Nikon D3x leaked PERMALINK

All over the web is the news of the Nikon D3x: 24.5-megapixel full-frame sensor, 5 frames per second, ISO 50-6400, and 16-bit EXPEED processor. Presumably that means 16-bit processing, but with the RAW files remaining 14-bit.

With the 24MP Sony A900 already on the market, will Nikon price the D3x aggressively? My guess is no—they are two very different cameras with different quality viewfinder, build quality, etc.

The big and very interesting question is this: with all the theory about downsizing a larger image to a smaller one, will a 24.5MP D3x image downsized to 12MP (D3 size) be as good at low ISOs? I doubt so, but it should prove interesting. See DAP for more on this noise issue at high ISOs.

Update on Zeiss ZE 85/1.4 Planar AF issue PERMALINK

I’ve updated my comments on the Canon autofocus issue with the Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar. The issue is how the AF system works.

Click for more

Adobe FlexNet copy protection crashes: polluted system log PERMALINK

Adobe software continues to irk me...not only does Adobe not make improvements in basic functionality like open and save speed, they charge for upgrades that have the same old bugs and you get some irritating new bugs for your “upgrade” price—

Launch any CS4 application: Adobe’s FLEXNet software (FNPLicensingServ) crashes constantly (SIGSEGV means a bad memory access eg "unix OS signal indicating segmentation violation"), filling up my system log files with garbage (I’m not the only one experiencing this, search onilne):

Friday, November 28, 2008 2:39:36  US/Pacific 
Nov 28 14:39:43 llcMP /Library/Application Support/FLEXnet Publisher/Service/11.5.0/
FNPLicensingService[8449]: Started - This service performs licensing function
 on behalf ofFLEXnet enabled products.
Nov 28 14:39:44 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:40:14: --- last message repeated 58 times ---
Nov 28 14:40:24 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:40:54: --- last message repeated 3 times ---
Nov 28 14:41:04 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:41:34: --- last message repeated 3 times ---
Nov 28 14:41:44 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:42:14: --- last message repeated 3 times ---
Nov 28 14:42:24 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:42:54: --- last message repeated 3 times ---
Nov 28 14:43:04 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:43:34: --- last message repeated 3 times ---
Nov 28 14:43:44 llcMP kernel[0]: unknown SIGSEGV code 0
Nov 28 14:44:00: --- last message repeated 41 times ---

The poetic justice here is that the copy protection scheme is unlikely to work with the program enforcing it failing constantly! This is wonderful if you want to steal Adobe software. (I don’t and don’t advise anyone to do so). But the irony provides some small compensation for legal users. Presumably this is one bug Adobe will consider a priority to fix!

A workaround to seeing your system log files fill up is to use Activity Monitor to forcibly Quit the FNPLicensingService process, as shown below. Please do this only for legitimate reasons: to keep your log files from growing constantly with SIGSEGV messages.

The way to keep your system log from filling up with Adobe crashes: kill FNPLicensingServ

If you want to automate this, you can run a daemon script to do to. See this hint.

Mac Performance Guide PERMALINK

Which Mac and how to configure it?

Photoshop performance?

Installing 6GB in a MacBook Pro?

Partitioning and RAID!

I’ve launched my new site MacPerformanceGuide.com.

Photoshop users will definitely want to check out my research in Optimizing Photoshop Performance. Here now is the definitive research on how memory and hard drive speed come into play. Did you know that there is up to a 5X performance envelope when working with large files in Photoshop? And that a 2.8GHz Mac can run rings around a less-optimally configured 3.2GHz Mac?

With the economy in the toilet, now is the time to consider performance upgrades instead of a new Mac Pro or MacBook Pro.

Memory is selling at prices about half of where it should be (below cost), leading to losses at even the most efficient producers, and portending much higher memory prices later this year, as weaker players quit the market or go out of business. Now is the time get that 16GB or 32GB upgrade! I’ve been pounding OWC’s 32GB kit (8X4GB) for weeks now—flawless stuff and "wow!" for large Photoshop files.

