DJbs EOS 1Ds Mk II Review

[djg]

Marc, you're right, I just realized you meant even if you tried you couldn't get up to 400KB at 800 pixels wide. I could on some of mine, but barely and because of the busy nature of the textures. Never mind the 600KB test, Dirk!

 

[dirk]

"Notice the redish chromatic aberration on the branches at top right (not an ISO thing). Unfortunate in every sensor I've had so far."

Hi DJ,

happened this also with the Contax ND?

Regarding the 400KB limit: It stays til monday, then we can decide.

I have the feeling that the 130KB image of Marc is darker (hair, skin tones etc.) than the 400KB version. apart of that I do not see really significant differences. But this could be also because of my Computerscreen, which is really not the best

What is your opnion?

Have you also images with more different colours etc. or "edgy" subjects to see maybe better differences between 130KB and 400KB?

Thanks in advance

 

[deshojo]

Hi DJ,
"Notice the redish chromatic aberration on the branches at top right (not an ISO thing). Unfortunate in every sensor I've had so far."

I have found that the red/purple fringing doesn't appear when using Zeiss lenses on a 20D, also the Canon 17-40mm L was considerably less prone than the 17-85mm EFS (still a tiny bit in the branches though!).
This would suggest to me that it may be a lens design/coating issue, perhaps exacerbating a weakness of Canon digital sensors.

I wonder if anyone else has noticed this unwanted effect dissapearing with different lenses?

Matt.

 

[jsmisc]

Is this one occasion when my red/green colour blindness problem is a bonus?

 

[djg]

It's happened to me with both Zeiss lenses in the ND, and now with the one Canon lens I've shot so far in the 1DsII, under the same basic edgy extreme high-contrast boundaries. Maybe this week-end if I get a chance I'll make a specific test with the various lenses I have and the same prone subject. I'm wondering is something could be done at the raw development level to minimize it.

The 400kb limit is really more of a safety net for occasional images. Probably for the most partwe'd be doing in the 200-300 range. It just becomes a pain to set the max to say 200 so you have to start trial-and-error for particular images to get them down.

John, sometimes apparent shortcomings turn out to be heaven sent

.

 

[fotografz]

DJ, try opening in RAW, make sure you select "Advanced" in the right side dialog box, click on the "lens" tab, and use the chromatic aberration slider to adjust. The trick is to super enlarge the offending portion so you can see the effect of the slider adjustments.

Under this tab you can also adjust out any light fall-off on the edges (vignetting)... you need to have the whole image on screen when doing that correction.

 

[djg]

Marc,

Been there, but the problem is that the effect cannot be applied to just the parts you're trying to fix (that I can see), so then you get that part looking better and the rest getting the CA

. At least that has been my experience so far - I'll keep trying to fuss with it. All that aside, I do love the PS raw developer. Thomas is doing a great job.

 

[jsmisc]

Thanks DJ. That makes me feel better. My brother commented that since he has become a little hard of hearing, the loud music in restaurants is less intrusive. So these things can have an upside!
All the best for Christmas and the New Year to everyone.
John

 

[fotografz]

DJ, I haven't experienced as much of the problem as you seem to have. I wonder if it is the post path you are following or something. Hmmm...

Anyway, I partied with Irakly last night, who looks like a pirate since his eye injury. Fortunately it wasn't his shooting eye, because it'll never be the same again. All the best to him for a speedy recovery... and a caution to all of us to protect our precious vision.

 

[irakly]

Marc, do you think I wore a red shirt just for you to convert it into B&W?