoted your post. Well... quoted is an overstatement - he said "a copy over of part of a thread from a different forum". Lame...
yeah my alternate personality is pretty lame, gonna have to have a serious talking to him tonight
anyway, sorry for the confusion
different forum, different handle
on quite a few forums skibum followed by more different numbers than you can imagine has laready been taken by others so i gave up (i don't recall if that was the case in this situation or not but it has been in others)
Fred Tedsen wrote:
I don't think that it necessarily should, but on the other hand why should what DPP does look so much more pronounced in Lightroom? The mazing in that image in DPP is really minimal compared with how it looks in Lightroom, and in 2.5 the TIFF looks exactly like the RAW. Why is that? I was beginning to think that part of the problem was related to how Lightroom displays the image. Now that doesn't seem to be the case. But, I'm still curious as to the display difference between DPP and Lightroom. There is no RAW processing happening to the TIFF, yet it looks very different. Just a point of curiousity. With Lightroom 2.6 here I'm going to try to forget that i ever heard of mazing. ...Show more →
yeah i have no clue that seems very strange
maybe you have color profiling turned on in one program and not the other?
or did the wrong type of monitor profile? (one thing to watch out for is absolute vs. relative blackpoint monitor profiles both work fine with most programs but only one works properly with adobe lightroom/cs4 and it can really make shadow areas look much different, and it can also change deep contrast a bit, maybe that happened and accentuated the look of the mazing just a totally wild guess. anyway it is an important thing to know, it drove me crazy for a while since i would do stuff or view stuff in cs4 only to find things shifting how they looked in other programs, and i am not just talking about subtle color shifts between color away and non-color aware programs and viewers, here the entire shadow detail region and lower tones would be pretty radically altered)
anyway yeah i think mazing is best forgotten about now it's gone with ACR and largerly gone with c1v5 (although i still dont like how that makes certain types of artifcats especially the lack of filtering the white and black dots but that is somewhat a different issue), it can still be there for DPP users who have copies with the balance farther out though.
acr 5.6 gets less moire (this MAY make it improve IQ for cameras other than 7D as well, haven't checked yet)
it might be a touch less microcontrasty at times than 5.5, but those are pretty rare times, so maybe they did have to do a little averaging away of the finest detail contrast here and there, however it doesn't appear to be something to worry about since it is almost always minor and while DPR didn't post their 50D RAW file to compare with and the way they set ACR doesn't dig into the finest details too well, it still seems, looking at their samples, pretty likely that the 7D even with whatever they had to do with 5.6 will still at the very least the 50D for detail in any case so whether acr 5.6 needs to average away a little at times doesn't appear likely to matter any in the end if it has more reach than any other camera on the market even as is and of course it has far less banding at high iso than a 50D and so on
with acr 5.6 i think that pretty much any 7D copy (even the more out of balance ones) will be able to give overall better results than any other aps-c on the market at any iso for any purpose; maybe i am overstating things in the other direction now, but probably not
personally i lthink ACR 5.6 output from the 7D is the best since even if you had a copy that had no mazing at all with DPP and C1 those two still leave those nasty speckles and a few other artifacts all over and ACR 5.6 does not (i'm not a c1 expert so maybe if you fiddle around enough you can eventually get them to go away without ruining detail but not so sure about that). DPP also has a lot more zipper artifacts (as it does wth any body nothing to do with the 7D just the way they programmed the demosaic algo) and is more prone to breaking moire up into weird patterns. Granted ACR makes its own sort of artifacts (with any camera), ijust don't midn them as much as the DPP ones myself.
anyway im happy since i dont really like using DPP very much regardless of how well or not it does and i think i like acr handling a little better than c1 too plus who wants to spend another ton of money on yet another program
i accidentally originally saved as jpg instead of tiff and then reopened so it did slightly mute the differences but this still pretty much gives the picture, modest processing not pushing contrast or sharpening to any degree at all:
These are ACR 5.5 vs 5.6 with the 7D? The second of each pair clearly has much less artifacting, though there is some still left, which is intrinsic to ACR's demosaic method.
