Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Why does it seem to be more difficult to get full frame shots thru QC than with aps-c or 4/3 ? Even using L lenses? Why does it seem necessary to downsize full frame images? Why are so many of you full frame users dumping them for aps-c? Is it something besides size and weight that i know is a factor?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No troubles with ff (5D2) using both zooms and primes. Indeed I bought a m43 (Oly EM5) the other week (wanted the IBIS) and it's currently for sale on Ebay.....nuff said!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto no trouble whatsoever with FF (D700, sometimes D4) using both zooms (modern) and primes (many decades old).

 

And I never find it necessary to downsize images.

 

dd

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both my pro cameras are full frame. Canon 5DMkII and 1DS Mk III. No problem getting images through QC.  Historically, I did have a QC problem, but it related to how I was processing my images, not to the FF camera I was using/used. No, I love my FF Cameras too!

Edited by John Gaffen
Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of the full frame canon 6D using L lenses the sharpness is set at 4 automatically. That is as viewed in DPP 4. Now alamy doesnt want any sharpening but if i set sharpening down to 0 the image is very very soft. I leave it at the 4 setting as it comes out of the camera. The images still look a bit soft to me but that is were i process. They look better at a setting of 7 but i dont do that. Any higher than that 7 and the pixels get noisy. I have also been shooting everything at iso 400 lately. I cant see much difference in noise from 100. I am just wondering what you canon folks use for settings in raw processing. You're welcome to shit on the canon if you want to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try downsizing. It has helped some here. Even I do it now, to 4500 long side.

Edit- sorry, you already do.

Can't help with RAW as I've always used jpeg and have even got a bit of sharpening (40 in LR) past QC

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its true, the native images from Canon FF cameras (at least the ones I own),  are quite soft. My QC issue did relate to sharpness. But all my problems  were solved when I started to use Lightroom. I now, always apply some moderate sharpening to my RAW/Tiff images (No more than 40) . I don't downsize, unless I think the composition/balance, is improved by cropping the image  in some way.  

Edited by John Gaffen
Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of the full frame canon 6D using L lenses the sharpness is set at 4 automatically. That is as viewed in DPP 4. Now alamy doesnt want any sharpening but if i set sharpening down to 0 the image is very very soft. I leave it at the 4 setting as it comes out of the camera. The images still look a bit soft to me but that is were i process. They look better at a setting of 7 but i dont do that. Any higher than that 7 and the pixels get noisy. I have also been shooting everything at iso 400 lately. I cant see much difference in noise from 100. I am just wondering what you canon folks use for settings in raw processing. You're welcome to shit on the canon if you want to.

 

When I used DPP, long time back, I used capture sharpening at 2 (IIRC) in the dialog box. I don't shoot jpegs, just raw. I've always used the default in LR or ACR.

 

6D is a great camera, should have no trouble getting past QC with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As regards the 6D, I've never had a QC failure with it. I shoot RAW and process in Lightroom. I've never found any need for NR or sharpening.

 

I also use a Sony A6000, also shooting RAW, and as far as detail goes, I only apply a little noise reduction if the image needs it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 . I don't downsize, unless I think the composition/balance, is improved by cropping the image  in some way.  

I meant just downsizing the image, I wasn't referring to cropping.

You can put a condition on the downsizing so it doesn't inadvertently upsize a cropped image.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hesitant to put a toe into this can of worms . . . but, correct me if I'm wrong: it's been a long time since Alamy has "suggested" using zero sharpening. In recent years, they have been saying "no excess" sharpening. 

 

If you're having trouble judging the sharpness of your output, regardless of your gear, first go to a good eye doctor and have your eyes tested . . . no, I'm not joking. Then review all the steps in your workflow. And finally, do a bench test of everything you're using, old and new.

 

I never had a QC failure with my Nikons, FF or DX, even when we upsized to 48MP.  When I switched to the smaller, lighter mirrorless Sony gear (RX10 with the Zeiss 24-200, NEX-6, 7 and 3, with a few great primes and now the 10-18 f/4 zoom), I had a series of QC failures. Looking back with my sharp, doctor-OKed eyes, I now see that all the fails were my fault, due to adjusting to the new equipment and a few missed steps in my workflow. The first thing you did, Addict, is monkey with the factory defaults. Oh my. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does it seem to be more difficult to get full frame shots thru QC than with aps-c or 4/3 ? Even using L lenses? Why does it seem necessary to downsize full frame images? Why are so many of you full frame users dumping them for aps-c? Is it something besides size and weight that i know is a factor?

 

FF has less depth of field than smaller sensors making focus critical - presume you've checked for front/back focus issues? I got rid of my Canon gear in the end. I was fed up with unreliable phase detect focusing.

 

A high pixel count also makes lack of camera shake/movement critical.

 

Might be worth double checking

 

1) The focus accuracy

2) Lack of camera shake/movement

3) Don't use tiny apertures which will cause softening due to diffraction (some suggest not going beyond F11)

4) Use a low ISO and avoid high NR.

