Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Thread started 27 Apr 2016 (Wednesday) 14:46
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1D X Mark II Owners Unite! Discuss & Post Photos

 
buddy4344
Goldmember
Joined Nov 2006
Allentown, PA
May 07, 2016 15:43 |  #391

bps wrote in post #17998981 (external link)
You need to arm yourself with a 1DX2, 5DsR, and 7D2! ;-)a

That does sound like a formidable combination.

I just hope I won't need that second kidney I'd have to sell to do that. To justify the 1Dx2 I'm clearing out the toy box of less frequently used items to generate a few $$$.


Buddy4344

Gear: Canon 1Dx MkII, 7D MkII, Canon Lenses: 100 macro, 100-400 Ver.IIL IS, 24-105L IS, Canon 17-40, Canon 1.4x TCon, Rokinon 14mm. Kenko extension tubes, Kenko 1.4x pro TCon.and Kiboko 30L and 22L+

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
mrmaint
Member
Joined Oct 2011
May 07, 2016 15:46 |  #392

amorrison wrote in post #17999002 (external link)
Does anyone know if DPP3 can be made to convert a raw file from the 1dxm2? I have gotten so used to that program and it converts a lot faster than DPP4, at least on my old computer. Just thought I would see if anyone else still used it and might know.

Raw files are not visible in DPP 3.15.0.0 nor will they open.


1D X Mark II, 7D: EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mark II, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 24-105 f/4L, 100 2.8L, 40mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, Tokina 11-16 2.8, 2 600EX-RT, ST-E3-RT.

LOG IN TO REPLY
aehric
Member
aehric's Avatar
Joined Jul 2015
Asheville, NC, USA
May 07, 2016 15:56 |  #393

I've had this camera 4 days now and I'm at 3447 actuations already. :eek:

It's been a busy week. And I have another gig in an hour.

And no, I haven't just been spraying and praying. I'm just really busy.  :p

Will hopefully be able to post a few this weekend once I get time to edit.


Canon EOS 5D Mark III, EOS 6D, EOS 1D X Mark II | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM, EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 50mm f/1.8, EF 8-15mm f/4L USM | Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,623 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
May 07, 2016 16:16 |  #394

So, someone one post up some links to good (yet unimportant) underexposed and or high ISO RAW files that we can have a play with. I want to see these darks in action :)

Pretty please?


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott_online
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by Scott_online.
May 07, 2016 16:25 |  #395

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17999048 (external link)
So, someone one post up some links to good (yet unimportant) underexposed and or high ISO RAW files that we can have a play with. I want to see these darks in action :)

Pretty please?

jwcdds already did here: http://photography-on-the.net ...hp?t=1458944&goto=n​ewpost

EDIT: Sorry - I see you are looking for raw files.


flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
aehric
Member
aehric's Avatar
Joined Jul 2015
Asheville, NC, USA
May 07, 2016 16:29 |  #396

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17999048 (external link)
So, someone one post up some links to good (yet unimportant) underexposed and or high ISO RAW files that we can have a play with. I want to see these darks in action :)

Pretty please?

I'm in a hurry to get to a shoot, but here's a RAW ISO 32,000 shot from last night for you. I don't shoot birds or sports. Have fun.  :p

https://www.dropbox.co​m ...egjxlww/_19I1087.CR​2?dl=0 (external link)


Canon EOS 5D Mark III, EOS 6D, EOS 1D X Mark II | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM, EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 50mm f/1.8, EF 8-15mm f/4L USM | Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

LOG IN TO REPLY
MedicineMan4040
The Magic Johnson of Cameras
MedicineMan4040's Avatar
Joined Jul 2013
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by MedicineMan4040.
May 07, 2016 16:30 |  #397

Experimenting with the Xii + cTCiii + 400DOii. Early morning before the Sun had crested the hill.


Canon EOS-1D X Mark II
EF400mm f/4 DO IS II USM +2x III
ƒ/9.0 800.0 mm 1/1250 10000 Flash (off, did not fire)

IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7120/26875522565_341362a733_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GWU5​wH] (external link)Facing the green abyss (external link) by MedicineMan4040 (external link), on Flickr

flickr (external link)
Vid Collection: https://www.youtube.co​m/user/medicineman4040 (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
LincsRP
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2007
Lincolnshire,UK
May 07, 2016 16:31 |  #398

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17999048 (external link)
So, someone one post up some links to good (yet unimportant) underexposed and or high ISO RAW files that we can have a play with. I want to see these darks in action :)

Pretty please?

I'm intrigued why do you have to test these cameras under conditions you would not shoot images at? Or do you shoot at these settings and hope the software will save the day?