I'd be interested to see ACR 5.6 with the 7D vs the 50D.
and yes you can get into some extreme pixel peeping at times and yet still actually get out and shoot, sorry for the crazy length of this post, but maybe it will put to rest all the sniping that you can't get technical and pixel peep AND also get out and shoot since most people can do both:
EDIT: posted a few too many here and deleted them
but it was a ton of photos from all over the world of all sorts of different subjects
ejmartin wrote:
These are ACR 5.5 vs 5.6 with the 7D? The second of each pair clearly has much less artifacting, though there is some still left, which is intrinsic to ACR's demosaic method.
I'd be interested to see ACR 5.6 with the 7D vs the 50D.
yeah 5.5 vs. 5.6 with the 7D using the DPR ISO100 test scene
yeah i would be interested in seeing the 50D DPR test RAW since the real question is whether it really does at least deliver 50D detail without artifacting i suspect it can but can't be sure
i didn't check for general noise, for all i know whatever they did still leaves extra noise, but at least it is of a nice form and its not THAT critical at low ISO if it is of a nicer looking form (although if it still was 2x as bad for some cameras that would be a bit weak of canon)
I should be receiving my third 7D body tomorrow, as the first and second both have non-IQ related issues. I'm not sure I will have time this weekend, but I may be able to set up a somewhat controlled test shot of 50D vs 7D1, 7D2, and 7D3. My plan is to tripod mount my 100-400 @ 100mm f/8 (we aren't really worried about diffraction, are we?), focus multiple times using live mode AF in live-view (& pick the best) and light the scene with bounced flash, manual power.
I probably won't put a lot of effort into the subject scene; I may put some wine bottles and skeins of yarn on the fireplace mantle. Any suggestions here (easy things I might have around the house)?
skibum5 wrote:
yeah 5.5 vs. 5.6 with the 7D using the DPR ISO100 test scene
yeah i would be interested in seeing the 50D DPR test RAW since the real question is whether it really does at least deliver 50D detail without artifacting i suspect it can but can't be sure
i didn't check for general noise, for all i know whatever they did still leaves extra noise, but at least it is of a nice form and its not THAT critical at low ISO if it is of a nicer looking form
skibum5 wrote:
yeah 5.5 vs. 5.6 with the 7D using the DPR ISO100 test scene
yeah i would be interested in seeing the 50D DPR test RAW since the real question is whether it really does at least deliver 50D detail without artifacting i suspect it can but can't be sure
i didn't check for general noise, for all i know whatever they did still leaves extra noise, but at least it is of a nice form and its not THAT critical at low ISO if it is of a nicer looking form
i sold my 50D so i can't make a test scene mysef
Why not use the Imaging-Resource test scene? That should be available for the 50D.
Hmmm. I know people say it is great but I'm still trying to wrap my head around where the advantage is. I shoot a lot in AI Servo with the shutter button set to AF and Metering Start and I do very well. The metering is continually adjusting during this set up. Just seems like there is more thing to think about.
You also stated your set up for AI Servo. So your One Shot functions normally? AF and metering start? This must that registering part I read about in the manual.
I have AI Servo parameters set into one of the Custom Settings, including AV mode, orientation-specific AF points (expanded AF), and others suitable for tracking moving subjects. I have another Custom Setting configured for MLU, Manual exposure, expanded center AF point, and others, mainly for landscape and static work based on experience with previous EOS bodies, primarily the 5D.
My non-Custom Settings configuration is more ad-hoc to the situation and I find I'm mostly using One-Shot and AV or M mode. The My Menu page has also been a great addition for collecting camera operation options in one quick to access place, such as bracketing, flash control, format,...
I had the * button set for Focus and no AF on the Shutter button on the older EOS bodies before the AF-on button was added. I'm used to this way of using the EOS bodies and use it all of the time in addition to having it set within the CS modes.
Oops - didn't fully answer you... On the older bodies AF could be a little flaky! Once I had a good focus (usually the center point) especially with static subjects, and needed to recompose/shift the scene before making the image, I didn't want the camera to refocus elsewhere. Habits stick - good and bad ones.
paulfeng wrote:
I will be happy not to shoot a test scene. But I may anyway, to convince myself that the second body does not have magical IQ properties.
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting I'm about to analyze any more RAW files; I'm more or less done with that. I was simply curious how the ACR 5.6rc renders one of these standard test scenes relative to the 50D. Can't do it myself since I am still using CS3.
