canon 1ds mark II

[Andy]

it's a lot of camera! (and it ought to be http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/11389300-Ti.gif http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/11389300-Ti.gif ) well, i got my hands on it today. i have really just begun to familiarize myself with it.

some of my reservations before buying are still holding true - i really love the form factor of the 20d, and while i knew the 1ds mark II was a ton bigger and heavier, i still wanted to try it out. the look and feel are battle-quality. it's quite a joy to behold!

looking the the viewfinder nearly made me cry. it's so big, bright and beautiful! http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/11746842-Ti.gif

there 45 focus points, that's pretty sweet - i enjoyed the extra flexibility of more focus points to choose from. and it does make a difference if you like to shoot wide open, focus and then recompose can cause dof errors.

i'm a little concerned how my 16-35L will perform on the ff body. the folks over on the 1d forum at dpr have nothing good to say about this lens on the canon ff, but i have had stellar results from the lens on my 1.6x bodies. this could be a potential deal killer for me, as i really like to shoot wide. on a positive note - it's so freakin' cool to look through the viewfinder and see the whole 16mm fov! i'd almost forgotten what it looks like :wxwax

the files are beasts! crimony - 18-21meg raws and roughly 10 meg jpgs :lol3

i'm looking forward to shooting on the streets of new york with it next week.

stay tuned.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12579798-O.jpg

[DJ-S1]

Way to go, Andy! :clap I can't wait to see what you capture with that new monster. You're gonna get Popeye arms hauling that one up to your eye!:wink :lol3

[Michiel de Brieder]

[turning green with envy] :rofl nah, I'm glad for you! Must be great to hold and indeed view! One of the main reasons for me to have FF would be the much bigger viewfinder and true FOV (been bothered by that in a studio environment, I really wanted to use the 70-200 but it was just too much tele :cry)
Kudos on the purchase Andy!

[Andy]

1600 and 3200

appear every bit as good as the 20d. iow, really low noise! canon really has the sensor noise thing beat imo. properly exposed 1600 on the 1ds mk2 would not need noise reduction for a print imo.

:clap canon!

[Michiel de Brieder]

1600 and 3200

appear every bit as good as the 20d. iow, really low noise! canon really has the sensor noise thing beat imo. properly exposed 1600 on the 1ds mk2 would not need noise reduction for a print imo.

:clap canon! I was afraid of the ISO performance.... Perhaps in some years when I accumulate some cash :wink.... The 1Ds MK II would be the ultimate camera for concerts then, besides excellent high ISO performance also the ability to heavily reduce noise by resizing and beter crop-ability [drool]
Any sign of banding with the mk II? I know you haven't been troubled by it with the 20D (neither have I :D)
Cheers

[MainFragger]

1. Do you think the learning curve on this camera would be harder for someone who is use to shooting with pro cameras, or for someone who is just going to start shooting with pro cameras. In other words, will a pro feel like he has to relearn this camera, and run into more foibles than someone who just picked up their first pro camera and had no preconceptions?

2. I've had my eye on this camera since I've first heard of it, and lobster syndrome kicked in (My parents call me lobster boy because without knowing anything about expensive foods/items, and without seeing the price, I always manage to pick and like the most expensive item offered). I am usually pretty broke, but soon will have an opportunity to have enough money availble to pick this camera up. My question is... Do you feel that someone who eventually wants to be a pro should start with the best in hopes of just having that much less to overcome in shortcomings and image quality, and in cost in having to upgrade later? Or do you feel someone just starting as a pro would be better off getting a lesser camera and upgrading as they feel the need to? I tend to learn features pretty quickly (I do tech support for a living and often have to create many of the troubleshooting techniques for our facility off the top of my head while dealing with p.o.'ed customers), and my fear is that even though I may not "Need" such a powerful camera now...in 6 months I will find reasons to want it, and then not have the money available to me anymore.

MainFragger

[Andy]

1. Do you think the learning curve on this camera would be harder for someone who is use to shooting with pro cameras, or for someone who is just going to start shooting with pro cameras. In other words, will a pro feel like he has to relearn this camera, and run into more foibles than someone who just picked up their first pro camera and had no preconceptions?

2. I've had my eye on this camera since I've first heard of it, and lobster syndrome kicked in (My parents call me lobster boy because without knowing anything about expensive foods/items, and without seeing the price, I always manage to pick and like the most expensive item offered). I am usually pretty broke, but soon will have an opportunity to have enough money availble to pick this camera up. My question is... Do you feel that someone who eventually wants to be a pro should start with the best in hopes of just having that much less to overcome in shortcomings and image quality, and in cost in having to upgrade later? Or do you feel someone just starting as a pro would be better off getting a lesser camera and upgrading as they feel the need to? I tend to learn features pretty quickly (I do tech support for a living and often have to create many of the troubleshooting techniques for our facility off the top of my head while dealing with p.o.'ed customers), and my fear is that even though I may not "Need" such a powerful camera now...in 6 months I will find reasons to want it, and then not have the money available to me anymore.

MainFragger

learning curve - yeah even a curve from 1.6x bodies like the 10d, 20d etc. it's bigger, heavier, and full-framier :D so the differences are in metering choices and exposures and in lens performance and usage, because everything's magnified on the ff.

i think you should start with the 20d, put some $$ into good glass, and get the ff when you hit a brick wall with the 20d.

[Andy]

I was afraid of the ISO performance.... Perhaps in some years when I accumulate some cash :wink.... The 1Ds MK II would be the ultimate camera for concerts then, besides excellent high ISO performance also the ability to heavily reduce noise by resizing and beter crop-ability [drool]
Any sign of banding with the mk II? I know you haven't been troubled by it with the 20D (neither have I :D)
Cheers

no banding whatsoever that i can see or even force.... any iso.

:D

[Steve Cavigliano]

Andy,

HoooBoyyyy, Santa came early for you :super I am really happy for you. I know how much you wanted this camera. I sure hope you can get acceptable results with the 16-35mm. As you say, this is a stellar performer on the 20D, it would be a shame if it didn't do as well on a FF camera. Plus, I know how much you enjoy wide. Not many other high quality wide zoom options out there :dunno

So is this a "test drive"? Or, are you thinking of keeping it? If you keep it, are you going to keep the 20D too? Have you tried it with the 580EX yet? I know, I ask lots of questions.....lol :rofl

Congratulations :thumb Like everyone else, I'm green with envy. You have to promise (no matter how much I beg), to not let me look through the VF. Doing that with your 10D and 20D damaged me for life :rofl The DW would kill me :whip if I tried to spend $8000 on another camera, so soon. She's still in intensive care about the $5000 20D kit....LOL

I see many more Sting shows in your wife's future :wink BTW, he's here in Feb.


Steve

[wxwax]

Since I'm 1 for 1 in predictions, :flip here's my next one. Despite concerns about edge softness with his beloved 16-35, Andy will keep the DsII, and sell his 20D on the internet. Shortly thereafter he'll begin posting questions about computer upgrades. :evil

:rofl

[MainFragger]

Since I'm 1 for 1 in predictions, :flip here's my next one. Despite concerns about edge softness with his beloved 16-35, Andy will keep the DsII, and sell his 20D on the internet. Shortly thereafter he'll begin posting questions about computer upgrades. :evil

:rofl


Hmmm...maybe that is why he was hinting I'd want to go with the 20D!

[wxwax]

Hmmm...maybe that is why he was hinting I'd want to go with the 20D!
:lol3 Always thinking ahead, that lad.

[pathfinder]

Since I'm 1 for 1 in predictions, :flip here's my next one. Despite concerns about edge softness with his beloved 16-35, Andy will keep the DsII, and sell his 20D on the internet. Shortly thereafter he'll begin posting questions about computer upgrades. :evil

:rofl

I'm running a fast G5 and 8 Mgbt files from a 20D can slow it down when running a filter like Neat Image inside PS - I can only imagine what files from the 1DsMKll are like to process.

Rutt and I have had discussions about the processing power the 1DsMkll files require. I think you may be right about Andy re: new computers waxy.

[Andy]

I'm running a fast G5 and 8 Mgbt files from a 20D can slow it down when running a filter like Neat Image inside PS - I can only imagine what files from the 1DsMKll are like to process.

Rutt and I have had discussions about the processing power the 1DsMkll files require. I think you may be right about Andy re: new computers waxy.

here are some cr2 and jpgs and one processed tiff (processed in dpp). the cr2 and the jpgs are untouched
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12635532-L.jpg

here are some full size jpgs that have been edited (sharpening, curves, etc)

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12635531-L.jpg

the bald-one and onethumb better fix the 8mb smugmug upload limit, eh? :lol3

[pathfinder]

here are some cr2 and jpgs and one processed tiff (processed in dpp). the cr2 and the jpgs are untouched
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12635532-S.jpg

here are some full size jpgs that have been edited (sharpening, curves, etc)

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12635531-S.jpg

the bald-one and onethumb better fix the 8mb smugmug upload limit, eh? :lol3

Wow - Now those a big suckers. I may just stick with my measely ole 8Megapixel cameras after all. Congrats Andy, on your new tool. :thumb

[Andy]

Since I'm 1 for 1 in predictions, :flip here's my next one. Despite concerns about edge softness with his beloved 16-35, Andy will keep the DsII, and sell his 20D on the internet. Shortly thereafter he'll begin posting questions about computer upgrades. :evil

:rofl

we'll see :D

i'm smart enough (barely) to know that this camera requires some practice and experience to get things right. with ff, everything's magnified eh? so, for example, i can hold my 70-200 i.s. at 1/6th second on my 20d, i'm prolly not gonna be able to do that on the ff. i'm going to shoot with it for the week, couple days in nyc, then off to the coast again and i'll shoot some california with steve on thursday night - mebbe san francisco.

oh i can't stand the review lag - 1 sec longer than on my 20d - it crimps my chimping :lol3

[Andy]

Since I'm 1 for 1 in predictions, :flip here's my next one. Despite concerns about edge softness with his beloved 16-35, Andy will keep the DsII, and sell his 20D on the internet. Shortly thereafter he'll begin posting questions about computer upgrades. :evil

:rofl

downsized pic (http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12639052-L.jpg )

here are some full-res files (broken in thirds b/c of the upload limit). the edges don't suck.

the left third of the photo (http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12639053-O.jpg ) the middle third (http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12639058-O.jpg ) the right third (http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12639060-O.jpg )

[fish]

those are the shortest seagulls I've ever seen. :D

[wxwax]

the edges don't suck.



Yeah, doesn't seem that bad to me, but I'm no expert.

[Andy]

nothing special. i really haven't be able to do much this weekend 'cept fire off some test shots here and there. i'm looking forward to giving it a good go this week in nyc and then san fran.

iso 1600, canon 35mm f/1.4L at f/1.4

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12640661-L.jpg

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12640662-L.jpg

iso 100, 70-200 f/2.8L i.s. at f/2.8

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12640663-L.jpg

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12640655-L.jpg

[wxwax]

Even your throwaways are cool shots, Andy. You're right, I don't see any banding in the high ISO shots. Love the first birdie. I feel like I can reach in and touch the pebbles on the second bird shot.

[Andy]

Yeah, doesn't seem that bad to me, but I'm no expert.

sid, that wide angle pic gives me some encouragement. i wouldn't be surprised if there's some different sharpening techniques that one has to learn with images such as this. and again - this is an in-camera processed jpg (lowest settings for contrast, sharpness) and then processed in post. i think that using the raw file would yield an even better result...

y'know, i read with amusement certain threads on the other more gear-oriented forums, and there are literally guys who will shoot newspapers taped up on their walls, to determine sharpness or softness. and the flame wars that go on and on! oh my :lol3 .... for me, it's a "feel" thing. i will shoot for a while, normal shooting for me - and i'll know, in post, if there's a problem - i don't need nancy, sluggo, and doonesbury to tell me :D

[Andy]

Even your throwaways are cool shots, Andy. You're right, I don't see any banding in the high ISO shots. Love the first birdie. I feel like I can reach in and touch the pebbles on the second bird shot.

the second bird (the pigeon) is an agressive crop - like maybe one fifth of the whole image - and the crop is still 3 megs :yikes

:clap :clap :clap

thanks sid :D

[wxwax]

i will shoot for a while, normal shooting for me - and i'll know, in post, if there's a problem - i don't need nancy, sluggo, and doonesbury to tell me :D
And you have a rather talented eye. Anyway, wrt sluggo, it's just how some folks are wired... they get obsessive about stuff, and pick away until they find a fault. Meanwhile, they've left the real world far, far behind.

[Andy]

i said earlier that the high iso performance of this camera is as good as the 20d (personal experience) and the 1d mk2 (from examples i've seen). here's a shot of iso 3200, tough scene, lots of color and lights. it looks okay. it would respond well to noise removal tools, if one needed to make a big print from this type of file. i've also no doubt that a more typical type of scene would look even better. i'll try to shoot some this week.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12641675-L.jpg

and a 100% crop from this full image (http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12641672-O.jpg ) (warning, 600KB)

[pathfinder]

i said earlier that the high iso performance of this camera is as good as the 20d (personal experience) and the 1d mk2 (from examples i've seen). here's a shot of iso 3200, tough scene, lots of color and lights. it looks okay. it would respond well to noise removal tools, if one needed to make a big print from this type of file. i've also no doubt that a more typical type of scene would look even better. i'll try to shoot some this week.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12641675-S.jpg

and a 100% crop from this full image (http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12641672-O.jpg ) (warning, 600KB)


Even at 3200, the digtal file blows away a film image shot at 400 or 800 ASA. Remember when they said digital would never replace film? Or that 35mm film was a lot better than a DSLR?

[Andy]

Even at 3200, the digtal file blows away a film image shot at 400 or 800 ASA. Remember when they said digital would never replace film? Or that 35mm film was a lot better than a DSLR?

and what i can't stand is the pixel-peeping, measurebating digerati that can't and or don't remember what asa 400 or 800 film at 8x10 even looked like. how sharp is sharp? yeah, i can make sharp shots. but sharpness alone isn't the measure of a great photograph....

you're right, put 3200 up against that any day of the week :D

[Andy]

and don't worry - the first thing i'm handing you is 3lbs of full-frame joy to behold :D

it's more than a test drive, i do own the camera. the question is, does it stay in my bag? can't say yet. it's really nice to have. i'm not ditching the 20d yet either :D no, i haven't tried the 580ex with it yet, no time for that even! holidays and all, y'know?

Andy,

HoooBoyyyy, Santa came early for you :super I am really happy for you. I know how much you wanted this camera. I sure hope you can get acceptable results with the 16-35mm. As you say, this is a stellar performer on the 20D, it would be a shame if it didn't do as well on a FF camera. Plus, I know how much you enjoy wide. Not many other high quality wide zoom options out there :dunno

So is this a "test drive"? Or, are you thinking of keeping it? If you keep it, are you going to keep the 20D too? Have you tried it with the 580EX yet? I know, I ask lots of questions.....lol :rofl

Congratulations :thumb Like everyone else, I'm green with envy. You have to promise (no matter how much I beg), to not let me look through the VF. Doing that with your 10D and 20D damaged me for life :rofl The DW would kill me :whip if I tried to spend $8000 on another camera, so soon. She's still in intensive care about the $5000 20D kit....LOL

I see many more Sting shows in your wife's future :wink BTW, he's here in Feb.


Steve

[mercphoto]

and what i can't stand is the pixel-peeping, measurebating digerati that can't and or don't remember what asa 400 or 800 film at 8x10 even looked like. how sharp is sharp? yeah, i can make sharp shots. but sharpness alone isn't the measure of a great photograph....

Agreed, I've seen it too. I don't quite understand viewing a photo on a computer screen at 100%, or more. It will dither differently on paper anyway. Or worrying about how a 20x30" print will look when viewed from 9" away. A 6.3MP digital image, captured in-camera JPG, will look better than same-ISO 35mm film will, in my experience.

I recently saw some photographs for sale at a local art gallery. Many were very grainy B&W film prints. Emotionally they were spectactular, which is what matters most.

[ian408]

On a side note. Before you get the new computer, you'll need some storage
for that card full of images. How will the larger images change your current
workflow? Do you think you'll keep fewer on disk and more on DVD/CD?

Also, it seems (to me at least) that every doubling of size requires bigger
CF to maintain a reasonable capture rate. I know I can get between a 150
and 190 RAW images on a 2G card (depends on what I shoot). Makes the
512MB cards feel 'small' :D

Look forward to seeing more images. The few items you've posted look good.

Ian

[Andy]

On a side note. Before you get the new computer, you'll need some storage
for that card full of images. How will the larger images change your current
workflow? Do you think you'll keep fewer on disk and more on DVD/CD?

Also, it seems (to me at least) that every doubling of size requires bigger
CF to maintain a reasonable capture rate. I know I can get between a 150
and 190 RAW images on a 2G card (depends on what I shoot). Makes the
512MB cards feel 'small' :D

Look forward to seeing more images. The few items you've posted look good.

Ian

yeh needs research... sigh... 2gb card holds i think 70 raws + L jpg. so i'll be buying a couple more 2gb cards for sure.

i'll documnet my workflow changes as i figure them out :D

[wxwax]

I'm waiting for the price of 4GB cards to drop.

[rutt]

Here are two things I discovered when I moved from 10D to 1dmkii, perhaps they will help you, too.


There is some magic that allows you to make the WB buttons (one for each shutter button) into a "choose favorite focus point" button. It only is in effect as long as you hold down the button. I have it set of center focus point, but for vertical portraits, you could imagine choosing a differnt point. Anyway, I love this feature. Most of the time I let the camera do it's thing and it does it very well. But sometimes, we (the camera and I) have different ideas and then it's great to be able to override without having to think about it. It's become a finger habit.
Getting the images from the camera to the computer became an issue for me when I started to shoot raws. I think it's going to be an even bigger issue for you. I had always used PCMCIA flashcard converters for notebooks for this purpose, but they were too slow and seemed to have a huge impact on other things that were going on at the same time. Firewire card readers were similar in terms of speed and system impact. I've found that USB2 flaschcard readers are much better both in terms of speed and system impact on both Macs and PCs (with linux.) These are really cheap, (<$30), so there is no harm in tryinng if you don't already have one.
Anyway, I'm sure you'll have fun with this camera. I tried to convince Elsa Dorfman (http://elsa.photo.net)to try something like this, but no dice. She is more likely to choose a gigapixel alternative or retire.

[rutt]

I'm waiting for the price of 4GB cards to drop.
I "froogled" and found them in the $350-$450 range. Pretty good, I think. Damon bought some sort of ipod-min clone and broke it open to get the 5gb minidisk out of it. According to CMR, minidisks are as fast as solid state on the canon pro cameras.

[rutt]

the 16-35L, razor sharp on my 20d, is a bit soft at the edges.

you need two fingers on left hand and your right forefinger to change iso

i'm sure that i can get over the last issue with practice / use, but if i can't use my 16-35L i think i'd :cry
I have this lens, too, and have always been a little disappointed by its sharpness. Recently, I've been leaning hard on my 24-70, even for wide angle. It seems so much sharper. Maybe there is some trick to sharpening wide angle that would give me better results.

[damonff]

I "froogled" and found them in the $350-$450 range. Pretty good, I think. Damon bought some sort of ipod-min clone and broke it open to get the 5gb minidisk out of it. According to CMR, minidisks are as fast as solid state on the canon pro cameras.
The Rio Carbon has a 5 gig Seagate drive in it. It cost me $250. The drive works great...no problems aside from write speed but that's not an issue since I can shoot while the 10D writes.

[tmlphoto]

[QUOTE=rutt]

Getting the images from the camera to the computer became an issue for me when I started to shoot raws. [QUOTE]
I have a sony pc box that has a built in card reader. Pop the CF card in and you can download a 1GB card full of images in a couple of minutes or less.

[ian408]

Getting the images from the camera to the computer became an issue for me when I started to shoot raws.
I have a sony pc box that has a built in card reader. Pop the CF card in and you can download a 1GB card full of images in a couple of minutes or less.
How big are your raw images? Are you using USB2.0?

