eh, that only works if you're not already invested in Canon lenses. But I do agree, if you're buying new, it is.
eh, that only works if you're not already invested in Canon lenses. But I do agree, if you're buying new, it is.
sdifox
No Lifer
- Sep 30, 2005
- 100,508
- 17,957
- 126
Originally posted by: daveshel
Originally posted by: sdifox
damn, and I was thinking about picking it up... maybe I'll wait a couple of months
I'm thinking I'll wait until more like a year from now. Be sure they get the bugs out and watch for a deal.
I am not in a hurry. Well, kindd was going to finally move from 35mm to DSLR
But I can wait.... I'll just get some better lenses <--- Still shooting Elan7
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,402
- 8,574
- 126
someone on dpreview was easily reproducing black dots, then turned off HTP, ALO, and NR and they went away. so the question is which is doing it? since ALO and NR aren't supposed to operate on raw, my money is on HTP.
another guy on dpreview tested the 5d2 against the 1ds3 and the d700. his conclusion was that the 5d2 and 1ds3 were basically equivalent as far as IQ all the way, through, and that the 5d2 had so much more resolution than the d700 that it overcame whatever noise existed all the way to 6400, where the two basically evened out. the d700 was slightly better at 25600, but that that setting isn't really useful on either camera unless it's a get it or miss evidence of the WMDs type of shot
another guy on dpreview tested the 5d2 against the 1ds3 and the d700. his conclusion was that the 5d2 and 1ds3 were basically equivalent as far as IQ all the way, through, and that the 5d2 had so much more resolution than the d700 that it overcame whatever noise existed all the way to 6400, where the two basically evened out. the d700 was slightly better at 25600, but that that setting isn't really useful on either camera unless it's a get it or miss evidence of the WMDs type of shot
Apparently, someone else reproduced the problem with all those off, and then the original poster also did and withdrew that claim. Bottom line -- disabling those settings doesn't fix the problem in all cases.
LOOK MA, THEY'RE GONE! -- Well almost . . .
Z3000, the guy I've mentioned several times for his amazing ability to track down problems by using adjustment softwares and knowlegde , mentioned below:
"Canon doesn't use 'proximity pixel leveling' for better gradation and detail. Canon's technique requires sharpening patterns applied to individual pixels based on differences in level and calculating(applying) diiferent contrast levels based on it.
It seems like too much contrast is applied in the area where highlight meets shadows.
Simply put, ill contrast control on the different area where highlight pixels and shadow pixels meet, too much of border contrast, just following the difference of highlight pixel to shadow pixel, is applied."
Oh well, I did the best I could to translate his words but after going through 2 finals and one eassy in a day, I can't really do better. Hope it, at least, gives some idea.
BTW, he mentioned that it can be fixed via fimware update.
Beside those problems mk2 has, I'm amazed by this guy's ability. He's made crop body to FF optical converter that doesn't degrade IQ. He has adjustment softwares of all major camera brands. Fine-tunes cameras to produce optimal IQ, and made AF speed of 85mm f/1.2 lens to be damn fast. He also calibrates other people's gear for free from time to time. Damn, I wish I could send my camera to him.
"Canon doesn't use 'proximity pixel leveling' for better gradation and detail. Canon's technique requires sharpening patterns applied to individual pixels based on differences in level and calculating(applying) diiferent contrast levels based on it.
It seems like too much contrast is applied in the area where highlight meets shadows.
Simply put, ill contrast control on the different area where highlight pixels and shadow pixels meet, too much of border contrast, just following the difference of highlight pixel to shadow pixel, is applied."
Oh well, I did the best I could to translate his words but after going through 2 finals and one eassy in a day, I can't really do better. Hope it, at least, gives some idea.
BTW, he mentioned that it can be fixed via fimware update.
Beside those problems mk2 has, I'm amazed by this guy's ability. He's made crop body to FF optical converter that doesn't degrade IQ. He has adjustment softwares of all major camera brands. Fine-tunes cameras to produce optimal IQ, and made AF speed of 85mm f/1.2 lens to be damn fast. He also calibrates other people's gear for free from time to time. Damn, I wish I could send my camera to him.
Nope, if anything I would say that Canon images ex-camera generally tend to have more "pop" than Sony.
