Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 5D II Field report  (Read 7313 times)

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« on: March 26, 2009, 09:16:36 pm »

A few observations between the 5D and the 5DII:
1) I tested my 5D and a 70-200 2.8 with and without a Hoya 1D protection filter and at a 100% crop you could see no difference in sharpness. I re-tested this with my 5D II and there is a noticeable softness with the filter in place and a huge increase in micro detail without.
2) I figured my Canon 24-105 and other Canon lenses were not up to the 5DII's resolution so I bought and tested a Contax/Zeiss 24-85, 35-70 and 45mm with adapters and compaired them to my inferior Canons. To my suprise the Canons resolve everything the C/Z's resolve. All the Canon files looked similar, all the C/Z files looked similar (at 100%) all the lenses when printed looked almost identical.
3) My conclusion, on the new high pixel density cameras don't put filters in front of them if you can avoid it, be happy with good Canon lenses the Zeiss don't resolve more, the Canons are more contrasty, the Zeiss are less contrasty/more realistic (with curves both can look like the other). The lenses I like a lot with my 5DII; Nikkor 14-24 w/adapter, Canon 24-105is, Canon 70-200 f4.0is, Tokina 100 Macro (best Bokeh of any lens), Canon 400 f5.6 (I sold my 17-35, 70-200 2.8 (too heavy) and my 70-300 DO)
Marc
Logged
Marc McCalmont

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
5D II Field report
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2009, 09:34:21 pm »

Marc,

how about the Nikkon 14-24mm vs the 17-35mm (I guess this is the 16-35mm), which you sold? Was this the 16-35mm  MkII? I tested one of these and was not impressed with it, even on a cropping camera.
Logged
Gabor

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2009, 09:51:32 pm »

Quote from: Panopeeper
Marc,

how about the Nikkon 14-24mm vs the 17-35mm (I guess this is the 16-35mm), which you sold? Was this the 16-35mm  MkII? I tested one of these and was not impressed with it, even on a cropping camera.

Sorry 17-40mm, It was good but not stunning the 14-24 (only a little time with it) is stunning, I bought a used 400mm 5.6 and have just started using it and am very impressed also.
Marc
Logged
Marc McCalmont

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
5D II Field report
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2009, 07:26:44 am »

Quote from: marcmccalmont
A few observations between the 5D and the 5DII:
1) I tested my 5D and a 70-200 2.8 with and without a Hoya 1D protection filter and at a 100% crop you could see no difference in sharpness. I re-tested this with my 5D II and there is a noticeable softness with the filter in place and a huge increase in micro detail without.
2) I figured my Canon 24-105 and other Canon lenses were not up to the 5DII's resolution so I bought and tested a Contax/Zeiss 24-85, 35-70 and 45mm with adapters and compaired them to my inferior Canons. To my suprise the Canons resolve everything the C/Z's resolve. All the Canon files looked similar, all the C/Z files looked similar (at 100%) all the lenses when printed looked almost identical.
3) My conclusion, on the new high pixel density cameras don't put filters in front of them if you can avoid it, be happy with good Canon lenses the Zeiss don't resolve more, the Canons are more contrasty, the Zeiss are less contrasty/more realistic (with curves both can look like the other). The lenses I like a lot with my 5DII; Nikkor 14-24 w/adapter, Canon 24-105is, Canon 70-200 f4.0is, Tokina 100 Macro (best Bokeh of any lens), Canon 400 f5.6 (I sold my 17-35, 70-200 2.8 (too heavy) and my 70-300 DO)
Marc

I learnt the filter lesson from my 1DsII with 85/1.2. It went back to Canon several times as focus was never sharp. One day, the filter came off and the lens was sharp; in fact it seemed the lens was doing ok with the filter, but the AF was getting thrown off very slightly.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

gss

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
5D II Field report
« Reply #4 on: March 29, 2009, 04:18:18 pm »

Have you tried a B+W or Heliopan filter?  It may just simply be a matter of using a Hoya instead of a good filter.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
5D II Field report
« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2009, 06:00:16 pm »

I dropped the filter altogether. I found out that a hood will provide very good protection for all teles.

Edmund

Quote from: gss
Have you tried a B+W or Heliopan filter?  It may just simply be a matter of using a Hoya instead of a good filter.
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2009, 06:16:52 pm »

Quote from: gss
Have you tried a B+W or Heliopan filter?  It may just simply be a matter of using a Hoya instead of a good filter.

Yes I have and BTW Hoya makes some of the best glass in the world as good as Shotte glass. Who makes all the glass for Canon and Nikon? Hoya!
Marc

http://www.hoya.co.jp/english/company/index.html
« Last Edit: March 29, 2009, 08:05:14 pm by marcmccalmont »
Logged
Marc McCalmont

JohnKoerner

  • Guest
5D II Field report
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2009, 11:18:32 pm »

Quote from: marcmccalmont
3) My conclusion, on the new high pixel density cameras don't put filters in front of them if you can avoid it, be happy with good Canon lenses the Zeiss don't resolve more, the


Quote from: eronald
I dropped the filter altogether. I found out that a hood will provide very good protection for all teles.
Edmund



Thank you both for your observations.

I have been working with my 50D and 100mm macro for about 4 months now, and have gotten a few great images ... and dozens that were "almost great" (in addition to no telling how many "deletes"  )

After reading this thread, I took off my Canon polarizer filter ... and WOW the clarity and sharpness indeed did improve.

So thanks for the tip!

Jack


.
Logged

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2009, 11:27:54 pm »

Quote from: JohnKoerner
Thank you both for your observations.

I have been working with my 50D and 100mm macro for about 4 months now, and have gotten a few great images ... and dozens that were "almost great" (in addition to no telling how many "deletes"  )

After reading this thread, I took off my Canon polarizer filter ... and WOW the clarity and sharpness indeed did improve.

