Ping Bowser 5DII?

Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the 40D/50D or
are they crisper?

-Jim

"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the 40D/50D or
are they crisper?

Well, the thing I notice least about the new cam is the increased
resolution. It's no big deal. What I do notice is the sensor cleaning,
better build quality, quieter shutter, improved menu system and feature set,
and that nice hi-res LCD.

I've compared some shots side by side, and while they're nothing scientific,
the II compares very well at the pixel level with the 5D. Noise levels are
comparable, but having the ability to shoot at 25,600 is a plus, even if the
images are weak. The 12,800 ISO images are surprisingly usable after a
scrubbing with Noise Ninja, and suitable for enlarging up to 8 x 12. The
images are not mushy at all. I've never compared it to the RAW files from a
50D so I can't comment on that comparison. Can't wait to shot some night
football next fall at ISO6400. Or maybe even 12,800.

Some new features, like the ability to control the shutter while shooting
flash sync in Av mode, are nice to have. This is something that drove me
crazy on the 5D since shooting sync on Av meant that the shutter would drop
as low as was necessary to balance ambient and flash. But you don't always
want that, and now I can set a range of 1/200 1/60 for Av sync. Nice
touch.

AF seems faster to me, but I have no way to verify it.

Metering is improved. My 5D would always overexpose images. The II is spot
on 99% of the time. Flash metering is also improved, and is approaching
Nikon's 3D flash metering. But it's not there yet. Still very good, though.

Highlight protection is a nice touch. I won't use it all the time, but it's
a nice option for very contrasty scenes. Still playing with this one.

Vignetting compesation is a wasted feature on me. I never had an issue with
it on the 5D, so I see no need to use that feature.

Battery life is excellent. And, someday, I may actually find a second
battery in stock somewhere and get one. Sheesh...

I'll shoot some stuff tripod-mounted and post it. I really haven't had a
chance to shoot a lot lately, but I have a trip coming up and will be in
Beaufort SC, St. Augustine FL, and Las Vegas NV over two weeks. I can't wait
to shoot some night stuff in LV. Maybe take some aerials, as well. Yahoo....

If you want, I'll shoot and post some RAW files if you want to play a
little. Let me know. I promise to use a lens other than the fisheye, as
well. It'll kill me, but I'll do it.

"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the 40D/50D or
are they crisper?

Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I like the
detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple hand-held shot; let
me know what you see.

"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...

"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the 40D/50D
or are they crisper?

Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I like
the detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple hand-held shot;
let me know what you see.

Nothing... ?
IE wanted to save it as a "tiff" file so I did that and changed it to a CR2
extension after it down loaded, but I can't read it even with the new Adobe
DNG converter? I only have CS2.

Low compression Jpeg please?

Thanks,
Jim

jimkramer wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the 40D/50D
or are they crisper?
Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I like
the detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple hand-held shot;
let me know what you see.

Nothing... ?
IE wanted to save it as a "tiff" file so I did that and changed it to a CR2
extension after it down loaded, but I can't read it even with the new Adobe
DNG converter? I only have CS2.

Low compression Jpeg please?

Thanks,
Jim



OK, I'll post it later on today. Yes, you need a newer version of PS to
open it. Look for it after 6 tonight (EDT).

"Bowser" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the 40D/50D
or are they crisper?
Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I like
the detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple hand-held
shot; let me know what you see.

Nothing... ?
IE wanted to save it as a "tiff" file so I did that and changed it to a
CR2 extension after it down loaded, but I can't read it even with the new
Adobe DNG converter? I only have CS2.

Low compression Jpeg please?

Thanks,
Jim

OK, I'll post it later on today. Yes, you need a newer version of PS to
open it. Look for it after 6 tonight (EDT).

Thanks
-Jim

"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
"Bowser" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the
40D/50D or are they crisper?
Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I like
the detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple hand-held
shot; let me know what you see.

Nothing... ?
IE wanted to save it as a "tiff" file so I did that and changed it to a
CR2 extension after it down loaded, but I can't read it even with the
new Adobe DNG converter? I only have CS2.

Low compression Jpeg please?

Thanks,
Jim

OK, I'll post it later on today. Yes, you need a newer version of PS to
open it. Look for it after 6 tonight (EDT).

Try this one: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2.jpg

11.7M download. It's a JPG file straight from ACR. Sharpness and Detail were
both set to "35." No sharpening was applied in PS after that. Taken hand
held.

"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...

"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
"Bowser" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the
40D/50D or are they crisper?
Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I
like the detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple
hand-held shot; let me know what you see.

Nothing... ?
IE wanted to save it as a "tiff" file so I did that and changed it to a
CR2 extension after it down loaded, but I can't read it even with the
new Adobe DNG converter? I only have CS2.

Low compression Jpeg please?

Thanks,
Jim

OK, I'll post it later on today. Yes, you need a newer version of PS to
open it. Look for it after 6 tonight (EDT).

Try this one: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2.jpg

11.7M download. It's a JPG file straight from ACR. Sharpness and Detail
were both set to "35." No sharpening was applied in PS after that. Taken
hand held.

Thanks, I think that "looks" better than the 40D images. Not looking
forward to the PS upgrade too. :-(

-Jim

jimkramer wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
"Bowser" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"Bowser" wrote in message
. com...
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Care to compare and contrast the 5DII vs 5D Classic?
Please.

What I really want to know is, are the images as "mushy" as the
40D/50D or are they crisper?
Try this: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2raw.CR2 (Note--30M file)

I open it up in PS CS4, set the sharpening and detail to 35, and I
like the detail. Sharpens up very easily. This is just a simple
hand-held shot; let me know what you see.
Nothing... ?
IE wanted to save it as a "tiff" file so I did that and changed it to a
CR2 extension after it down loaded, but I can't read it even with the
new Adobe DNG converter? I only have CS2.

Low compression Jpeg please?

Thanks,
Jim
OK, I'll post it later on today. Yes, you need a newer version of PS to
open it. Look for it after 6 tonight (EDT).
Try this one: http://www.manzi.org/pix/5d2.jpg

11.7M download. It's a JPG file straight from ACR. Sharpness and Detail
were both set to "35." No sharpening was applied in PS after that. Taken
hand held.

Thanks, I think that "looks" better than the 40D images. Not looking
forward to the PS upgrade too. :-(

-Jim



The PS upgrade isn't too bad from CS2, and the improvements are many.
The stitcher, for example, is vastly improved over CS2.

I like the results from the 5D II. The images are sharp and the colors
are spot on. It's a nice unit, and I have not been able to replicate
some of the common complaints, like the squeaky CF cover door, banding,
black dots. Mine has no issues. And I haven't even played with the live
view or video features yet.