Ian

[fish]

I have this lens, too, and have always been a little disappointed by its sharpness. Recently, I've been leaning hard on my 24-70, even for wide angle. It seems so much sharper. Maybe there is some trick to sharpening wide angle that would give me better results.
Funny...same here, but with the 17-40L. I don't know where some of the guys on other forums get off saying it's razor sharp. I've never been satisfied with either the sharpness or contrast. The 24-70L, on the otherhand, has been wonderful. If only it went just a tad wider.

I think I'm going to sell the 17-40L and try something else, whether it's a EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM or a sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM or something.

[fish]

I'm waiting for the price of 4GB cards to drop.
I have a feeling there's going to be an inflection point where the risk of losing a bunch of images will outweigh the size of the card. Not sure where that point is, but can you imagine doing an entire shoot on an 8GB card, then zapping it with ESD as you insert it into your card reader?

I like andy's idea of having a few 2gb cards.

[fish]

How big are your raw images?
That's not a nice question to ask in polite company. :nono

[ian408]

That's not a nice question to ask in polite company. :nono
No, no, no. I said "do these pants make me look fat" :D

Ian

[ian408]

I have a feeling there's going to be an inflection point where the risk of losing a bunch of images will outweigh the size of the card. Not sure where that point is, but can you imagine doing an entire shoot on an 8GB card, then zapping it with ESD as you insert it into your card reader?

Yes. But I think that point is different depending on the raw image size.
As an example, I shoot with 512's for my S50 and 2G's for the 1{0}d.


Ian

[pathfinder]

Funny...same here, but with the 17-40L. I don't know where some of the guys on other forums get off saying it's razor sharp. I've never been satisfied with either the sharpness or contrast. The 24-70L, on the otherhand, has been wonderful. If only it went just a tad wider.

I think I'm going to sell the 17-40L and try something else, whether it's a EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM or a sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM or something.


I have a SIgma 12-24 and it is the least sharp lens I own, particularly at the wide end. And its slo.o.ow to boot! I'll trade you my Sigma 12-24 for the Canon 16-35 F2.8 that people are so unhappy about any day!! :D :thumb

Regarding the 17-40 L Fish - the deer footprints on the bridge were shot with the 17-40. I have not found it lacking at least with an APS sized sensor. For Andy's full frame it might not be as good as the 16-35 L. :dunno

[pathfinder]

I'm waiting for the price of 4GB cards to drop.


Waxy, I remember the first time I plugged a 4Gb Micro Drive in my 10D and saw it say that it had capacity for 999 images - Large fine jpgs! Wow - I could go on vacation for a week and not remove anything from the camera! And the limit of 999 was not the size of the MD, but the limit of the file naming/numbering system in the 10D!

I use the 4Gb MD in the 1DMkll - It usually allows about 275 RAW images.

[tmlphoto]

How big are your raw images? Are you using USB2.0?

Ian
My RAW images are about 6 MB. When I used USB 1.0 the transfer times were very slow. I seemed like it took forever to transfer 60 images. I have not tried USB 2.0 because my new computer came with a card reader "built in". It is light years faster than USB. It has totally changed the whole tranfer issue for me. I just pop in the card and can download a 1GB card full of images in just a few minutes.

[Andy]

Waxy, I remember the first time I plugged a 4Gb Micro Drive in my 10D and saw it say that it had capacity for 999 images - Large fine jpgs! Wow - I could go on vacation for a week and not remove anything from the camera! And the limit of 999 was not the size of the MD, but the limit of the file naming/numbering system in the 10D!

I use the 4Gb MD in the 1DMkll - It usually allows about 275 RAW images.

i'm quoting pf but it's really in resp to this whole discussion ...

i'm finding that i don't shoot hundreds and hundreds in a shoot. if i come home after a whole day even, i maybe have 100 shots to go thru.. i chimp as i'm going, delete what i can in the field, mainly b/c i want to reduce time in post sorting thru the images.

now when i'm away for an extended time, as now in california for a few days, the same goes, b/c i can dump to laptop at night.

on vacation, i take my laptop, too, so i'm covered there. i think that when i go on one of andy biggs' african safaris i'll need a mess o' cards though :D

[ian408]

i chimp as i'm going, delete what i can in the field, mainly b/c i want to reduce time in post sorting thru the images.

now when i'm away for an extended time, as now in california for a few days, the same goes, b/c i can dump to laptop at night.
Thanks Andy.

I think the "chimp/delete" method is better in many respects. You
spend less time copying and processing the raw image later and save
some space in the field.

But I'm curious. Does chimp/delete significantly affect the read/write
performance over time? When the file is written to a fresh card, it's
written contigiously. When you delete a file, a gap is created. As the
card fills (and you continue to delete), it's harder to find 8MB in one
chunk (to write the new image). So the camera writes to the gaps
created where the delete files were. Finding free space is an expensive
operation--as any computer user with a severely fragmented disk can
tell you. But does it matter on CF?

Ian

[Andy]

never thought about that, but i'll keep it in mind if i see performance problems :D

thanks for the tip

Thanks Andy.

I think the "chimp/delete" method is better in many respects. You
spend less time copying and processing the raw image later and save
some space in the field.

But I'm curious. Does chimp/delete significantly affect the read/write
performance over time? When the file is written to a fresh card, it's
written contigiously. When you delete a file, a gap is created. As the
card fills (and you continue to delete), it's harder to find 8MB in one
chunk (to write the new image). So the camera writes to the gaps
created where the delete files were. Finding free space is an expensive
operation--as any computer user with a severely fragmented disk can
tell you. But does it matter on CF?

Ian

[ian408]

I should add that I think formatting the card in-camera before using it is
important (Because the preference is to write to empty space before writing
to space where a deleted file is).

Ian

[mercphoto]

Thanks Andy.

I think the "chimp/delete" method is better in many respects. You spend less time copying and processing the raw image later and save some space in the field.


As some know, I shoot mostly JPG and seldom shoot raw, especially if I'm reasonably certain the camera will do just fine with the exposure and white balance. I don't see a point in shooting raw when the camera will do just fine on its own and save me the hassle. But I'll shoot raw if the light is difficult, or the shoot is very important. But then I won't delete in the field, and for only one reason: when I use Canon's EVU to convert raw images I will often re-name the files as well. And if I don't delete raw files, then my file numbering for the JPG's matches the raw file. In other words, its easy to find the raw again.

How do others handle this? (or do you rename your raw file to match the jpg you just created?)

But I'm curious. Does chimp/delete significantly affect the read/write performance over time?

It would have to once the card becomes fragmented enough that holes are not available that are large enough for one file. However, this problem affects a mechanical device such as a microdrive much more than solid state memory. Disk drives have considerable lag as the drive head is repositioned to a new spot. Flash memory is "random access" -- going to any random memory location is the same latency as any other location. What I do not know is how the file system on a CF card is done. If it is exactly like a hard disk (i.e. any given file might reside in multiple non-contiguous "sectors"), in which case the performance penalty will be neglible. Or if the contents on the card must be re-arranged to create a contiguous hole large enough for the file, in which case the penalty is huge. I suspect the former.