 

I swapped to Lumix G5 mirrorless, micro 4/3rds format, with contrast based AF, which gives me 100% reliable focusing, slightly deeper depth of field, no mirror vibration. I never discard images for focus problems now, whereas with my Canon SLR it was probably 50% that got chucked.

 

I do downsize my images slightly, but then I'm using a 14-140 lens, which can be a tad soft if I don't downsize. No problems with QC in the last 200 submissions (tempting fate here!) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Virtually every shot I take with the 5D2 + 24-105 (FF) would pass Alamy. About 70% of what I take with the NEX6 (APSC) would pass. About 50%of what I took on the X-T1 (APSC) would pass.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problems at all with images from the 5DMk2; I never downsize my images either.  I have just got a 7DMk2 body as a "back-up" but that was more for the occasional need for more than 5 images per second, and the extra length afforded to my "L" lenses (I like the "silent shutter" operation as well, as does the wife!)

 

Kumar

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem at all with images from Canon 5DII. L-lenses - often 70-200mm or 24-105mm. Have to be careful above about ISO 1000 (noise) and focus carefully  (normally center point AF focus). I have a 7D as a backup / or mounted with my 70-200mm Canon L-lens, so I don't have to change lenses outside.

 

I tried uploading from my Canon G11 once - which resulted in my first QC fail for years - so dSLR for me, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No problems with my FF Nikon D4 (and sometimes D700).

 

I was under impression certain members were switching away from FF cameras mainly to use lighter equipment, not to improve QC outcome. 

 

All the best - Ann

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lighter and smaller are certainly my reasons for switching, Ann . . . but I'm not doing assignments anymore, as I believe you are. If I were still shooting assignments, I would be conspicuously lugging around several serious looking DSLRs. Why? Because photography is a business, and the image we present is as important as the images we deliver.   ;)

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lighter and smaller are certainly my reasons for switching, Ann . . . but I'm not doing assignments anymore, as I believe you are. If I were still shooting assignments, I would be conspicuously lugging around several serious looking DSLRs. Why? Because photography is a business, and the image we present is as important as the images we deliver.   ;)

Wise words.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No i am using the default sharpness out of the camera which is 4. I do believe that FF canons are a bit soft even with L lenses. Larger pixels and their sensors appear to be the problem. Quite honestly the shots from my old T2i with just EFS lenses appear damn near as sharp. I dont see a lot of difference at 100% mag

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no experience with Canon DSLR's( even though I was the second member of CPS in the 80's)

but I've worked with and have images from F mount DSLR's on Alamy shot with DSLR bodies going back to

the DSC460 and 620 and most of the CCD FUJI's all the way up to the Nikon D800.  With all of those

bodies I have only shot RAW or NEF (depending on the body).  I've used mostly the same glass, 12-24 f4

35-70 f2.8 AFD, 105 f4 Micro, 80-200 f2.8 AFD and 300 f2.8 IF-ED, now I've added the Tokina 16-28 f2.8

(fantastic lens) and the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 (another great piece of glass).  I process all of my RAW or NEF

files in ACR in CS5 and I get great finished 16 bit TIFF files to correct and touch up before saving as

as JPEG's.  I do not often use a tripod.  I have not had an image fail QC. 

 

I also have a small number of images on Alamy shot with the Canon G4, 6 and 9,  Keep in mind

that I always keep the ISO as low as possible and on the D800's I keep my aperture between one

stop down and 3 stops, depending on the lens I am using and the subject that I am photographing. 

I've tested all of my lenses and know where I will get the best results in FF, +1.2 and DX. 

 

Oh yes, almost forgot, I do not sharpen at all.

 

Chuck (Still the original one)

Edited by Chuck Nacke
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does it seem to be more difficult to get full frame shots thru QC than with aps-c or 4/3 ? Even using L lenses? Why does it seem necessary to downsize full frame images? Why are so many of you full frame users dumping them for aps-c? Is it something besides size and weight that i know is a factor?

For me it is all about size and portability. Aps-c out of necessity, if there were comparable FF size I would buy it.

SIze = much more discrete - positives in every instance, less intimidating to people you shoot, less attraction from thieves, more stealth everywhere,

Portability = gear fits in a small messenger bag & comes along at all times now without a second thought + less strain on body

 

As to sharpness etc. Hig megapixel FF can be really tough to nail shakewise. I suggest

1) try shooting everything at 2x the shutter speed you normally do for a while see it any difference.

2) do a focus test to see if your gear really is nailing it - might be offset, decentered, etc etc

Canon does deliver softish raw but not to the point of not passing with a bit of pp

 

I hope you find a solution!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Softish images don't fail Alamy's QC. Images not in focus do. If in doubt I perform a sharpening and scrutinize at 100%, if okay, I do not upload the sharpened image - but the "softish" one, which will pass QC. And this is the way Alamy prefer it, to leave the sharpening to the end user.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.