Remember, smaller pixel pitch means diffraction kicks in sooner.
The ISO 100 image rji2goleez posted looks like it has had NR then oversharpened. If you look at the foreground rocks, the seams in the panels on the building and the lights to the left you can see this.
Might just be an early firmware trick to get less savvy review sites to give more positive reviews </conspiracy-theory>
I\'ll accept that it\'s a real issue when someone posts a raw shot converted to jpeg in bibble, lightroom or ACR with no sharpening, NR, or manipulation. Would also help if they shot with a sharp prime at a reasonable aperture with MLU, remote release and tripod. All of this stuff can be read from the exif.
For the ISO100 shot:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colour noise reduction was applied at 25 on the iso100 shot (lightroom default), you should probably change your lightroom defaults.
Luminance smoothing at 53 - might account for the look of serious in camera NR
Highlight recovery at 36
Contrast 34
Clarity 45
brightness +61 (would introduce noise)
Split toning has been applied as well
The image was then resharpened with 74/1.0/0 and 25 on the detail slider - this would further the NR/oversharpened look.
vibrance set to +26.
All that info is in the EXIF for the ISO100 shot
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nov 29, 2008 at 01:04 AM
Previous versions of thrice's message #6430037 « Canon 5D Mark II master thread »