[ian408]

How do others handle this? (or do you rename your raw file to match the jpg you just created?)

I run the raw images through Dr. Brown's Image processor. That creates matching
jpegs.



It would have to once the card becomes fragmented enough that holes are not available that are large enough for one file. However, this problem affects a mechanical device such as a microdrive much more than solid state memory. Disk drives have considerable lag as the drive head is repositioned to a new spot. Flash memory is "random access" -- going to any random memory location is the same latency as any other location. What I do not know is how the file system on a CF card is done. If it is exactly like a hard disk (i.e. any given file might reside in multiple non-contiguous "sectors"), in which case the performance penalty will be neglible. Or if the contents on the card must be re-arranged to create a contiguous hole large enough for the file, in which case the penalty is huge. I suspect the former.
The file system is FAT32. Same as Windows. Be equiv to creating a disk in
memory (do people still do that?) for performance reasons.

I think the mitigating factor is that, generally speaking, file sizes are similar
enough so that a hole created by deleting can probably be filled by another file.

Geeze, what a geeky question I asked :huh

Ian

[mercphoto]

I run the raw images through Dr. Brown's Image processor. That creates matching jpegs.

So if I don't want files named "img_0037.jpg" ....

This is why I don't delete in-camera those few times I shoot raw. That way "some_session_name_0037.jpg" matches "crw_0037.cr2". Guess I'll keep doing it my way. :)

[Andy]

took the 1ds mark 2 out today for a little beach shooting, with my good friend and fine photographer steve cavigliano, this time, half moon bay, about 30 miles south of san francisco. really we went there becuase there's a nice italian joint where the dinner's really good :D

we managed a few shots down on the beach. i put my 70-200 f/2.8L i.s. on board, a lens which i found a bit long for me on my 20d but i am enjoying it more on the ff body.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12806534-L.jpg

[ian408]

took the 1ds mark 2 out today for a little beach shooting, with my good friend and fine photographer steve cavigliano, this time, half moon bay, about 30 miles south of san francisco. really we went there becuase there's a nice italian joint where the dinner's really good :D

we managed a few shots down on the beach. i put my 70-200 f/2.8L i.s. on board, a lens which i found a bit long for me on my 20d but i am enjoying it more on the ff body.


I knew I should have called in sick :D

Looks like a nice evening. Gazo's Creek?

Ian

[dkapp]

Great sunset shot. Are you starting to feel comfortable with the new camera yet? I bet that viewfinder is amazing!

Thanks for sharing.
Dave

[Andy]

i am absolutely stunned by canon's high iso performance. it's good on the 300d and 10d. it's absolutely stunning on the 20d, and equally as good if not better on the 1ds mark 2. the canon engineers should all get bonuses, man, becuase this camera was made for low light. i haven't yet owned the 1d mark 2, but i have seen equally good examples from that box as well.

here's just a shot for the heck of it, with a couple of 100% crops. ignore the white balance, as i only could work from the in camera jpg, i don't have the raw converter on my laptop yet. these pics are unprocessed whatsover, only the least in-camera processing possible for sharpening, contrast etc.

i'm certain that iso 3200 would be improved via normal raw conversion process in acr, c1, bibble, or even dpp for that matter. anyhow, here they are.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12808688-O.jpg

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12808689-O.jpg

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12808690-O.jpg

pics taken at iso 3200 would respond well to noise removal tools like noise ninja or neat image. however, i should add that i routinely shoot at iso 1600 on my 20d and do not do nr at all on the images - it's that good.

[Andy]

the croppabilty factor is high with this beast.

handheld, 70-200 f/2.8L i.s., iso 400, f/4, 1/80th sec. this is a 100% crop from the center of the frame, 800 pixels by 533. i snapped this just to see what the resolving power is, and it appears to be pretty darn good imo...

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12808934-O.jpg

[pathfinder]

the croppabilty factor is high with this beast.

handheld, 70-200 f/2.8L i.s., iso 400, f/4, 1/80th sec. this is a 100% crop from the center of the frame, 800 pixels by 533. i snapped this just to see what the resolving power is, and it appears to be pretty darn good imo...

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12808934-O.jpg


Michael Reichman has related the the 1Ds, and even more the 1DsMkii, will demonstrate lens weaknesses or technique weakenesses like no other 35mm camera. The resolution is so high that it is much more demanding of optical quality and of photographer's technique. He feels the 1DsMkii is superior to medium format film images for most subjects. The next step up is the 22 Mgpxl digital back on a Hasselblad. Then things really start to get expensive!!

[Andy]

the ff sensors show the light fall-off on even the best glass. i have seen vignetting on my 50 f/1.4, my 70-200L f/2.8L and my 16-35L. from others i've spoken with, this is a ff thing, and so if this camera is staying in my bag i have to learn to deal with it.

two ways, of course:

1) since there are 16.7 mpx, i could re-train myself to compose differently at shoot, leaving plenty of room to crop.

2) adobe just updated adobe camera raw to support the 1ds mark II files (yay on ya, thomas knoll and crew!) and so acr has a "anti-vignetting" feature, whereby you can minimze the vignetting in the raw conversion process. i've tried it, it works. need to play with the settings / sliders but it does work.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12851781-L.jpg
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12851780-L.jpg

[Andy]

full shot, for comparison purposes. 16-35 f/2.8L, iso 100, f/11, tripod mounted. shot in raw, converted in acr, in ps cs, applied usm of 350, .4, 1)

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12904650-L.jpg

and a 800x800 100% crop from the lower left corner

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12904649-O.jpg

i also shot the same scene with a canon 10-22 ef-s lens mounted on my 20d, same settings f/11, iso 100. the corner sharpness was very very similar, but i give the edge to the full-frame though. there was more ca (cyan, purple) with the 10-22 than the with 16-35. neither lens' ca was difficult to correct, either in acr or by using shaytech's color fringe remover (http://www.shaystephens.com/ca.asp).

[Andy]

now having done this about 6 or 7 times, the "vigging" controls in adobe camera raw do a fine job, the adjustment does not degrade the image and it's easy enough to perform.

and, not all images require it, which is a good thing!

the ff sensors show the light fall-off on even the best glass. i have seen vignetting on my 50 f/1.4, my 70-200L f/2.8L and my 16-35L. from others i've spoken with, this is a ff thing, and so if this camera is staying in my bag i have to learn to deal with it.

two ways, of course:

1) since there are 16.7 mpx, i could re-train myself to compose differently at shoot, leaving plenty of room to crop.

2) adobe just updated adobe camera raw to support the 1ds mark II files (yay on ya, thomas knoll and crew!) and so acr has a "anti-vignetting" feature, whereby you can minimze the vignetting in the raw conversion process. i've tried it, it works. need to play with the settings / sliders but it does work.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12851781-L.jpg
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12851780-L.jpg

[OlgaJ]

...a monitor that could handle the viewing of those files. I have a friend who just put together a system with a monitor like that.

http://www.dphoto.us/forum/showthread.php?t=3024

:D

Olga

[Andy]

...a monitor that could handle the viewing of those files. I have a friend who just put together a system with a monitor like that.

http://www.dphoto.us/forum/showthread.php?t=3024

:D

Olga

:wave welcome aboard, olga :D i'm so glad you joined. you'll recognize many of the names here :wink

ahh yes, the apple cinema 30 incher - way way cool, olga. i'd like to get one of those, but i cannot afford a trip to the jewelry store again for a little while :deal :lol3

if you need any help 'round here, just holler!

[dkapp]

...a monitor that could handle the viewing of those files. I have a friend who just put together a system with a monitor like that.

http://www.dphoto.us/forum/showthread.php?t=3024

:D

Olga

I *drool* over that display every time I visit the Apple store. Since I just bought a new Nikon D2H this morning, I will be editing pictures on my 12" PowerBook a little while longer.

One day it will be mine :D

Welcome aboard.
Dave

[OlgaJ]

Thanks for the welcome Dave and Andy,

I've only tried a large monitor (21 or 22") for business work, spreadsheets and the like, some time ago. I thought it was going to be the cat's meow. Instead I found myself getting dizzy trying to read spreadsheets. I didn't like having to move my head left-right-left so much. I kept losing track of where I was looking. So my husband inherited the big monitor and I went back to a 17" LCD and remain content with it.

Olga

[ian408]

I edit with 2 monitors. Both 19" NEC LCDs. The extra real estate is very nice.

Not nearly as nice as that 23" Apple though.


ian

[Andy]

the meter reads true, at least in my experience thus far. i shot this with +2/3s ec. it was a very bright white overcast sky.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/12928212-L.jpg

[Andy]

i'm definitely going to have to upgrade my 'puter. present setup is a 2.4ghz, 2yr old sony desktop with 1.5gb ram. 7200rpm onboard disk.

so i took a fairly complex file, a beach scene with about 1000 birds in the pic, opened it in acr, converted as 16bit... in ps added a levels layer, curves layer, hue / saturation layer. saved the whole thing as a .psd ...

a whopping 183megs just for this one psd.

flattened, and then did an unsharp mask, 23 seconds to to process that.

so, without question, if one is to have any sort of rhythm going in post with these files, a fast badass pc is quite in-order :D

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13108129-L.jpg

[patch29]

i'm definitely going to have to upgrade my 'puter. present setup is a 2.4ghz, 2yr old sony desktop with 1.5gb ram. 7200rpm onboard disk.

so i took a fairly complex file, a beach scene with about 1000 birds in the pic, opened it in acr, converted as 16bit... in ps added a levels layer, curves layer, hue / saturation layer. saved the whole thing as a .psd ...

a whopping 183megs just for this one psd.

flattened, and then did an unsharp mask, 23 seconds to to process that.

so, without question, if one is to have any sort of rhythm going in post with these files, a fast badass pc is quite in-order :D



Andy, my friend has a 2.5ghtz G5 DP and 1Ds mkII. I asked him to run a similar file though PS to see how long it takes. He is out of town through Sunday, but he should do it. If you want to give me all your specs (or upload the RAW file somewhere) I can have him use your parameters and give you some more info for your computer purchase.

[rutt]

Andy, my friend has a 2.5ghtz G5 DP and 1Ds mkII. I asked him to run a similar file though PS to see how long it takes. He is out of town through Sunday, but he should do it. If you want to give me all your specs (or upload the RAW file somewhere) I can have him use your parameters and give you some more info for your computer purchase.
This kind of problem specific benchmarking is exactly the right way to make your decision instead of listening to eveyone's opinion and reading marketing literature. See if you can run the exact same test on a modern PC with a modern PS. For integer problems (running gcc), I've found that single processor 3GHz Intel processors are as fast as my DB 2.0GHz G5 DP. But I don't have the resources to compare PS on both machines (almost all the Intel machines I have access to run Linux, else I'd do some benchmarking for you.)

[patch29]

This kind of problem specific benchmarking is exactly the right way to make your decision instead of listening to eveyone's opinion and reading marketing literature. See if you can run the exact same test on a modern PC with a modern PS. For integer problems (running gcc), I've found that single processor 3GHz Intel processors are as fast as my DB 2.0GHz G5 DP. But I don't have the resources to compare PS on both machines (almost all the Intel machines I have access to run Linux, else I'd do some benchmarking for you.)

If we had thought about it yesterday Andy could have brought a CD to the Apple store and tried it himself, sorry Andy I guess you will have to go to SOHO again. :deal :rofl :wxwax

[Andy]

If we had thought about it yesterday Andy could have brought a CD to the Apple store and tried it himself, sorry Andy I guess you will have to go to SOHO again. :deal :rofl :wxwax

will they let me bring a cd in the store and try it on their machines?

np getting back to the store ...

[Andy]

Andy, my friend has a 2.5ghtz G5 DP and 1Ds mkII. I asked him to run a similar file though PS to see how long it takes. He is out of town through Sunday, but he should do it. If you want to give me all your specs (or upload the RAW file somewhere) I can have him use your parameters and give you some more info for your computer purchase.

ask him to just do the same thing i did .. his file will be fine. i timed it by "one 1thousand, two 1thousand... etc ... very unscientific :lol3 , but i missed the class on measurebating, i was out shooting :D

stupid is as stupid does ... :lol

[patch29]

will they let me bring a cd in the store and try it on their machines?

np getting back to the store ...

I would think they would not care. I have done it in Atlanta, just tell them you are a PC user and want to know if the G5 really is faster and processing your files will give you the answer. The hitch is you may have to download the PS ARC 2.4b, which they will have to help you with (or do for you, with the admin password). So really it is finding a time when they are not super busy and finding the person that will help. You should be able to pop in the disk and still run other PS filters to see how they run on files. They may wonder, but they may be too busy to notice. One big difference my friend notices on his machine is that he can run PS and still run other programs in the background and not slow down the computer.

[patch29]

ask him to just do the same thing i did .. his file will be fine. i timed it by "one 1thousand, two 1thousand... etc ... very unscientific :lol3 , but i missed the class on measurebating, i was out shooting :D

stupid is as stupid does ... :lol

which part did you time? The USM? or all of it? I would think the ARC to 16bit would be a good number and the USM time.

[Andy]

which part did you time? The USM? or all of it? I would think the ARC to 16bit would be a good number and the USM time.

i timed the usm ... about 25 seconds i think?
i timed the saving of that three layer .psd - whoa that was 1 minute or mebbe a bit less....

[patch29]

i timed the usm ... about 25 seconds i think?
i timed the saving of that three layer .psd - whoa that was 1 minute or mebbe a bit less....

That should be easy enough. If you wanted to test that stuff at the Apple store they should let you do that no problem. You could always just download originals off smugmug and they would probably not be the wiser. When I use Safari on one of the stores machines I always go to Safari in the menu and then hit "reset Safari">Reset, after logging out it will cover your tracks very well.

[dkapp]

That should be easy enough. If you wanted to test that stuff at the Apple store they should let you do that no problem. You could always just download originals off smugmug and they would probably not be the wiser. When I use Safari on one of the stores machines I always go to Safari in the menu and then hit "reset Safari">Reset, after logging out it will cover your tracks very well.

I do the same thing :D


Dave

[patch29]

I do the same thing :D


Dave

They offer the best free internet service while traveling if a store is nearby.

I was in Las Vegas in February. I went to the Apple Store in the Fashion Mall and used my powerbook from the tables outside. All of a sudden the floor rises up to a runway and they have a Fredrick's of Hollywood fashion show in the mall, not a bad way to access the internet. :D

[mercphoto]

Andy, will be interesting to see, as you play with this camera more, given all the pixles it has, if you feel the need to uprez and sharpen disappears simply because there is so much native data already present.

[pathfinder]

i'm definitely going to have to upgrade my 'puter. present setup is a 2.4ghz, 2yr old sony desktop with 1.5gb ram. 7200rpm onboard disk.

so i took a fairly complex file, a beach scene with about 1000 birds in the pic, opened it in acr, converted as 16bit... in ps added a levels layer, curves layer, hue / saturation layer. saved the whole thing as a .psd ...

a whopping 183megs just for this one psd.

flattened, and then did an unsharp mask, 23 seconds to to process that.

so, without question, if one is to have any sort of rhythm going in post with these files, a fast badass pc is quite in-order :D

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13108129-S.jpg


Andy, my files are not quite as big with a 1DMkll - but my psds may easily run from 25 or 30 to 80 or 90 Mbytes, and if all I'm doing is USM, they seem to be instantaneous. Running the Neat Image plug in may run 20 or 30 seconds if I use it at its maximum strength. I am running a 2.5 Ghz MAC.

[luckyrwe]

I have 2GB cards and will soon upgrade to 4GB. As for the thought that 8GB is to much to maybe lose and only use 2GB cards, well, back when 2GB cards were huge everyone wanted to use 512MB cards. And when 512MB cards were huge, 64MB was the safe number. The day will come, maybe for the 1Ds Mark IV, that folks will wonder if a 512GB card is too big and to avoid losing information they will stick with 128GB cards. :D

One option I have is to use two cards in my camera so I have a backup. Also sometimes if I shoot something really good I will change cards and get the image on as many cards as possible for backup.

Hopefully the iage recovery software will keep getting better and better as well.

[Andy]

an outdoor portrait

1Ds Mark II, 50mm f/1.4 aboard
http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/13238010-L.jpg

here's a crop:

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13238470-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

Andy, that is a great shot. You are looking like a pro! :thumb

Is that your daughter? The camera really does her justice.
(The pink color of coat, hat,gloves and cheeks are good, too)

g

[sash]

andy, ya brat... congrats on your mark II - i bow my head in envy, lol. nice shot, amazing detail.

[ginger_55]

re previous remarks on # of images brought home, and the benefits of deletion...

I find myself saving images I am not sure of. I don't trust my little window to tell me the total and true story. That means I upload lots of junk, but save some gems.

With the 20D, is the window more accurate. For instance sharpness can be a question mark, especially without extensive examination. And other things.

I figure I would have to go a lot higher than 20D to get a window where I would sort a lot more. I already delete much of what I shoot.

I use 1gb cards, two. And I have two 512s. At this point that seems all I need, I have wanted more. I shoot like a deranged child. But I do have to think of weighing down my hard drive.

I would like to upgrade the hard drive situation.

External? Internal? Other important considerations? I will probably do that in a month.

ginger (excuse me, I missed the sweet light, but the birds are still there)

[patch29]

i timed the usm ... about 25 seconds i think?
i timed the saving of that three layer .psd - whoa that was 1 minute or mebbe a bit less....

He ran USM on a 183mb file in about 2 seconds this morning. It is very fast. Let me know if you want anything else.

[patch29]

He ran a 1Ds mkII file in ARC to 16bit tif, default settings and it took 3 seconds. I really need a new computer.

[Andy]

He ran a 1Ds mkII file in ARC to 16bit tif, default settings and it took 3 seconds. I really need a new computer.

:yikes

yeah, i'm still looking, deciding....

thanks for this info. it really helps. tell me again, model / specs of his system?

[patch29]

:yikes

yeah, i'm still looking, deciding....

thanks for this info. it really helps. tell me again, model / specs of his system?

G5 DP 2.5 ghtz. I think he has 4gb of ram.

Just get the Mac, you know you want to. :deal :evil

[ian408]

Both versions of PS come on the disk. Can you un-install it and re-install it
on the mac?

ian

[lynnesite]

Hey, Andy--are you familiar with DxO for optical correction? For your vignetting concern, also does chromatic aberrations, distortions, blur. A buddy of mine swears by it. You can batch in it too. It's on my "list".

<http://www.dxo.com/en/photo/optics_pro/default.php>

Lynne

[Andy]

Hey, Andy--are you familiar with DxO for optical correction? For your vignetting concern, also does chromatic aberrations, distortions, blur. A buddy of mine swears by it. You can batch in it too. It's on my "list".

<http://www.dxo.com/en/photo/optics_pro/default.php>

Lynne

thanks lynn, yeah i'm familiar with it, but i'm avoiding more software now like the plague. acr corrects the vigging just fine.... :D

thanks for the tip though!

[Andy]

i'm really cool with it

here's the full pic, resized of course:
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13447993-L.jpg

and, here's an 800px by 800px 100% crop from the lower left corner. my focus point was at least halfway into the pic, btw. i shot this at f/11, focal length of 16mm.

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13447992-L.jpg

[Andy]

just to show that this lens does indeed perform on the ff body. i'm really happy :D

shot with 1Ds Mark II, canon 16-35 f/2.8L, 16mm focal length, iso 100, 2secs at f/11, mlu enabled.

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/13782997-O.jpg

100% crops (direct from raw, no post processing. they respond very well to standard usm)

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/13782984-O.jpg

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/13783134-O.jpg

[Shay Stephens]

Totally dig this photo!

just to show that this lens does indeed perform on the ff body. i'm really happy :D

shot with 1Ds Mark II, canon 16-35 f/2.8L, 16mm focal length, iso 100, 2secs at f/11, mlu enabled.

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/13782997-O.jpg

[Andy]

Totally dig this photo!

thanks shay, i appreciate your comment very much!

[Andy]

a little big ben, shot on tripod, 50mm f/1.4 aboard

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13828486-L.jpg


and, a 100% crop

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/13881336-L.jpg

[ian408]

Stop teasing us with those 100% crops :D

As always, beautiful shots Andy!

