Canon EOS-1D Mark II N User Report

You guys have probably already seen this, but for those who haven't, here's a good user's review of the II N:

http://www.sportsshoot​er.com/news/1490

Haven't seen it. Wonder how their comments compare to my observations. Thanks!

I think this was posted in the Sports thread just recently. Its an interesting article but just one persons opinion, IMHO : )

Interesting stuff, especially when CMOS/AA and DIGIC II are identical. I can understand that N's JPEG output is better (more sharpening or different algorigthm applied in camera), but on robralbraith.com one guy said that N's RAW was sharper, which is highly unbelievable, unless they now apply sharpening to RAW, too (which would explain it).

Part of all this is perhaps a placebo effect coming from badly calibrated Mark II to good version of Mark II N. Or simply because that new camera is clean internally!

Well, it's always interesting to read "hands-on" reports. They have a certain "there" quality that other reviews don't.

That said, and while I don't own the 1dmkII, I don't buy the knock on the 1dmkII in any way. I've seen too many amazing shots, both here and in the newspapers and magazines made with it to believe there was a longstanding problem.

Interesting article, but it strikes me as more psychological than actual. He'd taken a few soft shots or missed a few shots with the earlier camera, and had convinced himself the new camera was "better" and wouldn't do that anymore.

I can understand that. It always seems a bit more fun to drive your car after you've spent the day washing it, changing the oil and plugs, vacuuming it out and waxing it. Same concept.

Doc.

RAW is unprocessed sensor data with EXIF added, i'm 99% sure they'd not mess with it in any destructive way (sharpening is destructive). If they messed with it it wouldn't be RAW any more...

I know several people that use the 1D Mark II and they never complained about soft shots. I really didn't have a significant problem with soft shots on my 10D or 20D either, but I've been shooting digital since the advent of the D30 and SLR's since the 70's - so I had an idea of what to expect and how to compensate. I love my 1D Mark II N, but I was ready to buy the 1D Mark II when the N was released, so it wasn't a hard decision to get the newer version at a lower list price.

Mark

tim wrote:
RAW is unprocessed sensor data with EXIF added, i'm 99% sure they'd not mess with it in any destructive way (sharpening is destructive). If they messed with it it wouldn't be RAW any more...

Canon 1D series is not sharpened in RAW. D30, D60, 10D are, and so are all compact models. This info is from Canon's Chuck Westfall. Don't know about 20D and 5D yet.

There's one thing which most of people are missing here. This review is not written by some wanabee photographer but by one pretty experienced shooter. I don't know Brad personally, but personally I'm not jumping around of happines and thinking about new names how to call my new camera. And I don't think he does that either. Once when you have camera for earning money it's just a tool and nothing else. This puts aside all that hype someone else might have when testing or "testing" new camera. But on the other side it doesn't mean that if he wrote it, it has to be truth and nothing but truth.
PS: Personally I don't have any problems with sharpness on any of my 1dmk2, but I'm not saying someone can't have it. Everything is possible, including me winning loto

One look at the reviewer's photos and his byline would indicate to anyone, including us, that he's far from a newbie. We all realize he's a professional. How else would he be getting those shots and "assignments" at the World Series. No, we didn't miss that, at least I didn't.

However, please consider that the Olympics last year, along with hundreds of thousands of other events were shot with the 1dsmkII, not the new N.

What I don't get is that "now" when the shot is slightly soft or otherwise, he's willing to blame user error, but not before.

Pro or not, he can have opinions and say things and so can I.

"Pro" does not equal to knowledge. I'm not saying that about reviewer, but many just shoot without knowing the gear too well.

The other day one pretty "big name" came to photograph my work, we met in elevator and I saw the green line on his lens and said "oh, you shoot with DO", he looked at the lens and said "well it says here DO IS USM - don't know what it means".

400 f/4 is really too slow a lens choice for the hall we play in. Most shooters have 70-200 IS, 300/2.8 or 200/1.8. So he spent lots of his time holding the lens to seats - maybe he did not find that IS switch.

Later I asked why don't you guys never use the mirror noise reduction mode (all shooters on our concert halls use Mark II without mirror NR on, and it is distractive especially because they do not know the music). He said it is a personal setting and he cannot access it. I told "you can set it with computer". He said "But it can only be set on or off, I do not need that all the time". I told "after you set that personal function active you can set it on and off whenever you like". He did not know that and thanked me for the info.

I guess you understood wrong, or I wrote wrong, or better yet... it's my English which caused missunderstanding
Anyway... I agree with most of stuff what you wrote now. But I wanted to tell that most of pros (if not all) consider their cameras and lenses just as tool... nothing more nothing less. And most of them don't shoot charts to compare one lens to other, so "reviews" are usually quite different then those made by people doing only reviews.
PS: I agree also with that what Mdjak wrote as answer to my previous post. Beside I wrote myself... I'm perfectly happy with all my 1dmk2, so most of time if photo is soft it's my fault.

Yes, this was quite a revelation to us Canon shooters at the time the 10D was new. Based upon Phil Askeys comparative reviews, (both the numerical and image comparisons) I would guess that there is also significant noise reduction smoothing done to the 20D image, but I have no clear idea about the 5D. It is clear that the philosophy towards the 1DsII and 1DII cameras was to maintain minimal or no smoothing at higer ISOs. As an opposite extreme, the D2x crop at high ISO shows significant loss of detail, while the noise (especially luminance) is kept low. Thus lots of smoothing. From what I have seen 20D and D2x do not signifianctly increase their noise in TIFF outputs so I presume this smoothing is done on RAW. This difference in 1D series processing philosophy may explain how the prosumer 1.6 crop cameras maintain comparable or even better S/N with significantly smaller pixels. They sacrifice detail at the higher settings
Mike K

Been saying the exact same thing for about 8 months now.........and of course taking major heat for it. I returned the old Mk2 after 3 days of shooting with it, the images were totally soft & flat....even at max settings, but now that I have the "N" it's all good! Everyone thought I was a total nut........."what do you mean the Mk2 takes soft photo's.......mines razor sharp". Like I tell my Wife, "Man is gets old being right all the time".

I would say 1 of 3 things are happening........#1 there is a HUGE bad batch of Mk2's that got out of the factory "not quite right"........or #2. People spent 4 grand on a pro level Canon and for whatever reason just can't bring themself to the fact that it takes soft pictures.......or maybe #3. Most people using this level of camera shoot 90% RAW and are used to sharpening the living piss out of the files (cause the files will take it) and just think JPG's look crappy anyway.