5D II look

Started Oct 8, 2008 | Discussions thread
Hans Kruse Veteran Member • Posts: 3,432
Re: 5D II look -- please look at sample posted yesterday

Edward Karaa wrote:

Very nice and lovely photo!

Thanks!

To my eyes, it has just some of this digital look where the fine
detail looks smoothed out. Although I have to say that the 1Ds series
have the best, least digital look from Canon. I myself use a 1Ds2,
and I believe the best camera in this respect was the 1Ds original. I
have always been pleased with the files of the 1Ds 1/2 series and
probably would enjoy the 1Ds3 as well, if I could afford it.

I personally thought the 5D files looked more digital when I replaced
my original 1Ds with the 5D. I was actually quite disappointed and
that's why I bought the 1Ds2 and it was an excellent decision. I
expect the 5D2 to have a similar look to the 5D as it is oriented
towards the same client category.

I have used the 5D for over two years and I found the files from the 5D very good. I would agree that the look of the conversions from RAW from either camera has a look you could call digital since film would not render details so clean and without noise. When you look carefully the details are rendered differently in different parts depending on where these details are located within and without of dof. I find details rendered very nicely even in 100% squarely within dof. Now we are looking at 100% which is superficial thing anyway. The important thing is how well these details are rendered on a good large print. I don't think this would look digital in any way in a large print except for the lack of noise and grain. The details are also rendered differently depending on the input sharpening settings used. I normally use quite a bit of masking to avoid smooth surfaces being sharpened which gives a less pleasant view. I believe that a lot of the talk about placky and digital looking emages are due to artifacts produced by the raw converterer and especially the sharpening done.

I found the 5D giving slightly less details in 100% but that is very marginal. I always shoot raw and I find bigger differences in different RAW converters that this slight difference from the 100% detail which again is not visivle really in a print. The real difference to the 1Ds mk3 in this respect is the incredible amount of details due to the high resolution. I would be VERY surprised if the 5D mk2 is not 100% identical to the 1Ds mk3 at lower ISO values and slightly better at high ISO values. The 1Ds mk3 is still remarkably good at ISO values up to and including ISO 3200 where it retains a surprising amount of detail. I'm referring to files convertered using Lightroom 2.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards,
Hans Kruse
Photo Gallery -- http://www.hanskruse.com
Workshops -- http://hanskrusephotography.blogspot.com

 Hans Kruse's gear list:Hans Kruse's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow