Official 5DMKII users thread

[raydio]

that's why i am seeking advise on whether should i wait of MkIII (persume if its coming next year)or just buy a MkII now since the price is quite attractive.

There are some rumours that say the Canon 5D MkIII may be coming soon to combat the impending release of the Nikon D700 replacement. Any speculation on that?

 

[juste_millieu]

There are some rumours that say the Canon 5D MkIII may be coming soon to combat the impending release of the Nikon D700 replacement. Any speculation on that?

if you can wait for 5D MKIII, you can wait for 5D MKIV
btw, the 5D MKIII rumour say coming next 2011

 

[Anson]

There are some rumours that say the Canon 5D MkIII may be coming soon to combat the impending release of the Nikon D700 replacement. Any speculation on that?

Instead of reading so much into rumours, my advise is to decide whether the 5DMII is right for you. If it is... bite the bullet and buy it.

 

[raydio]

Instead of reading so much into rumours, my advise is to decide whether the 5DMII is right for you. If it is... bite the bullet and buy it.

Very true! Can you give me a bullet to bite on?

 

[Anson]

Very true! Can you give me a bullet to bite on?

Bring bullet into SG is illegal.... :nono:

 

[takengo2003]

hi bro here,

I have a question, does the IQ of taking JPG+RAW same as just taking RAW and JPG individually?

for the above case, will there be any difference comparing the 2 RAW and 2 JPG?

anyone?

 

[sinned79]

anyone?

RAW file will appears "duller" i think... JPEG is the compressed + PPed by the camera.

 

[takengo2003]

RAW file will appears "duller" i think... JPEG is the compressed + PPed by the camera.

i am not comparing between raw and jpg. In 5DMK2, you can set your output format to be
1) RAW
2) JPG
3) RAW+JPG

now, i am comparing raw(option 1) vs raw(option 3), and
comparing jpg(option 2) vs jpg(option 3).

seems like option 3 is good if we have a big CF card, but how about IQ, same as option 1 and 2?

 

[mimik07]

i am not comparing between raw and jpg. In 5DMK2, you can set your output format to be
1) RAW
2) JPG
3) RAW+JPG

now, i am comparing raw(option 1) vs raw(option 3), and
comparing jpg(option 2) vs jpg(option 3).

seems like option 3 is good if we have a big CF card, but how about IQ, same as option 1 and 2?

Never tried that out before. Been shooting RAW all these while.
Why don't you try it out and let us know? :think:

 

[takengo2003]

Never tried that out before. Been shooting RAW all these while.
Why don't you try it out and let us know? :think:

i do not see much difference when i tried it last week, but that may be my eyes.
need to confirm with bros here as i will be bringing this camera to Europe next month.
Hmm, should i just stick to raw only.:think:

 

[raydio]

Bring bullet into SG is illegal.... :nono:

Ha ha! Is putting a Canon to your head illegal in Singapore too? :dunno:

 

[shuttered]

new 5DM2 owner here... 'love every single thing about it!!! i'm glad i took the jump. owned a 7d prior to owning the 5dm2 and i've no regret whatsoever when i sold my 7d and upgraded to 5dm2... sweeeeeet!

 

[mimik07]

i do not see much difference when i tried it last week, but that may be my eyes.
need to confirm with bros here as i will be bringing this camera to Europe next month.
Hmm, should i just stick to raw only.:think:

Last time I went Europe I shot all RAW..already need 2 x 16GB card and 1 x 8GB card. Imagine you shoot RAW + JPG... :sweat:

 

[raydio]

hi bro here,

I have a question, does the IQ of taking JPG+RAW same as just taking RAW and JPG individually?

for the above case, will there be any difference comparing the 2 RAW and 2 JPG?
anyone?

There is no difference in IQ for taking photos with camera set to RAW+JPEG or RAW by itself or JPEG by itself. RAW is RAW which ever way the camera is set and the same applies for JPEG.

However, there is a difference, sometimes a huge difference, between RAW and JPEG files.

When taking a RAW photo, the camera produces an image exactly the way it sees it with absolutely no in-camera processing or compression. These files are typically larger compared to its JPEG counterpart. On a high pixel camera like the 7D or 5D MkII, the RAW files will exceed 20mb and for some will approach 30mb.

JPEG images on the other hand, are highly compressed and processed. The camera strips out most colours that the human eye cannot perceive thus creating a much smaller file (compression). Using the above example of the 7D and 5D, JPEG photos average 5-7 mb each, making them much smaller than their RAW counterparts. The photos are also processed by the camera to produce saturated colours, additional sharpness, contrast, etc. This is particularly true when picture styles are used in-camera (eg. portrait, faithful, landscape, etc).

The reason why people use RAW is to perform post processing in software like DPP or Photoshop. This provides the most flexibility to allow the photographer to get the "look or feel" that he or she is trying to achieve. JPEG's can be manipulated in this way too, however there is much less flexibility than with RAW.

I hope this answers your question.... sorry to make it so long.

 

[takengo2003]

Last time I went Europe I shot all RAW..already need 2 x 16GB card and 1 x 8GB card. Imagine you shoot RAW + JPG... :sweat:

haha, not to worry, i will always bring my netbook, 1x16gb and 2x8gb when i am oversea. so will always copy my photos to netbook when i reach hotel, then format my CF cards for next day use.

I normally take less than 300 shots per day. if each raw+jpg is 30mb, then i will only need 9gb for a day.

so 1x16gb is enough for me, the rest of the CF cards are just standby.

 

[takengo2003]

There is no difference in IQ for taking photos with camera set to RAW+JPEG or RAW by itself or JPEG by itself. RAW is RAW which ever way the camera is set and the same applies for JPEG.

However, there is a difference, sometimes a huge difference, between RAW and JPEG files.

When taking a RAW photo, the camera produces an image exactly the way it sees it with absolutely no in-camera processing or compression. These files are typically larger compared to its JPEG counterpart. On a high pixel camera like the 7D or 5D MkII, the RAW files will exceed 20mb and for some will approach 30mb.

JPEG images on the other hand, are highly compressed and processed. The camera strips out most colours that the human eye cannot perceive thus creating a much smaller file (compression). Using the above example of the 7D and 5D, JPEG photos average 5-7 mb each, making them much smaller than their RAW counterparts. The photos are also processed by the camera to produce saturated colours, additional sharpness, contrast, etc. This is particularly true when picture styles are used in-camera (eg. portrait, faithful, landscape, etc).

The reason why people use RAW is to perform post processing in software like DPP or Photoshop. This provides the most flexibility to allow the photographer to get the "look or feel" that he or she is trying to achieve. JPEG's can be manipulated in this way too, however there is much less flexibility than with RAW.

I hope this answers your question.... sorry to make it so long.

thanks, good to know there is no difference between raw and raw+jpg.

difference between raw and jpg i already know, but thanks for the detail explainations. appreciate that.

 

[raydio]

haha, not to worry, i will always bring my netbook, 1x16gb and 2x8gb when i am oversea. so will always copy my photos to netbook when i reach hotel, then format my CF cards for next day use.

I normally take less than 300 shots per day. if each raw+jpg is 30mb, then i will only need 9gb for a day.

so 1x16gb is enough for me, the rest of the CF cards are just standby.

takengo2003; You mention in the above post that you have a netbook. I am considering one of these too. But I am just wondering, have you ever tried to run PhotoShop Elements on your netbook? If so, does it run well.... with reasonable performance?

 

[takengo2003]

takengo2003; You mention in the above post that you have a netbook. I am considering one of these too. But I am just wondering, have you ever tried to run PhotoShop Elements on your netbook? If so, does it run well.... with reasonable performance?

no, I did not install in my netbook as no time to do editing when oversea, my netbook only serves as a backup of my photos and surf the net for travel info when I am oversea.

 

[KBsnaps]

Nothing runs smoothly on most netbooks except low-CPU programs like words/ internet browser/ audio editing etc. Image editing will depend if your pic file is small enough

 

[Anson]

Ha ha! Is putting a Canon to your head illegal in Singapore too? :dunno:

Canon no.... Cannon maybe....:think: