Canon digital bodies and Nikon lenses

On 11/8/05 8:24 PM, in article ,
"C Wright" wrote:

I can't comment on the lenses that you bought since I have not tried them.
However, I do have a question. You don't say anything about how you
processed/handled your test images. Is it possible that you are using the
default in-camera processing parameters of your 1DsII? The default for
sharpness is a parameter of 0 which is the softest of four choices. Also,
most digital images benefit from some software sharpening, specially those
with little or no in-camera sharpening. Canon, rightly or wrongly, believes
that the buyers of of this camera prefer to default to a soft image. Most
users of the 1DsII that I have read about have reset their in-camera
sharpness to a 1 or a 2 setting.
Chuck


Chuck:

I haven't done any post processing at all. I took general photos without any
specific test in mind.

No post processing was done. The photos were taken as RAW (CR2), opened with
Bridge (Adobe's latest CS2) and viewed with Camera Raw 3.2 hosted by Bridge
(3.2 is the latest version and I just downloaded it from Adobe's web site a
few days ago).

Thank you for the suggestion about the in-camera processing parameters. Mine
remain as the factory defaults and I didn't feel the need to change them. I
am going to look into this and try a few different options to see how much
improvement I can obtain from it.

To be very honest with you what I see is basically the type of edge
distortion that is noticeable by the naked eye and one does not need to be a
specialist to see it. Distortion and lack of sharpness that are simply
absent with the Nikkor equivalent to these lenses. The difference between
Canon and Nikon is more pronounced on the zoom lenses (Nikkor's 17-35mm is
way superior to Canon's 16-35mm), but Nikkor's 28mm f/1.4 lens is also a lot
sharper than Canon's 24mm f/1.4 lens.

The camera is superb but the lenses (at least the ones I've chosen so far)
do not match it. Another lens I had chosen which is the new 24-105mm zoom
f/4L has been recalled. The next one I am going to purchase is the 135mm I
am planning to purchase for my in-office portraits of my patients. I have
read reviews that this lens fairs favorably when compared to the 85mm f/1.2
in terms of overall sharpness. I will post my initial impressions as soon as
I try it.

My only wish was to get the same image quality I had become accustomed to
with my Nikkor lenses.

Thank you again for your feedback and I will definitely check the camera
settings and to what degree they impact this issue.

Best regards,

Joseph

---

Dr. Joseph Chamberlain
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

2005-11-09, Joseph Chamberlain, DDS wrote:
[...]
Canon could follow Sony's approach. Since they realize they don't have the

Canon should install rootkits on our computers which cannot be removed
and generally try to make us unable to use the stuff we bought legally?
:-)

-peter

"Joseph Chamberlain, DDS" wrote in message
.. .

I haven't done any post processing at all. I took general photos without
any
specific test in mind.

No post processing was done. The photos were taken as RAW (CR2), opened
with
Bridge (Adobe's latest CS2) and viewed with Camera Raw 3.2 hosted by
Bridge
(3.2 is the latest version and I just downloaded it from Adobe's web site
a
few days ago).

Thank you for the suggestion about the in-camera processing parameters.
Mine
remain as the factory defaults and I didn't feel the need to change them.
I
am going to look into this and try a few different options to see how much
improvement I can obtain from it.

To be very honest with you what I see is basically the type of edge
distortion that is noticeable by the naked eye and one does not need to be
a
specialist to see it. Distortion and lack of sharpness that are simply
absent with the Nikkor equivalent to these lenses. The difference between
Canon and Nikon is more pronounced on the zoom lenses (Nikkor's 17-35mm is
way superior to Canon's 16-35mm), but Nikkor's 28mm f/1.4 lens is also a
lot
sharper than Canon's 24mm f/1.4 lens.

The camera is superb but the lenses (at least the ones I've chosen so far)
do not match it. Another lens I had chosen which is the new 24-105mm zoom
f/4L has been recalled. The next one I am going to purchase is the 135mm I
am planning to purchase for my in-office portraits of my patients. I have
read reviews that this lens fairs favorably when compared to the 85mm
f/1.2
in terms of overall sharpness. I will post my initial impressions as soon
as
I try it.

My only wish was to get the same image quality I had become accustomed to
with my Nikkor lenses.

Thank you again for your feedback and I will definitely check the camera
settings and to what degree they impact this issue.


Can you post a photo of your medical or dental license? I'm having trouble
believing you're nothing but a brainless troll or a fraud of a Douglas
sockpuppet.

Greg

Skip M wrote:
Oh, yeah, and laughing, too! g

Laugh this one Skip...
The Canon hater in me absolutely hates *me* today. I just ordered a 5D!
God help this poor sole who is once again corrupted by the demon EOS. Is
there no help for me?

Shock, Horror... I just dusted off my sole remaining Canon camera. an
old EOS 1N and behold... It still works just like the day I threw it in
the box. This incredibly durable piece of hardware will from this day
forth keep me company everywhere I go, such is it's reliability. Ability
to work in obscene temperatures and still take impeccable pictures. Not
to mention survive the odd dropping!

Ahrrr Nikon lied to me. It worked so well all during winter and then
when the first really hot day arrives and I had to use it in the sun, it
heated up it's sensor, started capturing colours that weren't there.

I put it in the fridge with all the beer and champers for half an hour
while I shot some of the Wedding with a E300 (is there no sin?) and then
got the thing from the fridge and shot the formals before it sobered up.