One terabyte (1TB) hard drives can now be had after rebate for barely more than US$100, making 4-drive striped RAID a high-value proposition for Mac Pro users, and even MacBook Pro users via an eSATA Express Card.

Happy Turkey Day PERMALINK

Here in the US, it’s Thanksgiving, the day when a few thousand turkeys give thanks for still gobbling, and not being gobbled!

Thankful

Game plan

Tip of the day: enjoy a fast lens PERMALINK

A “fast” lens has a large maximum “f” number (small numerically) eg f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8, f/2. A large aperture allows higher shutter speeds because it delivers a much brighter image.

A wide-range consumer zoom whose aperture at 85mm is f/5 or so would have required 1/5 second instead of the 1/60 second made possible by f/1.4, a speed making a sharp image next to impossible (camera shake and subject motion).

Shooting this scene under heavy foliage late in the day, the “fast” f/1.4 maximum aperture of the Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar came in handy at (1/60 sec).

Panhandlers
Canon 1Ds Mark III + Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar @ f/1.4

Of course, f/1.4 presents certain challenges in getting accurate focus, not to mention subjects moving at the same time. I shot a 2nd frame where I nailed the focus on the gander’s eye at left, and with the head turned just the best angle into the light—but the other ducks did not line up as directed.

Boy, that eagle would enjoy one of those fat city ducks...!

Next tip/question…

Persimmon fall color PERMALINK

Though we’ve yet to see a frost this fall (a 16-year anomaly for my yard), my Fuyu persimmon tree is showing its usual riot of intense color.

Fuyu fall color
Canon 1Ds Mark III + Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar @ f/4

Persimmons bear heavily in alternate years, and the light crop this year follows last year’s outrageous bounty.

Tip of the day: Depth of field PERMALINK

A reader who just purchased a Zeiss ZF 35mm f/2 Distagon (see Zeiss ZF Lenses) is working hard to understand how to get maximum sharpness, using the depth of field scale and hyperfocal distance. It takes two stops to double depth of field.

My advice: forget the hyperfocal distance, and consider instead what is most important in the image—skew focus towards that area and let the other areas fall where they may. Stop down to f/8 for depth of field, more if necessary, keeping in mind diffraction and pixel size issues. For best results, f/11 is the limit for smaller sensor cameras with photosites in the 5-6 micron range, f/16 is OK for cameras with larger photosites. More than that is OK, too, but the entire image will look hazy as contrast really drops.

A point of much consternation is the depth of field scale marked on the lens, which allegedly shows what will be “sharp”. The marks are a useful reference point, and that’s it. Most such scales presume an acceptable “circle of confusion” (spot size) of 30 microns. A Nikon D300 has photosites that are 5.5 microns. That means that an “acceptably sharp” dot is about 30 times larger (in area) than a photosite. In other words, “acceptably sharp” of 30 microns for a 12 megapixel D300 includes detail down to a resolution of 0.4 megapixels!

Mouse over to see a depiction of a 30-micron circle of confusion on a grid representing 5.5-micron photosites.

Simulated circle of confusion, mouse over for 30 microns vs 5.5 microns

The circle of confusion ranges from the tightly focused dot at the plane of focus to the big blob depicted here; the size grows away from the plane of focus. Stopping down shrinks the dot, but diffraction enlarges it! That’s why stopping down too far is self-defeating.

To exploit the sensor resolution, you’ll need to be much more conservative. Mentally adjusting by two stops gives a more realistic gauge to what will be sharp in a digital image. For example, use the f/4 depth of field marks when shooting at f/8, f/5.6 marks for f/11, etc.

Ultimately it all depends on how large a print will be made. For small prints up to 12 X 8 inches, 30 microns may well be acceptable. For 30 X 20 inch prints, it’s unrealistic. It is easy to stare at actual pixels on a computer monitor and be disappointed—be sure to consider the print size and keep things in perspective.

Next tip/question…

Focus shift on a resolution chart PERMALINK

I previously reported on focus shift, and its importance when working with fast lenses (typically f/1.2 or f/1.4, but in some cases with f/2 or even f/2.8 lenses).