He said that they (Canon RAW images) didn't seem to have the colour &"sparkle" of the Sony RAW.
To me, A900 does show more subtle images than Canon images in default settings. However, a few click will change such color settings dramatically. Canon may show very soft/low saturated colors if Neutural Picture Style is used. Canon may show crazy strong colors if Clear Picture Style is used. Same goes for Sony or any cameras. Argument over this camera generate "pop" image, That camera generates "flat" image seems pointless since a few years ago as cameras started to provide detailed color settings. This is not to say there's no difference between cameras (in terms of IQ characteristics,) but it's just silly to argue using words such as "pop" or "flat" because things are a lot more complicated.
Also, RAW is a data format, not an image file. Any RAW programs will read RAW files differently and we can't say this "RAW file doesn't seem to have colour &'sparkle.' simply because we're talking about RAW files.
Originally posted by: finbarqs
(ps - 24-105L f/4 IS teh awesome
apparently not on a 5DMk2 (either that or Canon QC on them let a dog slip through).
in which case Canon let a dog slip through not only at manufacture but also at their UK marketing/PR level because they new it was going to a reasonably influential reviewer.
well, Canon UK having seen the RAW samples forwarded to them by him agreed that something wasn't right & were supplying either a new 24-105mm or a new 5DMk2 +24-105mm.
Guess we'll see in the final review if that makes a difference.
Guess we'll see in the final review if that makes a difference.
moks78
Lifer
- Jan 5, 2001
- 10,581
- 1
- 0
http://www.kenrockwell.com/can...rk-ii/black-pixels.htm
Ken never fails to amaze me. Such a self-centered ignorant b......
Ken never fails to amaze me. Such a self-centered ignorant b......
At least he's good for a laugh. What amazes me is the number of people that recommend his sight on forums around the net.
My favorite part of the article has to be "Just get over it. It should be easy to fix by firmware or hardware if Canon wanted to." And "If Canon offers an upgrade or recall for this, I wouldn't bother to send my camera in...".
I just found out my 5D Mk II suffers from this problem after viewing a picture I took.
I took this picture at ISO 2000 with a 0.8" shutter in JPG.
If you zoom in on the moon and Venus which is below and left of the moon you will see the black spots people seem to suffer from.
Pic
I hope they remedy this problem.
Edit: To fix bad link
I took this picture at ISO 2000 with a 0.8" shutter in JPG.
If you zoom in on the moon and Venus which is below and left of the moon you will see the black spots people seem to suffer from.
Pic
I hope they remedy this problem.
Edit: To fix bad link
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
With more people chiming in about real world usage, I've read several accounts about the 5D2's sub-par AF. What it boils down to:
1) The center AF point is the only one worth using on a regular basis.
2) AI Servo performance is poor.
3) Poor performance in low-light, with wide-open apertures, with lightly-textured subjects.
Of course the AF situation is only made worse by the fact that Canon refuses to add the extra $2 worth of parts necessary for a built-in AF assist light, or trickle-down their pro-level AF like Nikon does.
1) The center AF point is the only one worth using on a regular basis.
2) AI Servo performance is poor.
3) Poor performance in low-light, with wide-open apertures, with lightly-textured subjects.
Of course the AF situation is only made worse by the fact that Canon refuses to add the extra $2 worth of parts necessary for a built-in AF assist light, or trickle-down their pro-level AF like Nikon does.
How is the video from this cam though? I know you cannot take long videos like a full blown camcorder but for those 30 second wildlife shots and the fact you can use any L glass makes it sound attractive for doing high end video and not spending tons more on a professional camcorder.
Canon has released new firmware for the 5D Mk2 which "improves and mitigates" the black dot and vertical banding problems.
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eo...eos5dmk2/firmware.html
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eo...eos5dmk2/firmware.html
The 1080 video is amazing. My friend is a videographer and I showed him a video shot with the camera and he was blown away.
Do a search for Vincent Laforet (i think that's his name). He has a smugmug with a few videos posted with a preproduction model.
I still don't know how to feel about this black dot issue.
I don't have this camera and probably won't for a little while.
Is it really that noticeable? It seems like the pictures I've seen are always 100%+ crops of the effected areas.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter