Reading mode: Light Dark

1D MK II sample pictures

Go to last post
Michel said:
Now that I have played with the files a bit more I'm actually quite
impressed with the files, but only when taken through the DPP
application.
Click to expand...
Interesting, because DPP is said to take into account Canon's profiles for each lens, while other RAW convertors unmless they use the new DXO technology, have no such info.

Just a thought.

Asher
Michel26604 said:
DPP_STD_SH3_0001.jpg for example leaves hardly anything to desire.
Ok, it could be even a little bit sharper, but perhaps it's taken
with the 17-40mm lens, which is less than ultimately sharp... Can't
tell from the EXIF.

--
gr. Michel
http://www.yourimage.nl
Click to expand...
 
I see lots of purple fringing, if that is what you're referring to. I agree; the extra megapixels aren't looking like they're worth it so far. Hopefully the production version fixes some of the numerous shortcomings I see so far.
GWPHOTOGRAPHY said:
Discouraging indeed.
Chief said:
Apologize if someone has posted these pics before but this is the
first time I have seen them. Using CPP for conversion, high ISO
ones are truly spectacular. Maybe someone could translate as I
don't speak what appears to be Japanese to me.

http://homepage.mac.com/ipi/mark2/1D2.html

--
MOLON LABE!

Regards,
John
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Len
What's a camera without a photographer? (touche, Ger Bee)
 
shudderbug2 said:
How can anyone draw any real conclusions with 2 completely
different shots??
Click to expand...
What's completely? They're both at least ISO 1600. I've seen some 10D / D100 comparisons that didn't even use the same brand of lens ( Canon vs Nikkor ), so I think there's at least some merit here.
shudderbug2 said:
My apologizies for not seeing the significance of this comparsion.
Click to expand...
You're incredibly polite! I'm not trying to show any earth-shattering news, but the ISO performance is one of the primary reasons I'm interested in the 1D-2 ( and I don't think I'm alone on this one ), and I think the camera does a remarkable job here.
 
Tom K. said:
You should take a look through all his camera test galleries -
amazing stuff from every camera he touches. Sure adds weight to Ken
Rockwell's essay
Click to expand...
He, Hironobu Mochizuki is a God in the field of digital photograpy in Japan.
His works are really amazing.
 
Hmm, interesting indeed!

On the site are examples from the same image processed with both EVU and DPP and the difference is HUGE!

grM
med007 said:
Interesting, because DPP is said to take into account Canon's
profiles for each lens, while other RAW convertors unmless they use
the new DXO technology, have no such info.

Just a thought.

Asher
Click to expand...
--
gr. Michel
http://www.yourimage.nl
 
assuming the blue face pics are lit the same there seams to be more detail on the 1DII in the shadow to the right of the right eye socket

very nice ISO1600

a more film like shot as well out of the camera, but seams to sharpen up very well
Chief said:
Apologize if someone has posted these pics before but this is the
first time I have seen them. Using CPP for conversion, high ISO
ones are truly spectacular. Maybe someone could translate as I
don't speak what appears to be Japanese to me.

http://homepage.mac.com/ipi/mark2/1D2.html

--
MOLON LABE!

Regards,
John
Click to expand...
--
500+ Posts before it was reset :D
A muppet with Pro gear ;)
http://www.pbase.com/nick_eos/
 
Forrest said:
SNIP
Click to expand...
That's what I've got, but I think I would prefer the 17-40 because of the filters. On a 1.3 crop camera the Sigma 20/1.8 has a lot going for it.
Forrest41926 said:
SNIP
Paul has intimated that the 1Ds2 will be annouinced at Photokina,
Forrest41926 said:
and will not greatly increase the MP of the current IDs.
Click to expand...
But why would...? Is the new(ish) SLR/n that good, and still
cheap, that Canon is starting to feel threatened? It took them
three years to update the 1D; this just seems kind of sudden...?
Forrest41926 said:
If it uses the same engine as the 1D2, as the 1D and 1Ds use the
same engine, it will therefore be able to do around 5-6fps on it's
11-14MP sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Here's my links to one of Paul's 'hint' posts:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=7553089

The engine on the 1D2 moves around 70MP per second, which on an 11MP sensor gives around 6fps.

