5D Mark II raw files image quality

Question

Level 1

7 points

5D Mark II raw files image quality

Anyone out there using Aperture to convert their 5D2 raw files? I am trying to but I am having image quality problems. This is a surprise coming from Aperture, which for Sony raw files has produced stunning quality for me in the past. It leads me to believe that perhaps Aperture's 5D2 conversion setup needs work. Here is what I am seeing that I don't see from RAW Developer or Canon's Digital Photo Pro:
• Rainbow banding in specular highlights
• Webbing of tree branches, particularly against the sky.
• Not much "pixel level" contrast.
• Rather soft over all (I have good L lenses, tripod, and technique)
• Lackluster color requiring considerable post conversion work.
• The files tend to be rather fragile with tearing occurring easily if several rounds of sharpening need to be applied.
• More noise than one would expect, even at ISO 200.
• Highlights into quarter tones have a slick, almost smeared look (no NR applied in camera or Aperture).

Also, I really need to convert to 2x the native file size but I am limited by Aperture's current maximum size. So converting to 1.5x might be causing some of what I am seeing due to rounding errors, etc.

Can anyone (with direct experience) comment?
Thanks in advance.

MacPro Intel, dual G4 silverdoors, G3 iBook, etc., Mac OS X (10.5.2)

Posted on Feb 22, 2009 9:42 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Feb 25, 2009 2:28 AM in response to A Museman

Hi - I am suffering the same problems and have asked the same question with my local (ACMP) Professional Body

Just upgraded from a 5D to the 5DMKII and find the unprocessed raws flat and soft/ red/magenta cast - as bad as RAWS appeared when I had a FUJI Fine PIX S2 Pro - very old school.

The camera JPG previews look better than the raws even after I have boosted contrast / curves etc.

The Canon RAW processor (Digital Photo Professional) produces much better / excellent results - so I have been forced to ditch Aperture from our workflow at this stage ... until the issue is resolved. I would like to compare it with PS Bridge but I have the unsupported CS3 and don't want to upgrade just to find that the processed raws are poor ... also I would like to be able to stay with Aperture as it has become an integral part of workflow.

Any tips? Solutions?

Cheers

Reply

Answer 2

Feb 25, 2009 5:20 AM in response to xfireaust

Morning,

I am in the situation as the rest of you.
Tested a 5DMKll the other day.
Tried processing Raw image via Aperture 2.1.2 with awful results.
The Raw image are just plain flat.
Did the processing via Lightroom 2.3 using the same images with good results.
Personally I feel there needs to be an update for Aperture to handle Raw images from the 5DMKll.

Best,

Stu

Reply

Answer 3

leicanerd

Level 1

129 points

Feb 25, 2009 6:17 AM in response to A Museman

Hello,

no problems with my 5D2 raw files. Indeed images look sharper compared to those I did with my older 5D.

Upsampling is indeed restricted in Aperture 2 (please submit your feedback at http://www.apple.com/feedback/aperture.html). You could export a 16 bit PSD or TIF file to the desktop and do the upsampling with Photoshop or a similar image processor. Use bicubic smoother as interpolation method for upsampling. I tested this and brought 5DII images up to 2.00 meters with reasonable results.
There is even a plugin from http://www.ononesoftware.com/ (genuine fractals) to resample images in Aperture.

Hope this helps.
Regards, Eberhard

Reply

Answer 4

A Museman Author

Level 1

7 points

Feb 25, 2009 3:52 PM in response to leicanerd

I have submitted a bug report to Apple via the report mechanism in Aperture. I will be using Canon's DPP for all conversions until this is fixed. Let me encourage others experiencing this problem to let Apple know. Squeaky wheels and all that.

Reply

Answer 5

Felix01

Level 2

461 points

Feb 26, 2009 1:33 AM in response to A Museman

I'm seeing the same problems and have already sent Apple some feedback. Hopefully we'll see an update forthcoming. For the time being, I'm making minimal use of Aperture to process my 5D Mk II RAW photos since the conversion quality is universally poor with files from this relatively new camera. Apple needs to do some work on 2.1.2 since the other software packages already mentioned, plus DxO Optics, have already nailed it.

Reply

Answer 6

Feb 26, 2009 5:59 AM in response to Felix01

I to have now sent a feedback to Apple about the Raw problem with the Canon 5DMll.
In the men time I have now switched back to Lightroom 2.3 witch has no problem working with Raw from the Canon 5DMll.

Hopefully Apple will come up with an update for Aperture.

Best,

Stu

Reply

Answer 7

Feb 26, 2009 6:03 AM in response to A Museman

It would be helpful to see some example images that show the results of Aperture and other raw converters, and highlight the issues.

Thanks!

Reply

Answer 8

Mar 3, 2009 8:21 PM in response to xfireaust

xfireaust and others:
Apple's original RAW converter for the 5DII came out while the camera was on the old firmware (1.0.6?). Canon updated the firmware and simultaneously issued a new set of software (e.g. DPP) to remove a magenta cast that would come from the new firmware. The new cameras probably come with the new firmware, but Apple's latest RAW update might fix the problem. It says that "It fixes issues with specific cameras." Can you please try updating your RAW Converter (Software Update) and letting us know if this fixes the problem particularly the magenta problem?

