-=1D Classic Lovers !!!

1d is fantastic! Errrrrm I love it. I'm getting tempted to get a 30d but it just doesn't match the 1d in anyway at all

photomom2one wrote in post #9511347
when you shoot RAW, do you have to sharpen it for it to look good?

It should always depend on the output. If it is high res, like a background, I usually don't sharpen, and if I do, it's only ever to "1" on the DPP scale. For web stuff I usually use 1, and occasionally 2. I never go as high as 3 though. On my body, 3 starts to look distractingly sharp.

Why don't you post up some examples of what you're seeing?

Here are two full size pictures with no sharpening (and keep in mind that uploading them loses some sharpness as well).

http://s664.photobucke​t.com …view¤t=A7​3A2988.jpg

http://s664.photobucke​t.com …view¤t=A7​3A2990.jpg

photomom2one wrote in post #9511347
when you shoot RAW, do you have to sharpen it for it to look good?

when my files are small, they look really sharp, but then when enlarged to work on them they look out of focus. I sharpen them and then they look great.

is this because it's a small file and when enlarged on my large computer screen they look fuzzy? Or is my focus off? I need to know so I can work on that if my focus is off. If they were OOF, would they sharpen up so nicely?

I guess I need to shoot more jpeg and see if there is a difference.

Default setting for mine for RAW on DPP is 5, I never use less than this and usually use up to 8 on the scale.however the same lenes on my 400D I normally just leave the setting at 5

I think that changing the picture style [or maybe the sharpness] in the camera appears to change the default setting in DPP.Mine is set at natual and sharpness at 5

Also depends on which version of DPP you are using. I think the older ones went 0-20 for sharpness and the newest version does 0-10.

I am using ver3.7.2.0 which I think is the latest update

Nice cars

Nick VanGorder wrote in post #9511696
1d is fantastic! Errrrrm I love it. I'm getting tempted to get a 30d but it just doesn't match the 1d in anyway at all

1D Mark II is calling your name!

errrrrrr....i might see if i can get a gripped 30d or 40d.. I cant shoot 1d through computer can i?


hmm..

Nick VanGorder wrote in post #9513049
errrrrrr....i might see if i can get a gripped 30d or 40d.. I cant shoot 1d through computer can i?

hmm..

You can but you'll need a Firewire cable and I believe you'll definitely need Windows XP. And that goes for the Classic and the Mark II.

jasongraaf wrote in post #9511883
It should always depend on the output. If it is high res, like a background, I usually don't sharpen, and if I do, it's only ever to "1" on the DPP scale. For web stuff I usually use 1, and occasionally 2. I never go as high as 3 though. On my body, 3 starts to look distractingly sharp.

Why don't you post up some examples of what you're seeing?

Here are two full size pictures with no sharpening (and keep in mind that uploading them loses some sharpness as well).

http://s664.photobucke​t.com …view¤t=A7​3A2988.jpg

http://s664.photobucke​t.com …view¤t=A7​3A2990.jpg

I'll try to do that tomorrow, don't think I'll get to it tonight.

I haven't gotten sharpness like your pics unless I sharpen in DPP.

However, I wonder if it's my f stop. I got a little better sharpness today than yesterday, with smaller f stops for my distance from subject.

I'm going to get out tomorrow in natural light and see how I do.

sharpening to 3 in DPP seems to be enough (the RAW page). Then I sharpen a little more on the RGB page.


I guess it will take some practice with my 50mm 1.8. It's the only lens I have that will fit this body.

which leads me to another question. (don't ya'll love all the questions? I could post on the main board but I'm too lazy.)j

I have a 55-250mm zoom that I can't use on the 1D. I was thinking maybe I should sell it and get a lens that I can use on both cameras instead of just one.

which would be a good trade. I'd love another zoom but not sure I could afford one with as long of a reach as the one I have. I can't afford L, the cost would have to be close to what I can sell the 55-250mm for which is a little over $200.

any suggestions?

thanks for all your help.

I am soon to engage...my lady friend

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Well having come from an XTI/400D where I had the ussual kit lens and then went to a Tamron 17-50 I then started collecting used glass which work well with both bodies.the 24-85 usm ,28-135 is usm 50 f1.8,70-210 usm,old 28-70 f3.5.100-300 usm,24-70 f2.8 L and lately a ef 100 f2.0.All of which I purchased on the net after reading lens reviews,I haven't had a dud yet and haven't spent a truck load of money and can all be shared with my EOS-1 & 5 film bodies and 400D & 1D more modern stuff