I can't find the thread now, but Paul certainly indicated Photokina for the announcement -after all, that is around 2 years after the original 1D.

As to why, the upgrade to the 1D is significant enough that a lot of guys like yourself might stick with the 1D2 rather than giving Canon more money still for a 1Ds.

The reason for expecting better performance, especially in low-light, is that the improvements in the 1D2 have come from two primary areas:

a) The use of the DIGIC2 processing, which will obviously be available for the 1Ds2
b) Much better microlenses, so that more of the light is actually used.

c) If Canon have indeed decided not to up the pixel count significantly, the relatvely large size should lead to at least equivalent low-light performance compared to the 1D2.

The rationale underlying this appears to be that Canon are fmoving towards combining their Pro cameras into just one model in the next upgrade, so the two are moving closer together - in this generation the 1D2 and the 1Ds2 will be able to pinch-hit for each other very effectively as landscape/sports cameras, although obviously they would each still have their speciality
Forrest41926 said:
And these specs would be IDEAL. I mean 9 fps would be great for
impressing my friends ( click! click! click! click! ) but honestly,
I think I'd leave it set to 5/6 most of the time ... and then
forget to set it back up to 9 when I need that. Honestly that
wouldn't be a step back at all, far as I'm concerned, and the
resolution ( for shooting -scapes ) would be a happy trade-off.

Any thoughts on the buffer? I shoot RAW mode almost exclusively on
my D60, but waiting for the card to flush is pretty irritating.
Especially when I want to show the model / client the last shot. I
sit and wait in situations like this, but when I'm shooting
wildlife ( when I could potentially need it most ) I go to jpeg for
the buffer depth.
Click to expand...
Again, it seems likely that the buffer will be the same absolute size as the 1D2 - so with the larger file sizes on the 1Ds2, you'd have to struggle alaong on something like a 20-30 frame buffer!
I don't know how you will cope!
Forrest41926 said:
Forrest41926 said:
That gives it a similar pixel size to the 1D2, so high ISO
performance etc should be similar, and it will also obviously have
the different things like Ettl-2.
Click to expand...
E-TTL 2 actually is a non-issue in my case. I'm a natural-light
kinda guy ... which is why the very high ISO performance is an
issue, especially with the specific projects I have in mind. My
fear is that the 1Ds has larger pixels than the D60, but more noise
at low ISOs. Actually, this is what's scared me about the 'Ds
since Day One. But it also makes me wonder what the 1Ds Mark 2
images might look like in the noise department...?
Click to expand...
Apparently the fill-flash is also in another class though, which I would have thought would be great for you.
Forrest41926 said:
But if the camera had 11 ( or 14 to keep up with Kodak ) megapixels
and had the same ISO 50/100, 800, and 3200 performance as the 1D Mk
2 does, and I'm not planning to print these campfire portraits
above 8x10 inches...
Forrest41926 said:
Such a camera should be ideal for your needs, having the resolution
of the 1Ds or a bit more, and most of the speed and flexibility of
the 1D2.
Click to expand...
That would ABSOLUTELY be the perfect camera for my needs. In fact,
if it were full-frame, it would be like a film camera, and be my
one-and-only for years on end. Until I broke it, most likely. Not
much more I could ask for. But that's the thing; such a camera
would at the very least kill off the 1D Mark 2, and would be a VERY
hard act to follow.
Click to expand...
Why should it kill off the 1D2? I can't imagine sports shooters wanting to have that file size, and they need 8.5fps, and why should Canon care if it did?