I'm a bit lost on this whole raw shooting 5 stops under and then raising it 5 stops to see if the noise floor is better stuff.

To be honest the rest of us shoot photos, images, stuff we're proud of of ... are those under-exposed by 5 stops doing you any good? Geez folks...

:-P


Steve
www.lincsracephotos.co​.ukexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,623 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
May 07, 2016 16:32 |  #399

aehric wrote in post #17999061 (external link)
I'm in a hurry to get to a shoot, but here's a RAW ISO 32,000 shot from last night for you. I don't shoot birds or sports. Have fun.  :p

https://www.dropbox.co​m ...egjxlww/_19I1087.CR​2?dl=0 (external link)

Thank you kindly!
Now to DL and update DPP :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
aehric
Member
aehric's Avatar
Joined Jul 2015
Asheville, NC, USA
May 07, 2016 16:34 as a reply to CyberDyneSystems's post |  #400

No problem. I can provide some more tonight.


Canon EOS 5D Mark III, EOS 6D, EOS 1D X Mark II | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM, EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 50mm f/1.8, EF 8-15mm f/4L USM | Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,623 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by CyberDyneSystems.
May 07, 2016 17:10 |  #401

LincsRP wrote in post #17999070 (external link)
I'm intrigued why do you have to test these cameras under conditions you would not shoot images at? Or do you shoot at these settings and hope the software will save the day?

I'm a bit lost on this whole raw shooting 5 stops under and then raising it 5 stops to see if the noise floor is better stuff.

To be honest the rest of us shoot photos, images, stuff we're proud of of ... are those under-exposed by 5 stops doing you any good? Geez folks...

:-P


Hi Steve, no I don't tend to shoot underexposed 5 stops. I can't say that i've ever done it in fact. I shoot ETTR to tame noise usually. I am just curious to see what all the talk is about.

However I do often enough shoot in very dark environments. Performance work, in low and changing light, low enough light with fast enough subject movement that every bit of shutter speed becomes precious.

I've been proud of those shots, noise and motion blur and all, I might even go so far as to call them "photos", or "images".

I can compare some of the ballet work I did back with a 1D or 1D2, (and the compromised shutter speeds and wide open softer lenses of the day, and noisy ISO boosts required) with what my current 5D3 and modern glass can do and the differences are DRAMATIC. Really dramatic.

If I can time similar moments, and get shots without all the noise and motion blur, well, that would be nice. Every big step forward makes the technical aspects of the results better.

Lastly, when I finish a time consuming honing job on one of my laminated steel chisels, I like to test the edge on my arm hairs, If it doesn't shave dry like a good straight razor, then I'm not done honing. Then I see how thin of a wood shaving I can get. Thinner = sharper. See through is what I am looking for.

I will only use the chisel on Wood, no other material will touch the sharp end of one of my blades once I am done. Certainly I'll never use it to shave my beard. Rarely do I need to use a chisel to remove a wood shaving I can see through. But I want to know what my tools are capable of before I use them on a real project. (or buy them!) Thus the shaving tests.

seems totally normal to me, and far from intriguing.
I hope this helps explain it.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,623 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by CyberDyneSystems.
May 07, 2016 17:15 |  #402

aehric wrote in post #17999061 (external link)
I'm in a hurry to get to a shoot, but here's a RAW ISO 32,000 shot from last night for you. I don't shoot birds or sports. Have fun.  :p

https://www.dropbox.co​m ...egjxlww/_19I1087.CR​2?dl=0 (external link)

Well, there is noise to be sure, but ISO 32000 there is going to be noise, looks really good for 32000!
And the way it cleans up in DPP with the built in NR? Very nice!

Thanks again :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
jyeung
Member
Joined Dec 2010
May 07, 2016 17:40 |  #403

I thought Canon omitted the remote control terminal until I looked up in the manual :rolleyes:




LOG IN TO REPLY
SQZ
Member
SQZ's Avatar
Joined Jan 2011
Ohio, USA
May 07, 2016 17:54 |  #404

I have an observation that slightly concerns me , and it's the fact that I can't even come close to duplicating the noise reduction on high ISO raw pictures compared to in camera jpgs , in DPP. My experience with the 1DX is the opposite, the raws always look better.
Is anyone having success making their raws as clean as in camera jpgs?




LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,623 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
May 07, 2016 17:58 as a reply to SQZ's post |  #405

Does this mean that in camera processing has actually gotten so good that it's better (in some aspects) then doing it yourself?
This is something that I would never have believed.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

828,526 views & 11629 likes for this thread
1D X Mark II Owners Unite! Discuss & Post Photos
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00456 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.06s
Latest registered member is custecg
636 guests, 287 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016