When testing lenses on a resolution chart (or similar high-detail subject), attention must be paid to focus shift. Shown below is an actual pixels crop, shot with the 21MP Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III and the Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar. Results will be the same for the Nikon-mount ZF 85/1.4 Planar. See Zeiss ZF Lenses.

Although not optimized for close-up, the Zeiss ZE 85/1.4 Planar is resolving to the limits of the sensor; it is not possible to cleanly resolve the “60” bars on the 1DsM3 at the distance this target was shot (a smidgen closer and yes it’s possible).

Contrast is low due largely to spherical aberration, which affects the image even at center, unlike other aberrations. Remarkably, corner performance is as sharp as the center (not shown). The result can be made to look much sharper with more sharpening (+3 was used in Canon’s DPP).

Actual pixels, f/1.4
(Canon 1Ds Mark III + Zeiss ZF 85/1.4 Planar)

At aperture f/2.8, depth of field partially compensates for focus shift, but leaves the image lacking contrast, though resolution is just maintained. The low contrast makes images look soft, because we perceive contrast even more than resolution. Also, the zone of sharpness will have moved to the rear of the desired focus point, possibly throwing off key subject matter, such as eyes or eyelashes. Having the inside of the eyeball sharp is of no value!

Compensating by 2cm for the focus shift (using a nodal slider), the difference in contrast is obvious, as are the clean black and whites. The zone of sharpness will be centered around the focus point as well.

 
Actual pixels, f/2.8. No compensation (left), 2cm compensation (right).

Note that color is also affected; except for extremely well-corrected lenses, out-of-focus means that residual color aberrations affect color, especially on high-contrast edges.

Focus shift is an issue with many lenses, but not all. Why not subscribe to DAP and get the scoop on a wide variety of lenses?

Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar for Canon EOS focus problem PERMALINK

Please see my initial comments on the Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar. See also Zeiss ZF Lenses.

Update: several readers have written to help me understand how autofocus systems work, and I’ve now gotten similar feedback from Zeiss. It’s all a little confusing but I think I’ve sorted it out well enough to explain it.

The central AF sensor “sees” a narrow angle corresponding to what is seen by the sensor when the lens is stopped down to f/5.6. Thus, even though spherical aberration affects the entire frame, the off-axis light rays are not seen by the AF sensor.

The net result is that the “green dot” indicates focus for f/5.6; shooting wide open then naturally induces a focus shift towards the front (front-focus). This is exactly consistent with what is observed when focusing using f/1.4 with Live View; focus shifts to the back.

The Zeiss factory previously indicated to me that the ZF/ZE 85/1.4 Planar has the least focus shift of any Canon/Nikon/Leica 85/90mm lens near infinity (actual quote is in Zeiss ZF Lenses). Yet I don’t recall a focusing error with those lenses— something to verify.

Bottom line: the logical advice (not yet verified) is that if you’re making the exposure at f/1.4 or f/2.8, focus by eye. If you're shooting at f/4 - f/5.6, use the AF assist. This is all theory, I haven’t verified it yet. Just realize that the ZE 85/1.4 Planar is a very sharp lens, but accurate focusing is a challenge.

--- end update ---

Canon EOS cameras have a “green dot” which I’ll call Focus Assist. When the green dot lights up, the image is (allegedly) in focus. This works only with “chipped” lenses eg Canon EF lenses or lenses like the Zeiss ZE line, which have the required electronics (it ought to work with any lens, but Canon has chosen to disable the capability, unlike Nikon).

Shown below is the full frame snapshot demonstrating a problem that occurs constantly with my evaluation copy of the ZE 85/1.4 Planar: focus confirmation is way off, so far off that f/16 won’t rescue it. It’s badly front-focused; it is never a backfocus issue. In this example, the seagull in the foreground is sharp in the mis-focused image, instead of the distant tower!

I’ve compared it to the Canon EF 85/1.2L II and 85/1.8 lenses switched to manual focus, as well as multiple 50mm lenses (including the Sigma 50/1.4). The problem is unique to the Zeiss offering. Note that this has nothing to do with focus shift; the lens was shot wide open.

