eronald Posted March 11, 2007 Share #1 Posted March 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has someone here shot the same people with the successive versions of firmware ? I am starting to see a "clingfoil" look I don't like on some of my test pictures. Wonder if it's there, if it's my imagination, or if it's new. Edmund Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 11, 2007 Posted March 11, 2007 Hi eronald, Take a look here Has someone done a quality regression test ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
eronald Posted March 11, 2007 Author Share #2 Posted March 11, 2007 Up to now I had decent shots with the M8. No more. The latest batch need huge amount of USM sharpening, and lack bite. This is no fun. It's me or the firmware. There will be no new profiles for a while, because I want to spend some time behind a viewfinder rather than behind a computer again Edmund Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 11, 2007 Share #3 Posted March 11, 2007 Edmund, do you think this might the noise reduction getting in the way? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eronald Posted March 11, 2007 Author Share #4 Posted March 11, 2007 Edmund, do you think this might the noise reduction getting in the way? I just looked some more at some images taken in direct sun. No fun at all. The skin texture is totally smoothed over. I have a 1Ds and a 1DsII and when used side by side the 1DsII does this too. Yes, it's possible that the noise reduction has been enabled at low ISO or strengthened, in the latest firmware. Edmund Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted March 11, 2007 Share #5 Posted March 11, 2007 I just looked some more at some images taken in direct sun. No fun at all. The skin texture is totally smoothed over. I have a 1Ds and a 1DsII and when used side by side the 1DsII does this too. Yes, it's possible that the noise reduction has been enabled at low ISO or strengthened, in the latest firmware. Edmund So RAW is the new JPEG, right? Or at least not quite RAW but half-baked? :-{ Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted March 11, 2007 Share #6 Posted March 11, 2007 Edmund, Clean your lenses, your glasses, or both. ;-) Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eronald Posted March 11, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted March 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Edmund, Clean your lenses, your glasses, or both. ;-) Larry I'm actually preparing to sell the camera. If the image quality varies so strongly from firmware to firmware, it'll never be fixed. Edmund Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted March 11, 2007 Share #8 Posted March 11, 2007 Edmund, I haven't noticed the differences you've cited, but now I think I'll take a closer look. Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandymc Posted March 11, 2007 Share #9 Posted March 11, 2007 Even if, which I hope is the case, everybody is looking at raw files, I'd suggest being very careful as to how you compare - on the files I have looked at, Leica has made changes to some of the DNG tags - BayerGreenSplit used to be 0, is now 500, and AntiAliasStrength used to be 1, is now zero. Depending on what raw converter you are using, both of these, especially the AntiAliasStrength could change how the raw converter is operating, even if your settings are the same. In principle, if a raw converter sees a file with AntiAliasStrength of 0, it should not sharpen much at all by default, but at 1 it should sharpen quite a lot. But that would depend on whether your raw converter is actually paying attention to the tags or not. Sandy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertwright Posted March 11, 2007 Share #10 Posted March 11, 2007 Even if, which I hope is the case, everybody is looking at raw files, I'd suggest being very careful as to how you compare - on the files I have looked at, Leica has made changes to some of the DNG tags - BayerGreenSplit used to be 0, is now 500, and AntiAliasStrength used to be 1, is now zero. Depending on what raw converter you are using, both of these, especially the AntiAliasStrength could change how the raw converter is operating, even if your settings are the same. In principle, if a raw converter sees a file with AntiAliasStrength of 0, it should not sharpen much at all by default, but at 1 it should sharpen quite a lot. But that would depend on whether your raw converter is actually paying attention to the tags or not. Sandy ...And then open the file in three different raw converters and you get three different results. IMO, the difference between conversion software plays a much larger role than firmware differences overall. I am not saying the files might not look different all things being equal, but the comparing all raw converters, the differences are stark. What bothers me about a lot of the commentary on this forum is the tendency to look at the nits and ignore the nats so to speak. Whatever minor differences (that I cannot even see so far) exist between firmware versions is so totally eclipsed by differences in software conversion I wonder why it is made an issue of? In practice, I find I have to keep my options open when converting some edge cases, for example, Raw Developer has excellent noise and sharpening controls which help my high iso files, but for the majority of work I like how aperture is working even tho it is a hack right now. For printing, LR is head and shoulders above aperture. It is a pain to have to work this way but it is not so different from the darkroom overall. But you know, if you want your "vintage" 1.0 firmware look then go for it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.