Full Res 1DX files
- Thread starter IGADIZ
- Start date
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm quite surprised at the 1600 image. Her hair looks very soft and as though the image is already breaking up. They're not great
OP
- Messages
- 1,433
- Name
- Ivan
- Edit My Images
- No
1600 ISO looks to me as if it is a soft focus image.
The model image at ISO400 is spectacular!
(I am being sarcastic here...)
@Lukas
Thank you for posting the English link... I looked for a thread in this forum with this content before posting and could not find any....
The model image at ISO400 is spectacular!
(I am being sarcastic here...)
@Lukas
Thank you for posting the English link... I looked for a thread in this forum with this content before posting and could not find any....
Last edited:
I don't see that at all, it is f8 yet it looks soft, I have uploaded it to PS and gave it my preset sharpen and it is tons better but lots of it look soft and muddy.
OP
- Messages
- 1,433
- Name
- Ivan
- Edit My Images
- No
You were posting as I edited my post... it had my "I am being sarcastic" comment in the wrong place... If this is canon's best, us canon users are doomed!
- Messages
- 3,761
- Edit My Images
- No
If I were in your position I too wouldn't see any point of upgrading. seen the video of chap explaining techy stuff as well. nothing shocking.
the only thing is probably the clients expectations, someday they'll notice that there is a new canon
LongLensPhotography
Th..th..that's all folks!
- Messages
- 18,840
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
The samples are nearly certainly JPEGs from the camera. Yes, they are rather 'dull' and this is what I expected. I am waiting to see some RAWs before I make any conclusions. I would be very surprised if it didn't beat 1D mkIV, but then the 1DsIII might be replaced by the 5D successor (Nikon fashion). This would be good news price-wise, as there is just no way I can afford 1Dx just to gain more FPS and crazy high ISO, none of which really matter to me.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
daugirdas said:
They represent canon's new flagship £5k camera. You'd think they could do a little better then these all thing considered
LongLensPhotography
Th..th..that's all folks!
- Messages
- 18,840
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
I completely agree with you there.
The trouble is that Canon still can't produce good JPEGs 12 years on, but thanks god the RAWs are fantastic. Don't forget that even those JPEGs will look very good printed on A3+.
Do we agree, that Canon 5DII has a very capable and sharp sensor? I'd say yes.
Now let's have a laugh. Canon.jp were kind enough to publish 5DII sample images a while ago. http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos5dm2/eos5dm2_sample-e.html
The portrait This is so bad 1Dx looks light years better, and I just know it will perform in the hands of a real photographer. The samples also clearly show how bad 17-40mm L's are. I'm mega fed up with mine.So let's wait for independent reviews
I completely agree with you there.
The trouble is that Canon still can't produce good JPEGs 12 years on, but thanks god the RAWs are fantastic. Don't forget that even those JPEGs will look very good printed on A3+.
Do we agree, that Canon 5DII has a very capable and sharp sensor? I'd say yes.
Now let's have a laugh. Canon.jp were kind enough to publish 5DII sample images a while ago. http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos5dm2/eos5dm2_sample-e.html
So let's wait for independent reviews
The sample of the 1dx on the euro site look a damn sight better than on the Japanese one. And they are larger too so I reckon someone is fooling around.
cuthbert
Pugh Pugh Barney McGrew Me Dibble and Grubb
- Messages
- 2,042
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i think there is something going on here too, the image http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/eosd/1dx/samples/downloads/002.jpg was shot with a 135 f/2 at f5.6. in theory be absolutely razor sharp, but it isn't. even at f2 the lens is significantly sharper than this. it's actually pretty dreadful. on a 5d2, you'd be able to count the eyelashes on that lady at f2 let alone f5.6.
i'm sure this is just a side effect of a pre-production camera and some pretty careless post processing.
i'm sure this is just a side effect of a pre-production camera and some pretty careless post processing.
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 1,433
- Name
- Ivan
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't see any differences between the files in my link and that of Lucas.
Can you post your euro-site link?