So thanks for the tip!

Jack


.

If you haven't tried fixerlabs focus fixer yet try it! Another big improvement.
Logged
Marc McCalmont

JohnKoerner

  • Guest
5D II Field report
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2009, 01:29:49 pm »

Quote from: marcmccalmont
If you haven't tried fixerlabs focus fixer yet try it! Another big improvement.


I have never heard of it, no.

What is it exactly?

Thanks.
Logged

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2009, 10:12:07 pm »

Quote from: JohnKoerner
I have never heard of it, no.

What is it exactly?

Thanks.

Photo shop plugin for sharpening
http://www.fixerlabs.com/EN/photoshop_plugins/focusfixer.htm
Based on deconvolution not unsharp mask, the best I've tried, start between .5 to.9
Marc
Logged
Marc McCalmont

httivals

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 84
5D II Field report
« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2009, 12:32:44 am »

Quote from: marcmccalmont
Photo shop plugin for sharpening
http://www.fixerlabs.com/EN/photoshop_plugins/focusfixer.htm
Based on deconvolution not unsharp mask, the best I've tried, start between .5 to.9
Marc

Marc: do the focus fixer settings change based on which lens one is using?
Logged

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« Reply #12 on: April 02, 2009, 03:28:03 am »

Quote from: httivals
Marc: do the focus fixer settings change based on which lens one is using?

I haven't seen the need for this.
I use deblur @ .9 on my 5D files converted with DxO lens sharpness set at .2 (some capture sharpening)
I use deblur @ .5 on my 5DII files converted with DxO lens sharpness set at 0 (still some capture sharpening)
I use deblur @ .9 on my P30 files converted with Capture one  sharpness turned off (no capture sharpening)
From what I see it is dependent on the camera more than the lens although 90% of my shots are with my 24-105
Oh I had to email them for an explanation of threshold and as you would expect it sets what parts of the file are sharpened 0 is for the entire file and 100 would be only the areas with the most micro contrast (not smooth areas like sky and walls etc) I use 36 as a general purpose setting but you can adjust to taste making sure noise in shadows and the sky don't get sharpened. They recommend using the plugin early in your workflow so I do it first making a new layer, labeling it "sharpened" run the plugin and if I'm happy with it flatten the layers.
Marc
« Last Edit: April 02, 2009, 03:32:08 am by marcmccalmont »
Logged
Marc McCalmont

httivals

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 84
5D II Field report
« Reply #13 on: April 02, 2009, 09:52:29 am »

Thanks, Marc!  Not to hijack your thread, but I am finding the 5DII to be a fantastic upgrade to the 5DI, especially after having used Lens Align.  Here is a brief write-up of my experiences with Lens Align:

. . . I have Lens Align Pro and used it this week-end to calibrate my 24-105mm IS, 70-200mm f4 IS, 28mm f1.8, and 50mm f1.4 lenses. The results are fantastic. Whereas I was getting pretty good results before, now with the lenses properly calibrated, my focusing is much more consistent than with the 5D mark I (my other, previous camera), and the results are, even at 100% magnification about as sharp as with the 5D Mark I (which means that I'm getting a lot more detail with the 5D Mark II, because of the extra pixels).

Before doing the alignment, I watched the video download tutorials a couple of times, and still had a question about how far the lens should be from the target. I shoot landscapes mostly at infinity focus, and also take a lot of images of my 5 year old son, with his friends, around town, and at his soccer games. I didn't want to calibrate the lens for one use and "uncalibrate" it for another use. I resolved the issue of lens to target distance by choosing either (a) 50 times focal length (reportedly Canon's recommendation), or ( as far away as I could get and still see the target at 100% magnification clearly enough to judge what was/was not accurate focus. In practice, it meant that I was calibrating at about 20-50 times focal length. I also decided to calibrate my 24-105mm lens at 50mm because I use the lens most at 24-50mm, and for me the wider end is more important than the longer end of the range.

I had a question about lighting -- I wanted to mimick the type of lighting I use most in real world situations. Since I mostly shoot in daylight or indoors without artificial lighting, I set the target up in my house with no artifical lighting and no directional lighting (i.e. it was all diffuse reflected light) in a relatively bright room.

After doing the calibrations in my house, I then verified each, by taking images of a landscape at infinity focus in daylight with directional (sunlighted) lighting, both with and without the Lens Align adjustment applied.  I also verified that the calibrations worked well for both ends of the zoom ranges. The verifications established that the lenses calibrated at relatively close to medium focus distances also resulted in sharper (hence better focus calibrated) images at infinity focus.

Could I have achieved the same results using cheaper methods? Maybe, I don't know. But Lens Align Pro is quick, relatively simple, and works well. It's well worth the price to me, given the significantly sharper, better focused results, and the amount I've already invested in lenses and the camera.

I hope this helps!  BTW, my adjustments with Lens Align have been relatively minor, for the most part about +5 or so for each lens.  All of my lens were front focusing slightly before being adjusted.
Logged

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
5D II Field report
« Reply #14 on: April 02, 2009, 12:30:52 pm »

1. I used lens align lite with good results also. I verified alignment with the following file, computer screen set perpendicular to the lens and with live view, look for the maximum interference pattern.
[attachment=12680:MicroFocusAdjust1.gif]
2. I have been manually focusing a lot with liveview, a BTZS focusing hood and reading glasses. I like this so much (except the reading glasses) I pick up my 5DII more than my Mamiya 645/P30!
Marc
« Last Edit: April 02, 2009, 02:33:50 pm by marcmccalmont »
Logged
Marc McCalmont
Pages: [1]   Go Up