That is the difference, I'm not a pro who sell prints and I never make big
print since I don't have the wall to hang them but I enjoy shooting and veiw
them at 100% pixel size on my computer screen.
On the other hand, this ISO125 example doesn't look good at +2 stop boost
even scale down to 1000 pixel, I still see pattern noise with this small web
image:
http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_7615.JPG
Acceptance stand is very complex, some seek for high resolution, some high
ISO, some better color....
BTW, I also enjoy playing with different softwares so I know some RAW
converters don't do well in color rendering but many poeple just prefer them
for better workflow.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fenwick"
> 2009/12/2 C.H.Ling
>
>> I'm sure there are still thousands of people very happy with the 5D II,
>> it
>> depends on how they use the camera and their acceptance standard.
>
>
> I use it to take photographs, which I intend to print. My acceptance
> standard has led me on a long journey from OM through Leica's and various
> medium format experiments, and finally to the 5D and then the 5D2, which
> gives the best results of any of them, even when using some of my original
> OM lenses. There is no perfect camera, of course.
>
>
>> If one
>> don't boost exposure in post processing then it should be fine. With this
>> noise problem you are limited when playing with HDR. For example shooting
>> to
>> the sun, one may shot at -3 stops to retain the details of the sun and
>> then
>> push the shadow during post processing so you can mix a normal developed
>> image with a boosted one to make a better one. To ensure lower noise you
>> need low ISO and this require NR to remove the pattern noise due to this
>> problem and low contrast details could be lost in the process.
>>
>> In most cases if you print the image the shadow noise is not easy visible
>> as
>> paper has much narrow D-range, shadow and highlight are usually
>> sacrificed
>> for a good mid-tone.
>>
>
> In most cases if you don't print the image nobody will see it at a size
> that
> reveals a tenth of its subtle detail and tonality unless they are peering
> at
> huge screen enlargements of tiny portions of the image.
>
>
>> To me, if I pay that money I need something better, such problem was not
>> on
>> my 40D, I don't expect it on a 5D II.
>>
>
> My only previous canon was a 5D, and the new one is better in every way.
> Anyway, as I said before I don't really want to argue here, except maybe
> with the implication that unless one has a low 'acceptance standard' the
> 5D
> is not worth consideration until there is a mkIV!! If it really caused me
> a
> problem, I would probably get a 40D for next to nothing to shoot -3 stop
> frames of the sun, and stick with my 5D2 for everything else, where it's
> clearly better!
>
> Tom
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