Just as well this Wedding was in the grounds of a Pub! Prey for me Skip,
my sole is corrupted again. :-)

--
Douglas...
Specifications are good to read but
When it comes to judging Digital Cameras...
I'm in the "how do the pictures look" category.

"Joseph Chamberlain, DDS" wrote:

I haven't done any post processing at all. I took general photos without any
specific test in mind.


And therein lies the problem. You just don't understand digital.

Any DSLR will produce images that appear soft when compared with film.
It has nothing to do with the lenses, because the same lenses will
produce sharp images on film but soft digital images.

Digital images straight from the camera need to be post-processed -
suitable applications for doing this include Photoshop Elements v4.0
and Corel Paint Shop Pro X. You can spend megabucks on Photoshop CS
but everything you will need - and more- is in Photoshop Elements
v4.0. The best quality is generally obtained by shooting in RAW
format.

What you need to do now is learn how to post-process digital images to
get the results you want. Whether your extreme arrogance will allow
you to accept this is of course another matter.

Joseph Chamberlain, DDS wrote:

To be very honest with you what I see is basically the type of edge
distortion that is noticeable by the naked eye and one does not need
to be a specialist to see it. Distortion and lack of sharpness that
are simply absent with the Nikkor equivalent to these lenses. The
difference between Canon and Nikon is more pronounced on the zoom
lenses (Nikkor's 17-35mm is way superior to Canon's 16-35mm), but
Nikkor's 28mm f/1.4 lens is also a lot sharper than Canon's 24mm
f/1.4 lens.

Lens tests do not reveal the Canon lenses to have worse performance
than their Nikon equivalents.

Do you see this effect in the centre of the image, or just around the
outside?

I suspect that what you're really seeing is the effect of the
full-frame sensor: the extremes of the frame are far less sharp, both
on the Nikon and the Canon lenses. But the Nikon, not a full-frame
sensor, doesn't use the edge of the image.

Andrew.

In article ,
says...
Skip M wrote:
Oh, yeah, and laughing, too! g

Laugh this one Skip...
The Canon hater in me absolutely hates *me* today. I just ordered a 5D!
God help this poor sole who is once again corrupted by the demon EOS. Is
there no help for me?

Shock, Horror... I just dusted off my sole remaining Canon camera. an
old EOS 1N and behold... It still works just like the day I threw it in
the box. This incredibly durable piece of hardware will from this day
forth keep me company everywhere I go, such is it's reliability. Ability
to work in obscene temperatures and still take impeccable pictures. Not
to mention survive the odd dropping!

Ahrrr Nikon lied to me. It worked so well all during winter and then
when the first really hot day arrives and I had to use it in the sun, it
heated up it's sensor, started capturing colours that weren't there.

I put it in the fridge with all the beer and champers for half an hour
while I shot some of the Wedding with a E300 (is there no sin?) and then
got the thing from the fridge and shot the formals before it sobered up.

Just as well this Wedding was in the grounds of a Pub! Prey for me Skip,
my sole is corrupted again. :-)

Have you totally lost it?

Really Doug, it's no wonder you get flamed so often. Posts like these
only serve to show that its not photography you are interested in, but
playing with us!

How did you discover this Nikon colour capturing problem during the
shoot? Do you carry around a laptop with you and examine every shot in
RSE during the wedding? You can't possibly assess colour using the LCD
on a DSLR.

BTW, if colour accuracy is so vitally important to you, why not just
stick to the technology that has been keeping photographers happy since
midway through last century: colour film. Pick one, shoot it, stick with
it.

--
DD
www.dallasdahms.com
Central Scrutinizer

I have a novel suggestion: Try the lenses out on a Canon film body and
compare the results to the images you took with the Nikon? Better? I
wonder why?

Jim

Mate. I think you asked some reasonable questions. Unfortunately I don't
have the answers for you but I would like to apologise for the comments of
some of the people here.

Probably a mixture of jealousy both intellectual and financial with copious
helpings of Scheudenfraude.


Pretty pathetic really.

"Douglas..." wrote in message
...
Skip M wrote:
Oh, yeah, and laughing, too! g

Laugh this one Skip...
The Canon hater in me absolutely hates *me* today. I just ordered a 5D!
God help this poor sole who is once again corrupted by the demon EOS. Is
there no help for me?

Shock, Horror... I just dusted off my sole remaining Canon camera. an old
EOS 1N and behold... It still works just like the day I threw it in the
box. This incredibly durable piece of hardware will from this day forth
keep me company everywhere I go, such is it's reliability. Ability to work
in obscene temperatures and still take impeccable pictures. Not to mention
survive the odd dropping!

Ahrrr Nikon lied to me. It worked so well all during winter and then when
the first really hot day arrives and I had to use it in the sun, it heated
up it's sensor, started capturing colours that weren't there.

I put it in the fridge with all the beer and champers for half an hour
while I shot some of the Wedding with a E300 (is there no sin?) and then
got the thing from the fridge and shot the formals before it sobered up.

Just as well this Wedding was in the grounds of a Pub! Prey for me Skip,
my sole is corrupted again. :-)


Abandon all hope, all ye who enter here... grin

BTW that must be some vicious heat you guys have down there, we get hot
here, but I've never heard of cameras failing to function because of it.
I've never been good at the F:C conversion, so I'll speak Fahrenheit. We've
shot weddings in 95F heat, and I've shot in the desert in 118F and not had a
failure. Haven't had the 5D out in that, though, but I'd expect it to keep
up with the D30, in that case...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com