Due to the increased costs of FF, and the AA filter etc, it's gonna cost a lot more than the 1D2, maybe $6500
Forrest41926 said:
I hope Paul is right about this camera; when is Photokina?
Click to expand...
September - I think he has actually handled one.
Forrest41926 said:
Forrest41926 said:
Whatever you get, I look forward to your shots, just as I enjoy and
am informed by your posts!
Click to expand...
Thanks!! I'm looking forward to my shots more than anybody else
... and going out to make them. I'm making plans to spend a week
or two camping somewhere ( probably the Columbia River Gorge at
this point ) as soon as this temp job is up.
Click to expand...
I'm jealous! But I look forward to the vicarious pleasure of being invited around the campfire in your posts!
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
David Martin said:
I'm going to offer you some unpalatable and quite unsolicited
comments on your camera plans!
Click to expand...
Hah! That's what the forums are for! :-)
Member said:
I reckon it might be an idea for you to skip the 1D2 and wait for
the 1Ds2 given the needs you have stated, if it is at all possible
to finance a camera at that sort of cost.
Click to expand...
I was wondering similarly. Forrest might not mind waiting.
Member said:
Paul has intimated that the 1Ds2 will be annouinced at Photokina,
and will not greatly increase the MP of the current IDs.
Click to expand...
That's not exactly where he was going with that comment, although it's widely assumed that the 1DsMII may well come out during Photokina.
Member said:
If it uses the same engine as the 1D2, as the 1D and 1Ds use the
same engine, it will therefore be able to do around 5-6fps on it's
11-14MP sensor.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't THAT be something? :-)

And the speed issue is not really a high priority for Forrest. Although the price may be an issue for nearly anyone.

--

Ulysses
http://www.ulyssesphotography.com
 
Found the reference on the release date of the replacement 1Ds from 'the Pope'
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=7552019
Ulysses said:
David Martin said:
I'm going to offer you some unpalatable and quite unsolicited
comments on your camera plans!
Click to expand...
Hah! That's what the forums are for! :-)
Member said:
I reckon it might be an idea for you to skip the 1D2 and wait for
the 1Ds2 given the needs you have stated, if it is at all possible
to finance a camera at that sort of cost.
Click to expand...
I was wondering similarly. Forrest might not mind waiting.
Member said:
Paul has intimated that the 1Ds2 will be annouinced at Photokina,
and will not greatly increase the MP of the current IDs.
Click to expand...
That's not exactly where he was going with that comment, although
it's widely assumed that the 1DsMII may well come out during
Photokina.
Member said:
If it uses the same engine as the 1D2, as the 1D and 1Ds use the
same engine, it will therefore be able to do around 5-6fps on it's
11-14MP sensor.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't THAT be something? :-)

And the speed issue is not really a high priority for Forrest.
Although the price may be an issue for nearly anyone.

--

Ulysses
http://www.ulyssesphotography.com
Click to expand...
Don't encourage him Ulysses.
I'll be jealous enough if he gets a 1D2, but a 1Ds2.......
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
Member said:
Here's my links to one of Paul's 'hint' posts:
Click to expand...
They might not up the resolution. I would think they'd probably put in at least 12 so they can market more pixels ( I noticed a few gasps in response to Paul's hint ) and possibly 14 to keep up with the Joneses. Personally, I think 11 is just fine, and even the 8 in the 1D Mark 2 is pretty incredible.
Member said:
The engine on the 1D2 moves around 70MP per second, which on an
11MP sensor gives around 6fps.
Click to expand...
And this is one of the trade-offs involved with adding more pixels. It's not often that I use a bust mode, but when I do 3 seems a bit slow; I'd really like to have at least five. More pixels means less frames. ( And a more expensive buffer! ) I'll leave it to Canon to figure out exactly where those two should land. It's the noise I'm concerned with, which is also related to the pixel count, but not quite as directly.
Member said:
As to why, the upgrade to the 1D is significant enough that a lot
of guys like yourself might stick with the 1D2 rather than giving
Canon more money still for a 1Ds.
Click to expand...
This is a fantastic point. Makes a lot of sense.
Member said:
The rationale underlying this appears to be that Canon are fmoving
towards combining their Pro cameras into just one model in the next
upgrade, so the two are moving closer together - in this generation
the 1D2 and the 1Ds2 will be able to pinch-hit for each other very
effectively as landscape/sports cameras, although obviously they
would each still have their speciality
Click to expand...
Now this just seems too good to be true!! Makes sense that they would have a couple jack of all trades, but unrivaled at one in particular bodies. Let's hope this comes to pass!
Member said:
Apparently the fill-flash is also in another class though, which I
would have thought would be great for you.
Click to expand...
Probably would be great for me. It's just not my thing. I know I'm shooting myself in the foot at times...
Member said:
Why should it kill off the 1D2? I can't imagine sports shooters
wanting to have that file size, and they need 8.5fps, and why
should Canon care if it did?
Click to expand...
If I still get the ISOs, I'd be thrilled to give up the 8.5 fps.
Member said:
Due to the increased costs of FF, and the AA filter etc, it's gonna
cost a lot more than the 1D2, maybe $6500
Click to expand...
Hm. Interesting. If that were the case, the 1Ds 2 might fall to the $4,000 ( or slightly less ) level. Then there's the Rebel D at $900. Still leaves a lot of room for an EOS 3 D, although I do want a rugged and weatherproof camera body out on the trail.

