It seems that you really have to push the setting or settings significantly beyond what you normally would do for real life shots to get the mazing effect to come out. That reminds me of the ghosting effect that was "rectified" with a new firmware. Maybe if we scream hard and loud enough, Canon will come out with a new firmware to address this issue. But, I wonder what we will discover next .
AGeoJO wrote:
It seems that you really have to push the setting or settings significantly beyond what you normally would do for real life shots to get the mazing effect to come out. That reminds me of the ghosting effect that was "rectified" with a new firmware. Maybe if we scream hard and loud enough, Canon will come out with a new firmware to address this issue. But, I wonder what we will discover next .
Fred Tedsen wrote:
Lightroom 2.6 has been released, mazing is gone.
just to requote my latest comments from the other thread:
ok, i looked over the DPR ISO100 sample RAW (their copy was NOT as good as Paul's and probably more similar to mine)
and in all honesty I could only fine one spot where ACR 5.6 really seemed to drop any detail compared to ACR 5.5 and one other spot where it maybe dropped a hair of detail but I also found one spot where ACR 5.6 seemed to pull a little more detail and most of the images i really couldn't find any real difference, when there was it also seemed to be less moire and fringing and probably a truer representation so I didn't count those few other spots, so I don't think it can be said to be washing away detail, again tentative but sure looks rather promising to say the least
furthermore ACR 5.6 seems to color fringe less than ACR 5.5 and suffer less from moire
it has vastly less artifacting than ACR 5.5, even the somewhat worse copies don't really show mazing, certainly not anything you could with any reason in the world complain about
it has less artifacting that C1 too, having none of the nasty back and white speckling and corners of the maze left over nor the higher ISO blocking and stray dotting left over from fighting mazing
DPP has those C1 issues only worse and with less ways to try to control and get around them
and ACR 5.5 was of course riddled with mazing even if lacking the nasty dotting and blocking and smoothing of DPP
i would say it totally blows DPP out of the water and annihilates ACR 5.5 and handily, if not shockingly beats C1v5
all this is in terms of 7D didn't try other cameras with it yet (i wonder if it if it will reduce color frigning of fine lines and moire for the other bodies compared to previous ACR)
open questions:
just in general looking over more images, i did a really rushed quick comparison
will better copies like Paul's still end with less noise at lower and mid iso? will that still be a significant body to body difference? anyway, even if it was, it is a far, far less serious concern than the nasty artifact differences and there is no saying there will turn out to be more than a relatively modest difference anyway. i'd still rather have his copy but it might not be the most horrible thing in the world if you don't. Anyway will some copies still have 50-100% more noise even if of a very pleasing to the eye form that also doesn't damage detail much, if at all
will the better copues be able to pull even a hair better fine detail? my guess is it probably wouldn't be anything to worry about even if so
but things looks pretty promising
otoh, if i was weddded to DPP or C1 and got one of the likely many worser copies of the 7D I might not still be entirely thrilled not sure what those people should do if they are finicky or gonna do lots of heavy cropping or printing big but i'm starting to get the feeling that most 7D owners who use ACR may be good to go and nearly undoubtable so for those who got better copies like Paul's
anyway i will sleep on it and hopefully nobody discoveres something major that i missed and it bares out well overnight and tomorrow....
)