I'm particularly interested in knowing whether this solves your problem. My camera has the old firmware and I'm reluctant to update until I'm sure any problems with RAW Conversion are fixed.

By the way, the original Apple RAW Converter and my old firmware give beautiful pictures in Aperture, so I suspect you are hit with a problem from the new firmware.

Reply

Answer 9

Mar 4, 2009 11:31 AM in response to GordonS111

I just downloaded Apple's Camera Raw updates 2.4 and 2.5 and drilled down to the EOS 5DII part of the Raw.plist and it is unchanged. So, if you have problems with the 2.4 Raw on your EOS 5DII, it won't be fixed with 2.5.

Of course, I don't have any problems, but am putting off my camera firmware upgrade, just in case it does create problems with my EOS 5DII raw conversions (magenta shift?)

Reply

Answer 10

A Museman Author

Level 1

7 points

Mar 4, 2009 7:15 PM in response to GordonS111

I can't comment on whether these problems in Aperture are related to the firmware update since I updated the firmware as soon as I got the camera. But to assume that one is required for Aperture because DPP was updated when the firmware was updated seems to me to be a bit of a stretch.

I did a quick test with Aperture after the CR Update and saw no significant difference.

Someone mentioned a magenta cast being part of this problem. I have had no magenta cast problems.

I did play with the RAW fine tuning a bit and was able to improve things some by setting the sharpening and edges to 0.10 (the lowest), but it is still lacking.

Reply

Answer 11

Mar 6, 2009 4:19 AM in response to Jim Warthman

Hi - I have uploaded sample images showing the differences between raw converters & in camera JPG's - using the Canon 5D MK 2 3.2009 - view at:

http://www.crossfirephotography.com/5D2.jpg

Unfortunately I have no CS4 samples ... but it looks like I might have them to show soon.

Any hints - if I am doing something wrong in Aperture. These RAWs were processed with the most recent update RAW 2.5?

Reply

Answer 12

Mar 6, 2009 2:09 PM in response to xfireaust

Aperture doesn't recognize any of the picture styles "preset" information embedded in the raw image by the camera - but CPP does.

What you are seeing is the raw image with the contrast being cranked automatically by CPP, but aperture giving you the actual raw image data and ignoring the picture preset you had in camera... Try shooting with the neutral preset as a test and see if the renders are similar.

I actually prefer the aperture render here - there is quite a bit of dynamic range in that file...

Reply

Answer 13

A Museman Author

Level 1

7 points

Mar 6, 2009 2:44 PM in response to Matthew Bergsma

I agree that the differences we are seeing above are the result of picture styles applied to in camera jpegs and dpp processed raw files.

But to see what I am talking about you'll have to do a bit more work. Output PSD from Aperture at 1.5x, then finish the enlargement in PS to 20 x 30 or 24 x 36 at 360 ppi. Then finish sharpening and other adjustments in PS. Do the same from DPP, and compare the results. Compare at 25%, 50%, and 100%.

Reply

Answer 14

Mar 7, 2009 10:19 PM in response to A Museman

Hi & thanks for your comments. I interpolated 8 images up (for store posters) to 1600mm x 200dpi and still got better results from CPP V Aperture - in SRGB. "Better" is subjective in this case. I will experiment further.

Yes I understand the principal behind having a flat - hence max detail raw. My first DSLR was a Kodak D200 13 Years ago - it's raws were flat & magenta - as were many cameras Raws in between time (such as the Fuji Fine Pix s2Pro) - the same principal applied to B & W film long slow dev time produced lower contrast neg = more range to work with.

To me the flat raws are a bit of step backward? The issue is - fast - workflow.

I found the Nikon D200 & 5D Mk 1 raws through aperture required very little work (if any) to get them ready for next stage of production. I just want to get images as "ready" as the 5D Mk I from my MkII - which is not the case at the moment.

Any idea how to carry the 5DII preset over & onto the raws in Aperture? That might help speed things up?

Cheers ADR

Reply

Answer 15

A Museman Author

Level 1

7 points

Mar 8, 2009 7:00 AM in response to xfireaust

If I understand your question, and I can't speak for Apple of course, in version 2 of Aperture you can't and won't be able to transfer or employ camera presets in RAW files.

What version 3 will bring is anyone's guess. It is an interesting question. Camera manufacturers are beginning to employ software to correct lens problems, as well as to implement photographic styles. And who knows what else. Aperture, Lightroom, and others will have to respond in some way. But to do this well would, I think, require an unprecedented level of cooperation between camera makers and with software makers, to establish and adhere to standards for embedding the necessary info into metadata. This implies a leveling of the playing field that I can't see being subscribed to. Unless this depression rattles them into cooperation.

While I'm pipe-dreaming, maybe someday the camera makers will start to sell camera specific plug-ins for Aperture/Lightroom/etc., to implement their secret sauce adjustments. Wouldn't that be nice?

Reply