- Messages
- 5,334
- Name
- matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think the problem is that a few years ago around the era of 1dMk2 and 5d the images were about as good as you were ever going to get with a small format digital camera (35mm size sensor or thereabouts) and everything since then image wise has been a minor tweek. Lenses arent going to be a mega step up either, so we are left with next generation cameras giving us upgraded technology in terms of Fps, Better metering (which I'm not sure they do) and better/faster buffer size and write speeds. I dont think there's far either Canon or anyone can do to radically improve the IQ from where we were 5/6 years ago in top end cameras in run of the mill shots, which lets be fair these posted ones are, where the top enders score is ability to capture images they couldnt capture 5 years ago and we havent seen any of those posted as yet.
Matt
Matt
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 5,334
- Name
- matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sounds like you're in denial Matt
Maybe but I dont think so, seriously, the 5D2 produces nice images agreed, but that much better than the Mk1/Classic? I appreciate more Mp means you can crop heavier but if you framed the way you wanted it then you wouldnt have to crop (OK you may not be able to, which is why I said later cameras can get images older ones cant). 1D3/4 better images than a Mk2.
Talking as we are now just about the basic easily caught image on the sensor (you know daytime at f8) have we moved very far away from where we were 5/6 years ago despite having maybe 2 or 3 revisions to the camera (like for like obviously). I think the handling etc has improved of course, low light ability has improved, fps maybe and loads of other peripheral stuff and obviously this is all worthwhile but the basic image?
Not saying I wont rush out and buy a 5D mk3 when it hits the shopfloor though
Matt
LongLensPhotography
Th..th..that's all folks!
- Messages
- 18,840
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
Maybe but I dont think so, seriously, the 5D2 produces nice images agreed, but that much better than the Mk1/Classic? I appreciate more Mp means you can crop heavier but if you framed the way you wanted it then you wouldnt have to crop (OK you may not be able to, which is why I said later cameras can get images older ones cant). 1D3/4 better images than a Mk2.
Talking as we are now just about the basic easily caught image on the sensor (you know daytime at f8) have we moved very far away from where we were 5/6 years ago despite having maybe 2 or 3 revisions to the camera (like for like obviously). I think the handling etc has improved of course, low light ability has improved, fps maybe and loads of other peripheral stuff and obviously this is all worthwhile but the basic image?
Not saying I wont rush out and buy a 5D mk3 when it hits the shopfloor though
Matt
Everything is relative isn't it? I reasonable expect 5D mk1 and mk2 to perform identically at small apertures like f/16 due to diffraction, but at f/5.6 there should be significant difference in details (as long as in focus).
Af differences are even more significant than that, sadly we have to compare 5 and 1 series here. 21mp out of focus image is most likely useless compared to nice and sharp 10mp.
Noise - older cam's just can't do ISO6400, the new ones can.
Sensor coatings - or the absence of them can mean an extra 15min spent editing each image. (note 5DII has no Flourinated coatings, just the useless sonicator)
So everything is very relative and it depends on one's photographic needs. Surely 1Dx looks like the best canon yet (despite Canon.jp lack of ability to take suitable test shots)
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Maybe but I dont think so, seriously, the 5D2 produces nice images agreed, but that much better than the Mk1/Classic? I appreciate more Mp means you can crop heavier but if you framed the way you wanted it then you wouldnt have to crop (OK you may not be able to, which is why I said later cameras can get images older ones cant). 1D3/4 better images than a Mk2.
Talking as we are now just about the basic easily caught image on the sensor (you know daytime at f8) have we moved very far away from where we were 5/6 years ago despite having maybe 2 or 3 revisions to the camera (like for like obviously). I think the handling etc has improved of course, low light ability has improved, fps maybe and loads of other peripheral stuff and obviously this is all worthwhile but the basic image?
Not saying I wont rush out and buy a 5D mk3 when it hits the shopfloor though
Matt
LOL me too
You have a point though. On the odd occasion that I take a good snap, it's got almost nothing to do with the camera, and everything to do with the subject, the light, and timing.
There are exceptions to that though, such as landscapes where sometimes a lot if the natural beauty is contained in the finer details. And sport/wildlife, where you just don't stand a chance without a lot of expensive gear.