G
Guest
Don, it is the fourth item in the main menu. Right on the top of this page.
DPR Forum
Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.
DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!
G
Guest
Irakly,
That's pretty darned amazing, especially for ISO 200. For some reason, the EXIF info is reporting an aperture of 1.0 after downloading - are you holding back on us about a new lens?
Was that with the 85/1.4?
DJ
That's pretty darned amazing, especially for ISO 200. For some reason, the EXIF info is reporting an aperture of 1.0 after downloading - are you holding back on us about a new lens?
DJ
G
Guest
DJ, I have notived that my camera recodrs f/1 on 1.4/50 and 1.4/85 in EXIF header when shooting wide open. I guess, one more reason to bitch about quality of firmware
As for ISO, 200 and 400 are virtually undistinguishable.
As for ISO, 200 and 400 are virtually undistinguishable.
G
Guest
I got a lettef from Blake Ziegler. Here is a quote:
***
Hello,
Thanks for your comments concerning N Digital.
Please be sure to use RAW Developer Version 2. Version 1 was rush ware, and totally incompetent. To avoid the RAW Developer, why not shoot in the TIFF mode? I have had good success with TIFF.
No one from Adobe contacted us in the US to participate in their RAW Developer project. I cannot say that we were not contacted in Japan, but I would think they would consider us the point of contact, here. We have had other discussions with Adobe previously, so they know how to contact us about any projects they wish to pursue.
I have already contacted Adobe to discuss adding the Contax RAW Developer code to their software. We will see what the response is soon.
Blake Ziegler
Contax Technical Director
***
Hello,
Thanks for your comments concerning N Digital.
Please be sure to use RAW Developer Version 2. Version 1 was rush ware, and totally incompetent. To avoid the RAW Developer, why not shoot in the TIFF mode? I have had good success with TIFF.
No one from Adobe contacted us in the US to participate in their RAW Developer project. I cannot say that we were not contacted in Japan, but I would think they would consider us the point of contact, here. We have had other discussions with Adobe previously, so they know how to contact us about any projects they wish to pursue.
I have already contacted Adobe to discuss adding the Contax RAW Developer code to their software. We will see what the response is soon.
Blake Ziegler
Contax Technical Director
G
Guest
Posted by Irakly Shanidze on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 4:45 am:
Don, it is the fourth item in the main menu. Right on the top of this page.
Thanks,
I had actually been to that site but didn't see the gallery link at the top until now.
DAW
Don, it is the fourth item in the main menu. Right on the top of this page.
Thanks,
I had actually been to that site but didn't see the gallery link at the top until now.
DAW
G
Guest
Hello all.
I have up loaded two main images and a number of substantial cropped details shot with the ND and a Canon 1Ds.
Both cameras were set at ISO 50. Both on Manual Mode. Both on the same tripod using 2 sec. self timer for shake free images. 1/125th was the shutter speed. Both were set on flash for color temp. Profoto strobes were used without changing any of the settings.
Lenses used: Zeiss 24-85/3.5 @ f/16 set on 70mm; Canon 24-70/2.8L @ f/16 set on 70mm.
The only difference was that the ND was set to produce Tiffs (the RAW sometimes produces moire' patterns in the darks). The Canon doesn't offer a Tiff option, so 8 bit Tiff conversions were made from RAW files.
Conclusions: The ND does well but not as well as the 1Ds. Further refinements could have been done to the ND images, but that is true of the Canon images also. Yet, what can be expected from a sensor 1/2 the meg count of the Canon? The fact is that the Canon is not twice as good, despite the substantially more dense sensor. Color from the Contax ND / Zeiss combo was noticeably cooler than the Canon duo. Cooler to the point that is was more difficult to match the real colors in the scene, but not impossible.
In truth, for most applications up to 11"X14" with careful processing, there would probably be differences but not noticable unless laid side by side.
I have up loaded two main images and a number of substantial cropped details shot with the ND and a Canon 1Ds.
Both cameras were set at ISO 50. Both on Manual Mode. Both on the same tripod using 2 sec. self timer for shake free images. 1/125th was the shutter speed. Both were set on flash for color temp. Profoto strobes were used without changing any of the settings.
Lenses used: Zeiss 24-85/3.5 @ f/16 set on 70mm; Canon 24-70/2.8L @ f/16 set on 70mm.
The only difference was that the ND was set to produce Tiffs (the RAW sometimes produces moire' patterns in the darks). The Canon doesn't offer a Tiff option, so 8 bit Tiff conversions were made from RAW files.
Conclusions: The ND does well but not as well as the 1Ds. Further refinements could have been done to the ND images, but that is true of the Canon images also. Yet, what can be expected from a sensor 1/2 the meg count of the Canon? The fact is that the Canon is not twice as good, despite the substantially more dense sensor. Color from the Contax ND / Zeiss combo was noticeably cooler than the Canon duo. Cooler to the point that is was more difficult to match the real colors in the scene, but not impossible.
In truth, for most applications up to 11"X14" with careful processing, there would probably be differences but not noticable unless laid side by side.
G
Guest
so mark, are u saying you should not have bought the ND!! or may be it should be used as a medium format type camera (very very slow but good results). i just looked @ the shutterbug magazine and there is a conatx = day coming up in may two page ad with no mention of ND!! what does that = say!! i just picked up the ND again after sitting in the drawer for a long time after reading all your positive comments=20
G
Guest
Mehrard, I would not call it exactly "very very slow"<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">• only way to really slow down Contax ND is to shoot TIFFs, which I still have to find a reason to do.
G
Guest
Irakly, i am still trying to catch-up, what else did you hear from blake = @ contax. I am still planning to write my letter this month, running a = little late due to work (thank god!<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">•<font color="ff0000">• u also read the other part of the = email where there is no mention of contax ND on the two page contax ad?
G
Guest
Mehrdad, actually neither Irakly nor I can see an overpowering reason not to shoot large J-pegs with this camera...which considerably speeds up its' operation. So for more deliberate studio still lifes use RAW or Tiff. For faster needs use J-pegs and immediately convert them to Adobe RGB 1998 Tiffs in computer. Personally, I like the look of the J-pegs better because the Tiffs out of the camera tend to oversaturate the reds a bit.
Since shifting over to using large J-pegs for most of my street work, the camera has seen
a lot more action. BTW, when shooting J-pegs or Tiffs the new PhotoShop 7 browser can be used, so it speeds up work flow like crazy. Now if we only could use the Adobe RAW converter with ND files.
And I will repeat this again...
I LOVE this camera for black and white work.
For some reason, the black and white tonal range and general over-all look is still the best of any of my digital cameras. For me the camera is worth the money just for that reason alone.
If you are putting the camera in a drawer unused, that is a shame. The more you use it the more it reveals it's secrets.
Since shifting over to using large J-pegs for most of my street work, the camera has seen
a lot more action. BTW, when shooting J-pegs or Tiffs the new PhotoShop 7 browser can be used, so it speeds up work flow like crazy. Now if we only could use the Adobe RAW converter with ND files.
And I will repeat this again...
I LOVE this camera for black and white work.
For some reason, the black and white tonal range and general over-all look is still the best of any of my digital cameras. For me the camera is worth the money just for that reason alone.
If you are putting the camera in a drawer unused, that is a shame. The more you use it the more it reveals it's secrets.