Ian

[FAU4U]

Nice pics - just taking a look around (NT) :huh

[patch29]

I saw some 40x60 prints from my friends 1Ds mkII on Friday. They are very impressive and the small details hold up very well at that size. It is amazing how good that camera is.

I think Andy needs to print a few that size to hang around his new monitor so it does not feel oversized. :evil

[Andy]

I saw some 40x60 prints from my friends 1Ds mkII on Friday. They are very impressive and the small details hold up very well at that size. It is amazing how good that camera is.

I think Andy needs to print a few that size to hang around his new monitor so it does not feel oversized. :evil

i have a new order in at big posters (http://www.bigposters.com) a cuppla 3x4s and another six-footer :D

my wife is threatening to use some of my stuff really large in the house, but she's waffling over which ones... sigh

[patch29]

i have a new order in at big posters (http://www.bigposters.com) a cuppla 3x4s and another six-footer :D

my wife is threatening to use some of my stuff really large in the house, but she's waffling over which ones... sigh

Big prints are awesome, even better if someone else is buying. :deal

[Andy]

the elitists on some boards would scoff at using a $400 lens on this camera, but canon's 85 f/1.8 is one of their best values. sharp! contrasty, fast focus, light as a feather. oh and of course fast :D

here's a 100% crop of this pic posted over in "shots" (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=52403#post52403)

the details this camera gets stun me.

http://www.moonriverphotography.com/photos/14707166-O.jpg

[luckyrwe]

I was debating the 85/1.8 or the 100/2, and reviews show the 85mm is the better of the two.

[Stan]

I was shooting with a pro whose lens mount came loose within a week of getting his 1DsMk11 :splat Canon still have it for repair. He loves the 20d though

[Andy]

very interesting comparison of 1Ds Mark Ii to Medium Format here (http://photo.nemergut.com/equipment/canon1ds/markii.html)

[pathfinder]

very interesting comparison of 1Ds Mark Ii to Medium Format here (http://photo.nemergut.com/equipment/canon1ds/markii.html)


That has been Michael Reichman's contention since the 1ds first appeared, that the digital images are better and sharper than medium format film images.

Butnot medium format digital backs like Leaf or Kodak.

[Andy]

That has been Michael Reichman's contention since the 1ds first appeared, that the digital images are better and sharper than medium format film images.

Butnot medium format digital backs like Leaf or Kodak.

imo, the canon 20d can outdo film for many purposes (say, prints up to 16x20). but this is so very subjective, isn't it?

[pathfinder]

imo, the canon 20d can outdo film for many purposes (say, prints up to 16x20). but this is so very subjective, isn't it?


When I first stated shooting with a 10D, I was so impressed that it's images were vastly superior to most 35mm film images - particularly 35mm negative film.
I have posted B&W images I shot on Tri-X and souped in D-76 myself, and the grain and accutance in them does not begin to compare to a 20D. Not even close. Kodachrome 25 maybe was he closest, but much higher contrast with less shadow detail.

[wxwax]

very interesting comparison of 1Ds Mark Ii to Medium Format here (http://photo.nemergut.com/equipment/canon1ds/markii.html)
Cunning sales pitch. :evil Guerrilla marketing.

[Andy]

Cunning sales pitch. :evil Guerrilla marketing.

:lol3 well i see that now, you've figured me out :D

i actually found that link whilst surfing this morning... didn't decide until after a big breakfast with trev, we went to our favortie greasy spoon :food bacon, eggs, bagels, home fries mmm mm :eat

[wxwax]

:lol3 well i see that now, you've figured me out :D

i actually found that link whilst surfing this morning... didn't decide until after a big breakfast with trev, we went to our favortie greasy spoon :food bacon, eggs, bagels, home fries mmm mm :eat
Make that fried eggs, and add some cooked tomatoes and you have the classic English "fry up" breakfast. *Burp.*

[Andy]

Make that fried eggs, and add some cooked tomatoes and you have the classic English "fry up" breakfast. *Burp.*

saturday or sunday breakfast is a rich tradition with me and my kids :deal

[Andy]

after a brief period of brain malfunction i now have a 1Ds Mark II again :clap so i'm planning on keeping the 20d as my long body (for telephoto) and the 1Ds II for most of my wide angle shooting.

interestingly, i found the camera via ebay. brand new, unopened, us warranty. it was being sold by a well-known photojournalist, and i was able to verify by speaking to this photographer, the provenance and legitimacy of the seller. was able to get a sweet deal, too, supremely sweet.

[Bodley]

after a brief period of brain malfunction i now have a 1Ds Mark II again :clap so i'm planning on keeping the 20d as my long body (for telephoto) and the 1Ds II for most of my wide angle shooting.
Didn't you just sell your 1DmkII (no s) because it was too big :scratch Does this mean you really were not happy the the files produced by the 1DmkII after all?

[Andy]

Didn't you just sell your 1DmkII (no s) because it was too big :scratch Does this mean you really were not happy the the files produced by the 1DmkII after all?

i owned the 1Ds Mark II, from Dec thru Mar... then a fellow dgrinner bought it from me. Then I used my 1Ds in Yosemite, and decided that I'd go back to the 1Ds Mark II... file size is fine - big, but fine... i upgraded my studio system to a g5 powermac back in january.

thanks bodley!

[DavidTO]

after a brief period of brain malfunction i now have a 1Ds Mark II again :clap so i'm planning on keeping the 20d as my long body (for telephoto) and the 1Ds II for most of my wide angle shooting.

interestingly, i found the camera via ebay. brand new, unopened, us warranty. it was being sold by a well-known photojournalist, and i was able to verify by speaking to this photographer, the provenance and legitimacy of the seller. was able to get a sweet deal, too, supremely sweet.


Uh-oh. Sounds like you're about to re-purchase that 30" display for all those huge files...


actually, I AM just kidding. As sick as you are, Andy, I'm sure that you realize that the 23" really is large enough...

[Andy]

Uh-oh. Sounds like you're about to re-purchase that 30" display for all those huge files...


actually, I AM just kidding. As sick as you are, Andy, I'm sure that you realize that the 23" really is large enough...

i felt like i was in a tennis match with the 30" display. :nod the 23" is perfect size for me, really and truly.

[dragon300zx]

:bs:bigbs What else can we say. :D:dunno:scratch

[pathfinder]

:bs:bigbs What else can we say. :D:dunno:scratch

I really like the 1DsMkll that Andy let get away from him in a moment of weaknesshttp://dgrin.com/images/smilies/xzicon_smile_cool.gif
I was considering his 10-22 when he changed his mind. It IS hard to keep up with him, isn't it?

[Steve Cavigliano]

I was considering his 10-22 when he changed his mind. It IS hard to keep up with him, isn't it?
Yeah, but it sure is entertaining :lol

Steve