So thanks for all the info / hints!!
Member said:
I'm jealous! But I look forward to the vicarious pleasure of being
invited around the campfire in your posts!
Click to expand...
Well, I can't wait to go out and shoot some beautiful Pacific Northwest place ( probably the Gorge ), and I'm definately going to post what I get in here ... but if you're interested in the vicarious / around the campfire aspect, I've been working on a travellogues section for my web site:

http://valhallaphotos.com/html/Travel/Travelogues/CrossCountry4.htm
http://valhallaphotos.com/html/Travel/Travelogues/CrossCountry5.htm

I have no idea how to do good travel writing, but I'm trying...
 
Member said:
Thanks for the link. Photokina is the Big Tuna. Everyone's been
anticipating it would be at that show to announce Canon's ultimate
flagship.
Click to expand...
Interesting. It's not really that I don't mind the wait, it's just that I really have no choice in the matter, and have plenty else going on to distract me.
Member said:
Now all we need are specs. However, as Paul mentioned, don't expect
miracles. :-)
Click to expand...
11 mpx with the ISO performance I'm seeing ( low and high end, maybe even a boost to 6400 thrown in for good measure ) with 5 fps would be a miracle to me!
 
Forrest said:
Forrest41926 said:
Here's my links to one of Paul's 'hint' posts:
Click to expand...
They might not up the resolution. I would think they'd probably
put in at least 12 so they can market more pixels ( I noticed a few
gasps in response to Paul's hint ) and possibly 14 to keep up with
the Joneses. Personally, I think 11 is just fine, and even the 8
in the 1D Mark 2 is pretty incredible.
Forrest41926 said:
The engine on the 1D2 moves around 70MP per second, which on an
11MP sensor gives around 6fps.
Click to expand...
And this is one of the trade-offs involved with adding more pixels.
It's not often that I use a bust mode, but when I do 3 seems a bit
slow; I'd really like to have at least five. More pixels means
less frames. ( And a more expensive buffer! ) I'll leave it to
Canon to figure out exactly where those two should land. It's the
noise I'm concerned with, which is also related to the pixel count,
but not quite as directly.
Forrest41926 said:
As to why, the upgrade to the 1D is significant enough that a lot
of guys like yourself might stick with the 1D2 rather than giving
Canon more money still for a 1Ds.
Click to expand...
This is a fantastic point. Makes a lot of sense.
Forrest41926 said:
The rationale underlying this appears to be that Canon are fmoving
towards combining their Pro cameras into just one model in the next
upgrade, so the two are moving closer together - in this generation
the 1D2 and the 1Ds2 will be able to pinch-hit for each other very
effectively as landscape/sports cameras, although obviously they
would each still have their speciality
Click to expand...
Now this just seems too good to be true!! Makes sense that they
would have a couple jack of all trades, but unrivaled at one in
particular bodies. Let's hope this comes to pass!
Forrest41926 said:
Apparently the fill-flash is also in another class though, which I
would have thought would be great for you.
Click to expand...
Probably would be great for me. It's just not my thing. I know
I'm shooting myself in the foot at times...
Forrest41926 said:
Why should it kill off the 1D2? I can't imagine sports shooters
wanting to have that file size, and they need 8.5fps, and why
should Canon care if it did?
Click to expand...
If I still get the ISOs, I'd be thrilled to give up the 8.5 fps.
Forrest41926 said:
Due to the increased costs of FF, and the AA filter etc, it's gonna
cost a lot more than the 1D2, maybe $6500
Click to expand...
Hm. Interesting. If that were the case, the 1Ds 2 might fall to
the $4,000 ( or slightly less ) level. Then there's the Rebel D at
$900. Still leaves a lot of room for an EOS 3 D, although I do
want a rugged and weatherproof camera body out on the trail.

