uh-oh ... canon 1ds mark 2

wxwax

luben wrote:

Are you serious, or are you just playing?

Oh, he's serious alright. He'll have one in his hands within 6 months, I reckon. Probably less.



Maybe he'll have to sell me his 35 f1.4 to help pay for it.

Andy

*never* bet against what sid says

luben wrote:

Are you serious, or are you just playing?

i'm serious, but i did put it off. sid's right, it'll be six months or less, and i'll have a ff

sigh

tmlphoto

More Fuel for the fire

andy wrote:

yeah but i'm reading that these raw files open up huuuuuuuuuuuge in photoshop....

You can always drop down to an 8mp image for your street shooting and up it to 16 mp only when you really need it.

Andy

tmlphoto wrote:

You can always drop down to an 8mp image for your street shooting and up it to 16 mp only when you really need it.

hmmm there's an idea...

now, where's that phone number for onecall again?

tmlphoto

Dynamic Range??

andy wrote:

i've progressed from a rebel thru 10d and now 20d. the dr has improved with each, i've no doubt that the dr will be even better in the coming years.

Where exactly is the bottleneck for dr? The RAW file has alot more dr than it seems can be used for a JPEG without some PS manipulation. Alot of blown highlights in a JPEG image are actually differentiated already in the RAW file. This doesn't seem like a sensor issue to me. It seems like the problem is trying to cram all those subtle graduations into only 250 pixel brightness values is the problem. Can the eye detect more graduations? Am I not understanding something?

tmlphoto

andy wrote:

hmmm there's an idea...

now, where's that phone number for onecall again?

If I can get you to bite, maybe I could justify one for myself:D . It's more camera than I am photog, but still tempting. Ahhh, the mystical allure of full frame.

patch29

Canon has a new 1Ds mkII site here with new samples and info.

tmlphoto

patch29 wrote:

Canon has a new 1Ds mkII site here with new samples and info.

I just downloaded one of the 11mb JPEG sample images. Simply amazing, one can zoom way, way in and still not find a pixel. The detail is astounding. I uploaded the church image. My computer handled manipulating the JPEG without difficulty its a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4. I wonder if the RAW files would really slow it down? Anybody know where there are some 1DsII RAW files available for download?

Sam

tmlphoto wrote:

I just downloaded one of the 11mb JPEG sample images. Simply amazing, one can zoom way, way in and still not find a pixel. The detail is astounding. I uploaded the church image. My computer handled manipulating the JPEG without difficulty its a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4. I wonder if the RAW files would really slow it down? Anybody know where there are some 1DsII RAW files available for download?

I have a Pentium 4 with 1 Gig of memory and thought I would try 16 bit files. Crashed my computer. I think If I understand this, PS will address 2 gigs, and if you are working with uhmumngus files you may want 4 gigs of RAM in your computer. It never ends! 16 MP Raw files.......hum.....you probably need to buy memory cards with a terabite each and have several on hand. Plus dual processers, and 6 500 gig hard drives, and 32" monitor. OH, don't forget the new printer that can handle 1 gig photo files. Arugggg!!! I'm going back to my Polaroid!

mercphoto

Sam wrote:

I have a Pentium 4 with 1 Gig of memory and thought I would try 16 bit files. Crashed my computer.

Shouldn't have. An 11 megapixel image in 16-bit mode should have only been about 66 MB, give or take. Not very huge, and way under the memory limits. A lack of RAM was most likely not the problem. It was probably your choice of operating system that is the culprit.

ian408

Sam,

When you added the memory to your machine, did you check to make sure the
pagefile increased in size too?

Also, by crashed, what do you mean? The machine bluescreened? The application
died? The application hung?

I'm asking because PS wants to have it's own scratch space. Preferably not on the
same drive as the application. You can change this. It's also the one thing I noticed
opening the raw files from the 1d. I have very little free space on the system disk
(which is the default "scratch" space) and PS just crawls when it runs out. Changed
to one of the others and it's all good.

Ian

Sam

ian408 wrote:

Sam,

When you added the memory to your machine, did you check to make sure the
pagefile increased in size too?

Also, by crashed, what do you mean? The machine bluescreened? The application
died? The application hung?

I'm asking because PS wants to have it's own scratch space. Preferably not on the
same drive as the application. You can change this. It's also the one thing I noticed
opening the raw files from the 1d. I have very little free space on the system disk
(which is the default "scratch" space) and PS just crawls when it runs out. Changed
to one of the others and it's all good.

Ian

Ok, I guess I shouldn’t have been so vague with my terminology. I started getting error messages, when using 16 bit files, stating that PS couldn’t perform the requested operation because of insufficient memory. Also PS stopped responding, closed the file I was working on and I had to do a warm boot from the start button. (Windows XP)



I had the memory allocation for PS set at about 65% or close to 650 MB. When I checked the task manager is showed close to that being in use. When I went back to 8 bit files the amount in use dropped to about half.



Now about that scratch disk. I just checked and it appears I have 4 choices for scratch disks. The first is set to “start up” the next 3 show “none”. Drop down selections available are ether C or D drive.



Should I designate a second or third scratch disk to say D drive?

Thank you for any help you can provide.

Sam

ian408

Sam wrote:

Now about that scratch disk. I just checked and it appears I have 4 choices for scratch disks. The first is set to “start up” the next 3 show “none”. Drop down selections available are ether C or D drive.



Should I designate a second or third scratch disk to say D drive?

Thank you for any help you can provide.

Sam

The disk you assign for scratch use shouldn't be the one the OS is on or the
disk you'll be working from (where your images are). For those of you that
have multiple computers and share out the drives, you shouldn't use those
network drives as scratch space (unless you have a very, very fast network
link ).

I'm not sure how well PS does splitting scratch disks across several drives
so I can't say for sure if you should select more than two. Definetly make
the primary scratch drive one with plently of free space and one not being
used for the OS or picture storage.

Ian

Sam

ian408 wrote:

The disk you assign for scratch use shouldn't be the one the OS is on or the
disk you'll be working from (where your images are). For those of you that
have multiple computers and share out the drives, you shouldn't use those
network drives as scratch space (unless you have a very, very fast network
link ).

I'm not sure how well PS does splitting scratch disks across several drives
so I can't say for sure if you should select more than two. Definetly make
the primary scratch drive one with plently of free space and one not being
used for the OS or picture storage.

Ian

I went ahead and set the first to drive D. Then I converted one RAW photo twice (dark / light) to 16 bit PS files and went ahead with processing and blending them. I did not encounter any problems. I think it's solved.

Thanks!

Sam

pete w

Andy, Next year for me, let us know the difference between the 20D and 1D. When will you get it?

Andy

pete w wrote:

Andy, Next year for me, let us know the difference between the 20D and 1D. When will you get it?

i have the 20d now, pete. i wrote some observations here

pete w

canon 1ds mark 2
When will you get the 1Ds ? look forward to your thoughts on this camera.Maybe in your position you can persuade Smugmug to accept larger files!