1d mk2 and 5d

[Leigh_Adams]

[ QUOTE ]
With RAW capture, the 1D Mark II does compete image-wise with the 5D. The primary difference is a little more resolution on the 5D, but otherwise they are practically identical:

http://www.davidhophotography.com/tests/bottletest.html

[/ QUOTE ]

I just can't agree, I wish I could.

I've been comparing similar pro shots taken on a tripod with MLU from the days I used my 1DII to more recent shots with the 5D. There is simply much more 'in there' with the 5D. I'm happy to agree that in terms of colour and contrast they are quite similar, although the 5D seems inherently a lot sharper due to the less strong anti-moire filter. I don't need to process the 5D/RSP shots any further

Another big advanatage is when I need to uprate to include people in the shot, I can easily get away with 400ISO on the 5D and hardly notice, something I couldn't do on the 1 series

The acid test is my clients who are saying that they prefer the newer stuff when it is reproduced.

Leigh

[DavidHo]

Try taking the exact same photo on the same day with the same exposure, aperture, shutter speed, and ISO settings. Convert both RAW files with the same converter. That's the real test.

[Leigh_Adams]

[ QUOTE ]
Try taking the exact same photo on the same day with the same exposure, aperture, shutter speed, and ISO settings. Convert both RAW files with the same converter. That's the real test.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, done that, what I got was a file much bigger, with better shadow detail with the 5D.

Sorry, but that is what you get. The 5D files are nearly a match for 1DsII files and significantly superior to 1D2 files.

If they weren't why would anyone buy a camera with a sensor bigger than 8 meg?

Leigh

[E_J_Peiker]

Quite frankly there is absolutely no comparison between the quality of a 5D file and a 1D Mark II file. The 5D blows it away for highlight detail, shadow detail, dynamic range, and overall detail rendering. This is very easily verified with side by side tests on the same set-up and is very repeatable from body to body using both RAW and JPEG files. The 1D Mark IIn comes closer but still is not a match. This is despite having the same pixel pitch but the sensors are otherwise quite different as is the processing of the image. Many people tend to get in denial about there own equipment's shortcommings because they invested hard earned money in what they have and ten to become un-objective.

[Leigh_Adams]

[ QUOTE ]
Many people tend to get in denial about there own equipment's shortcommings because they invested hard earned money in what they have and ten to become un-objective.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm afraid that's true and I've been as guilty as anyone.

The other thing to remember is that this technology is moving along FAST, particularly in the realm of shadow detail, dynamic range and anti-moire issues. The 5D is *much* more 'naturally sharp' than the 1D2 and requires a lot less post-processing.

This is not to say that older dslr's aren't still excellent, they are (the 1DsII is superb) but they are simply being overtaken, as the 5D will be (probably next week [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

Leigh

[stevenmartin]

Talk is cheap folks. Can someone post a pair of small crops of 5D versus something else. Preferably with a real subject not some lame still life. A skin tone would make it even better. It should be easy if someone still has several bodies. It's a funny thing evaluating images. (There are people out there still trumpeting their magical D30 and D60's as never been not bettered yet). One guys blowing away is another guys shrug.

Thanks a bunch....Steve

[Leigh_Adams]

[ QUOTE ]
Talk is cheap folks. Can someone post a pair of small crops of 5D versus something else. Preferably with a real subject not some lame still life. A skin tone would make it even better. It should be easy if someone still has several bodies. It's a funny thing evaluating images. (There are people out there still trumpeting their magical D30 and D60's as never been not bettered yet). One guys blowing away is another guys shrug.

Thanks a bunch....Steve

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a difficult thing to do accurately. Although one could shoot two scenes with the same lens at the same ISO with the same lighting you are always going to get variations in the RAW processing because of the difference in camera profiles, no two are exactly alike.

Quite why anyone wouldn't believe us I don't know, personally I *adored* my 1 series and would not have given it up without finding something much better for image quality.

What can't be disputed is the sheer increase in size of the image of a 5D, which on its own means a lot more ability to crop and (for me) the greatness of having full frame. Looking around a 5D image at 100% in BreezeBrowzer there is just so much more to look round (best part of 50% more)

Leigh