ejmartin wrote:
Why not use the Imaging-Resource test scene? That should be available for the 50D.
yeah i guess i could do that
i know they kept changing the scene (and lighting) and focal point slightly all the time so i'm not sure it will work for this but i can see, maybe the 50D file will have the same setup and identical focus
ejmartin wrote:
Can't do it myself since I am still using CS3.
As am I, so w/out upgrading to CS4 (I am loathe to spring for CS4 so soon before CS5 debuts (rumored to be next spring)).
Does anyone know if the Lightroom 3 beta has or will soon have the latest ACR functionality (am I correct in "understanding" that LR does not take the ACR plugin, but has the raw support built in)?
Is anyone using ACR in Photoshop Elements, which would be another lower cost option that could tide me over until CS5?
paulfeng wrote:
As am I, so w/out upgrading to CS4 (I am loathe to spring for CS4 so soon before CS5 debuts (rumored to be next spring)).
Does anyone know if the Lightroom 3 beta has or will soon have the latest ACR functionality (am I correct in "understanding" that LR does not take the ACR plugin, but has the raw support built in)?
Is anyone using ACR in Photoshop Elements, which would be another lower cost option that could tide me over until CS5?
i thought LR 2.6 was just released and includes the efffective ACR 2.6RC in it
i don't use LR (at least not yet, full pricing on CS5 may change my mind though) so i don't know but i thought i saw mention of that
ejmartin wrote:
Why not use the Imaging-Resource test scene? That should be available for the 50D.
as i feared they didn't even shoot the 50D and 7D the same distance away from the setup, it's not wildly far off but when trying to see if 18MP matches 15MP you need it to be pretty darn close to be fair
anyway, as is with the 7D closer and getting and unfair advantage it does pull in more reach than 50D FWIW
Some Zoo pics today. Not sure of image limit. So EXIF data is one the reply. From this day on I am sending in every new camera to Canon Service for an oil change whether it needs it or not.
ejmartin wrote:
Why not use the Imaging-Resource test scene? That should be available for the 50D.
ok, after looking at the IR image (their copy mazed quite a lot) sample in 5.5 and 5.6 as expected 5.6 still solves the mazing however i am starting to think it does ever so slightly soften up the micro-contrast/detail at times, with some text on one of the bottles it seemed like i needed to use about three passes of 75%, 0.2 radius smart sharpen to truly even up the crispness of the bite. It's not too major though. Of course some of it alos might be different defauly curves and contrasts too.
it is pretty slight so i don't at all think we are anywhere near down to 40D levels of detail by any stretch, i think at most it could be the difference between 18MP and 15MP, but it might eat up any reach over a 50D (and remember the linear resolution differences between these cams are slight so it doesnt much to give it all back which is why you do need to peep to see if any actually deliver any more reach than the rest), i still have feeling it won't do worse than the 50D though and may even do a trace better in the end, which is all that matters but you really need to convince DPR to also release their 50D RAW test scene file if you want to know for sure
even left as is with same sharpening on both (7D and 50D) the 5.6 7D still did pull in more noticeably detail than the 50D, however, then again IR also placed the 7D closer to the subject so that is sort of worthless. i will still post them up later. the 50D did appear to have a touch more of that micro-bite like 7D acr 5.5 vs acr 5.6 but i think the 18MP vs 15MP would be enough to make up for it.
it is also possible they did something fight moire a bit more and maybe that is the reason for the touch less crispness at times and not the re-balancing of things
as far as i could tell acr 5.5 vs. 5.6 make no difference whatsoever with the 50D files so i think only the 7D part of it has any new code at all
in the end so long as it at least delivers 50D reach with acr i guess it won't matter and i'm still thinking this is the case but the QC/design still seems to be perhaps a little reckless to me since DPP still doesn't handle many 7Ds all that well and they do seem to trade a touch of micro-crispness away (unless it really is all in tone curves) and it probably makes it a pain in the neck for raw developers. If you applied a few small radius passes i'd think you'd eliminate any SNR gain you made so i still don't know that i see the point of it although i'm sure there is one. I mean it is starting to seem like it will turn out to be no big deal in the end but I don't see what the whole point of it was either.
ACR 5.5 seems to make 7D images about 1/3 stop darker
i noticed that IR used 1/3 stop longer exposure for their 7D image (then again their lights seem to change a bit each time) and the 50D image still seemed a trace brighter (but this also brings acr into play really need to look at the raw)
skibum5 wrote:
If you applied a few small radius passes i'd think you'd eliminate any SNR gain you made so i still don't know that i see the point of it although i'm sure there is one.
Well, they had put 18mp on the 7D sensor – no matter what.
Their marketing is still recovering from the D300 blow .
But I’m truly hoping that they will abandon this ‘unequal green response’ thing in the 7DII and will return to a normal bayer sensor and fight noise with other tech advances, not with color filters.
Thanks for the tests, btw. The results with ACR 5.6 seem quite good.
Zenon Char wrote:
Some Zoo pics today. Not sure of image limit. So EXIF data is one the reply. From this day on I am sending in every new camera to Canon Service for an oil change whether it needs it or not.
so that is sort of worthless. i will still post them up later. the 50D did appear to have a touch more of that micro-bite like 7D acr 5.5 vs acr 5.6 but i think the 18MP vs 15MP would be enough to make up for it.