So thanks for all the info / hints!!
Forrest41926 said:
I'm jealous! But I look forward to the vicarious pleasure of being
invited around the campfire in your posts!
Click to expand...
Well, I can't wait to go out and shoot some beautiful Pacific
Northwest place ( probably the Gorge ), and I'm definately going
to post what I get in here ... but if you're interested in the
vicarious / around the campfire aspect, I've been working on a
travellogues section for my web site:

http://valhallaphotos.com/html/Travel/Travelogues/CrossCountry4.htm
http://valhallaphotos.com/html/Travel/Travelogues/CrossCountry5.htm

I have no idea how to do good travel writing, but I'm trying...
Click to expand...
I very much enjoyed your links. Remember, I've got them in my bookmarks so I'll be watching you!
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
Ulysses said:
I'm surprised at how quickly everyone forgets Stephen Eastwoods
comments about Mark II sharpness. It's almost as if -- gasp -- they
don't believe him. :-)

Too bad. I guess I just tend to trust him due to the industry he's
in and the inherent need for sharpness.
Click to expand...
CMOS is "for soft", the industry he is in. CCD is "for landscapes". Sharp is all relative and over-played. "Trust" is an interesting comment on this one considering where his shots take place.... and "gasp" where did that come from? -- hehe :-)
Member said:
--

Ulysses
Click to expand...
--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com
 
Ok, the original size link didn't work. It can be downloaded here:

http://public.fotki.com/MeiAndChris/misc/01_24_70_01.html
Daffy_Duck said:
This is the Venice shot cropped and sharpened and some increased in
saturation. Looks damn good to me! But I'm just an amateur...what
do I know.

http://images5.fotki.com/v64/free/7a628/1/167259/738578/01_24_70_01-or.jpg

if that does not work...

http://images5.fotki.com/v64/photos/1/167259/738578/01_24_70_01-vi.jpg

Credit to the photographer Hironobu Mochizuki

Hope nobody jumps on me for posting someone else's photo. It's a
camera test shot!
Click to expand...
 
I can show you 2 ISO 1600 shots from the same camera taken of the same scene with the same lighting and just change the exposure of the shot and you will see a difference in noise characteristics.

I will agree again that the early shots I've seen with the Canon 1DMK II show much promise of excellent high ISO performance however, until Phil or someone gets it in a controlled environment to compare it side by side with other models, we can't really quantify how much better or worse it is.
Forrest41926 said:
What's completely? They're both at least ISO 1600. I've seen some
10D / D100 comparisons that didn't even use the same brand of
lens ( Canon vs Nikkor ), so I think there's at least some merit
here.
You're incredibly polite!
Click to expand...
Thank you, I just try to be respectful of others and live by the golden rule.
Forrest41926 said:
I'm not trying to show any
earth-shattering news, but the ISO performance is one of the
primary reasons I'm interested in the 1D-2 ( and I don't think I'm
alone on this one ), and I think the camera does a remarkable job
here.
Click to expand...
I hope that you're right and the camera is a leap ahead of the competition becacuse it might force the other manufacturers to work harder to get better results. Competition breeds innovation.

I'll politely stand by my original comment though that it's like comparing apples and oranges although I might be wrong but I can't come to a definitive conclusion regarding a comparsion based on these examples.

Kind Regards,

David Anderson
 
Chief said:
Apologize if someone has posted these pics before but this is the
first time I have seen them. Using CPP for conversion, high ISO
ones are truly spectacular. Maybe someone could translate as I
don't speak what appears to be Japanese to me.

http://homepage.mac.com/ipi/mark2/1D2.html

--
MOLON LABE!

Regards,
John
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing. Truly spectacular pixs!
--
Mac user
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top