If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
android wrote:
In article , sid wrote: There are raw files here if you are interested http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...-mark-iiA7.HTM Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s? yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features -- sid |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
In article ,
sid wrote: android wrote: In article , sid wrote: There are raw files here if you are interested http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...n-7d-mark-iiA7. HTM Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s? yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features The last revision of RT was 11/9. The 7d2 was not released then... -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
In article ,
sid wrote: android wrote: In article , sid wrote: There are raw files here if you are interested http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...n-7d-mark-iiA7. HTM Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s? yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features The last revision of RT was Sep 11. The 7d2 was not released then... -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
android wrote:
In article , sid wrote: android wrote: In article , sid wrote: There are raw files here if you are interested http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...n-7d-mark-iiA7. HTM Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s? yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features The last revision of RT was 11/9. The 7d2 was not released then... Anything based on DCRAW will convert the Canon 7D2 CR2 files. I didn't check to see exactly, but the usual thing is that DCRAW only checks the manufacturers name and the model for the specific number of characters. Hence a "7D" is what it will see, even if what is there is "7Dxx no such camera". As long as the parameters are the same as the previous model, the resulting conversion is just fine. Often there are small problems to start with due to small differences. In this case at least there don't seem to be any, as the above CR2 file looks exactly as one would expect. I tried both DCRAW 9.22 (July 3, 2014) and the current source code release of UFRAW. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
android wrote:
In article , (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: android wrote: In article , sid wrote: android wrote: In article , sid wrote: There are raw files here if you are interested http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...non-7d-mark-ii A7. HTM Do you have a raw converter for the 7d2s cr2s? yes, http://rawtherapee.com/blog/features The last revision of RT was 11/9. The 7d2 was not released then... Anything based on DCRAW will convert the Canon 7D2 CR2 files. I didn't check to see exactly, but the usual thing is that DCRAW only checks the manufacturers name and the model for the specific number of characters. Hence a "7D" is what it will see, even if what is there is "7Dxx no such camera". As long as the parameters are the same as the previous model, the resulting conversion is just fine. Often there are small problems to start with due to small differences. In this case at least there don't seem to be any, as the above CR2 file looks exactly as one would expect. I tried both DCRAW 9.22 (July 3, 2014) and the current source code release of UFRAW. There is no "7D mark II" in dcraw.c. The 7d2 do not have same sensor as the 7d. I guess that you're a wizard. Anyways, that would be an ad hock solultion and not a calibrated conversion. There need not be a "7D mark II" in dcraw.c, as it only has to find "Canon EOS 7D" to process the image using the algorithm identified with that label. The sensors may well be different, but the algorithm works the same with either of them. And it does produce a very appropriate conversion. I'd note that *every* raw conversion is an "ad hock solution", almost by definition! Will it be slightly different than what will be produced a few weeks from now when Coffin adds the new model... of course. But not enough different that you'll be able visually detect it. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
In article ,
(Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: Will it be slightly different than what will be produced a few weeks from now when Coffin adds the new model... of course. But not enough different that you'll be able visually detect it. That's good to know! -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
In article , android
wrote: In article , (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote: Will it be slightly different than what will be produced a few weeks from now when Coffin adds the new model... of course. But not enough different that you'll be able visually detect it. That's good to know! https://www.dropbox.com/s/2puu9zm3j8...le%20140924.ti ff?dl=0 ;-p -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote: As long as the parameters are the same as the previous model, the resulting conversion is just fine. Often there are small problems to start with due to small differences. In this case at least there don't seem to be any, as the above CR2 file looks exactly as one would expect. I tried both DCRAW 9.22 (July 3, 2014) and the current source code release of UFRAW. There is no "7D mark II" in dcraw.c. The 7d2 do not have same sensor as the 7d. I guess that you're a wizard. Anyways, that would be an ad hock solultion and not a calibrated conversion. There need not be a "7D mark II" in dcraw.c, as it only has to find "Canon EOS 7D" to process the image using the algorithm identified with that label. that's a bug. "Canon EOS 7D" != "7D mark II" (or whatever the exact labels are). The sensors may well be different, but the algorithm works the same with either of them. And it does produce a very appropriate conversion. works and works well are not the same. the arrangement of the pixels might differ, the chromaticities likely differ and certainly the amount of noise reduction, sharpening etc. needed will be different. I'd note that *every* raw conversion is an "ad hock solution", almost by definition! that's a stretch. Will it be slightly different than what will be produced a few weeks from now when Coffin adds the new model... of course. But not enough different that you'll be able visually detect it. maybe you won't, but other people will, especially if there are significant changes to the sensor. not everyone is satisfied with substandard results. if it wasn't noticeable then there would be no point in updating raw converters for new cameras. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
JPEG? Means nothing.
nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: As long as the parameters are the same as the previous model, the resulting conversion is just fine. Often there are small problems to start with due to small differences. In this case at least there don't seem to be any, as the above CR2 file looks exactly as one would expect. I tried both DCRAW 9.22 (July 3, 2014) and the current source code release of UFRAW. There is no "7D mark II" in dcraw.c. The 7d2 do not have same sensor as the 7d. I guess that you're a wizard. Anyways, that would be an ad hock solultion and not a calibrated conversion. There need not be a "7D mark II" in dcraw.c, as it only has to find "Canon EOS 7D" to process the image using the algorithm identified with that label. that's a bug. "Canon EOS 7D" != "7D mark II" (or whatever the exact labels are). In the opinion of who? You! Good for a laugh or two... The sensors may well be different, but the algorithm works the same with either of them. And it does produce a very appropriate conversion. works and works well are not the same. the arrangement of the pixels might differ, the chromaticities likely differ and certainly the amount of noise reduction, sharpening etc. needed will be different. None of that is true. I'd note that *every* raw conversion is an "ad hock solution", almost by definition! that's a stretch. That is a fact. Will it be slightly different than what will be produced a few weeks from now when Coffin adds the new model... of course. But not enough different that you'll be able visually detect it. maybe you won't, but other people will, especially if there are significant changes to the sensor. The point is that in this particular case there are not. not everyone is satisfied with substandard results. Only you are. Others can tell when results are not substandard. if it wasn't noticeable then there would be no point in updating raw converters for new cameras. Talk about a stupid comment. You don't seem to have understood the difference between what applies to this one specific case and what applies in general. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
7D2 vs D7100 @ 6400 | android | Digital Photography | 196 | November 18th 14 08:37 AM |
Nikon new release D7100 | Rob | Digital Photography | 159 | March 15th 13 11:09 AM |
6400 on the D3? How about 12,800 on a little P&S? | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | January 24th 08 08:29 PM |