-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Another pre-production comparison of the 1DX - 1DXII - Impressive results.
- Thread starter rrccad
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos-1d
boldcolors
Veteran Member
Looking at the first picture, ISO 2000, there's a clear difference in color rendition. The chair in the 1DX image is way more saturated and pretty much the same red hue as the table. Also, the bear gets a reddish tone.
The mark II seems to do a much better job here as well. CFA related, in-camera processing or just a profile thing? Hard to say of course, but theories are welcome!
The mark II seems to do a much better job here as well. CFA related, in-camera processing or just a profile thing? Hard to say of course, but theories are welcome!
Last edited:
R
rrccad
Guest
it would explain why the same sensor always looks better on nikon versus sony.. nikon more thoughful, quiet and serious contemplation of the art and craft of photography.. sony .. more giddy squealing every time the camera gets pulled out.
Last edited:
R
rrccad
Guest
what i found interesting was the pink chair for sure.
and also the "tearing" of the red bench on the 1DX as ISO increased, versus the 1DXII.
rhlpetrus
Veteran Member
I see some lower saturation, especially as iso goes up, from the newer camera. Reminds me of the D700, which had clear cleaning of chroma noise in raw.
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
Last edited:
You stated that a non pure black raw file means you haven't reached physical limits. (unless I misinterpreted your statement, in which case I apologize). Based on physics that claim is erroneous. Even a perfect electrical system will be subject to quantum noise.
Quantum noise doesn't require photons. It's also purely and truly random. It's used as a seed for high quality random number generators and the like, but for years nerds have just sampled Webcam and other sources with the lens taped over heavily.
I know this sounds like sacrilege, but it's actually an interesting and the purely academic for photographers concept..outside of the discussion of "perfection" in low noise.
I know this sounds like sacrilege, but it's actually an interesting and the purely academic for photographers concept..outside of the discussion of "perfection" in low noise.
In physics, all definitive statements are erroneous. Including those that somebody else is wrong.
Perfect is perfect by definition.
aftab
Veteran Member
Significant improvement in shadow noise/DR, color noise, high ISO noise and probably color rendition (pink chair) too. DPP might have played some role here, but improvement is quite evident.
The other thing is that shadows are a little lighter now. So, the contrast appears to be a little less compared to 1D X. This could be due to DPP handling two cameras differently or it could be the sensor or both.
The other thing is that shadows are a little lighter now. So, the contrast appears to be a little less compared to 1D X. This could be due to DPP handling two cameras differently or it could be the sensor or both.
All snide comments aside my point was merely this: a read out of all 0s isn't going to happen on a sensor without some kind of raw cooking due to the way the world and physics work.
I could have been incredibly nit picky and pointed out raw files can't contain nothing and be raw files but I was attempting to discuss the intent of the op's statement rather than getting mired in clever little nit picks and philosophical debates.
Like those that Newton mechanics becomes "wrong" in certain limits? Or like those philosophical debates that Maxwell equations are "wrong" on a certain scale, etc.?
Again, nothing in physics is absolute. If you think that stating that obvious fact contributes something to the discussion, fine. But if you want to be helpful, perhaps you can tell us what the physical limit of the read noise caused by quantum noise is?
crashpc
Veteran Member
I believe they often play with this, and now they don't have to as much.... I'm waiting for some on》sensor sensitivity ramping. That would be awesome.
halfwaythere
Leading Member
- Messages
- 893
- Reaction score
- 492
There's definitely something wrong with the 1DX files. Since the 1DX and 6D are closely related I've never had my 6D produce such bad results even on a 3 stop push/pull.
Also anything more than half a stop at high ISO is wishful thinking.
Also anything more than half a stop at high ISO is wishful thinking.
boldcolors
Veteran Member
halfwaythere then ;-)
ImageAmateur
Veteran Member
Yes, I see that, bit bothering. Newer cameras should not lose that much saturation as ISO's rise. (or Sony/ Nikon do not).
Maybe now we see why they do not want pre prod models out in high res.
Hopefully corrected in final.
That's said, maybe at ISO51200 etc detail and clarity is more important than color saturation? At least for such as 'official' work and so on?
aftab
Veteran Member
I won't take that too seriously. DPP is not as good as LR, PS or some other programs in removing color noise, it desaturates. Moreover, you will have to consider slightly lower contrast and or slightly brighter image in the new camera for the same exposure settings.
aftab
Veteran Member
aftab
Veteran Member
Color noise is significantly reduced, but it is not totally gone.
It is there in ISO 6400 sample posted in Canon Jp website.
It is there in ISO 6400 sample posted in Canon Jp website.
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
You have a magic 6D then, because I definitely have. I took a sunrise picture a couple of weeks ago just to share on FB at ISO 100 and when I went to lift shadows, the color noise went NUTS below the horizon. I just ended up leaving the shadows unchanged and posted it as-is. (it's FB after all)
I wish I hadn't deleted the RAW and JPG after posting it to use as an example here.