No word yet from Zeiss on whether they’ll be able to send me a 2nd copy for evaluation. The problem is so acute that my assumption is that it’s a problem with my particular sample. If that’s not the case, it means that focus will have to be by eye or Live View, which is the way I shoot anyway. Still, Focus Assist can come in handy.

The test frame, focused on the distant tower

Shown below is an actual pixels crop at f/1.4 with focus racked to the infinity stop. The image looks sharp in the viewfinder, too.

The test frame, focused on the distant tower

This is a second frame, but this time with focus Focus Assist (green dot). The viewfinder image is blurry when the Canon 1Ds Mark III gives focus the green light. Houston, we have a problem! This is just one example, I’ve obtained similar results over and over.

The test frame, focused on the distant tower

Photoshop CS4 performance bugs PERMALINK

Related entries: Opening and saving files in Photoshop is SLOW, CS4 and OpenGL, CS4 Upgrade Hassles and CS4 Sticker Shock.

Be sure to see my new site MacPerformanceGuide.com.

I’ll be updating my Optimizing Photoshop Performance report soon with results from a 32GB Mac Pro configuration. In a week or two I’m planning on adding results from other brands of hard drives. If you work with large files in Photoshop, this report alone will be well worth your money in subscribing to DAP (see Contents). PC (Windows) users will find the report quite useful, as the principles apply cross-platform.

In the course of researching how to make Photoshop run as fast as possible with large files, I have found two performance bugs. Maybe there are mitigating factors and I’m wrong for some out-of-band reason, but here they are:

(1) Memory limited to 2810MB in 32GB configurations

With a Mac Pro configured with 8GB or 16GB of memory, Photoshop allows a Let Photoshop Use choice of 3072K (100%).

With a 32GB configuration, the maximum drops to 2810K (100%). This shows up as slightly reduced performance in my benchmarks. How can having 32GB instead of 16GB mean reducing available memory by 262MB?!!!

I wrote my own 32-bit program and verified that with either a 16GB or 32GB configuration the program can allocate exactly the same amount of memory: 3480MB using 10MB chunks, or 3497MB using 1MB chunks, exactly the same figure with either configuration. So it’s hard to believe that this Photoshop behavior is anything other than a bug.

(2) Degraded RAID-set performance

I just could not reconcile the non-linear scalability I was seeing with striped RAID, so I researched the answer and found out one possibility: Photoshop performs disk I/O that in theory forces a portion of every write to a striped RAID to run at the speed of a single drive! We’re talking about dropping from 500MB/sec to 110MB/sec on a 6-way stripe!. Reads are unaffected.

However, the Mac OS X file system cache mitigates this problem—it is caching the writes, and might even be zero-padding newly-written blocks. At any rate, my test results are clear, the performance isn't scaling as expected, indicating a bottleneck somewhere, even if Mac OS X is actually mitigating the disk I/O problem via caching.

As a software engineer, I’ve designed high-performance software for over twenty years, but even a little thinking about disk performance will preclude the self-defeating behavior found in Photoshop CS4. Writing “nice” sizes is always beneficial with disk drives (on Mac OS X with SATA, “nice” sizes are 128K * the number of stripe drives, to minimize transactions, according to the SoftRAID driver developers eg 768K for a 6-way stripe).

…

The thing about these bugs is that I paid $200 for the CS4 “upgrade” which so far has yielded not a single useful new feature for my work, yet basic issues like these go unaddressed.

More focus shift: 35mm, 100mm, 135mm, more PERMALINK

I’ve now completed my first pass at focus shift (see the free introductory article Introduction to Focus Shift). DAP now includes several additional lenses in the 50mm range, as well as ~35mm, ~100mm and 135mm lenses. Canon, Nikon, Voigtlander, Zeiss and Sony Alpha now have coverage.

The “10” mark should be sharp!

The ~50mm focal length is most problematic in general. Why this should be is unclear. Read the full report in DAP for details.

Focus accuracy and diopter adjustment are additional issues that are independent of focus shift.

Misfocus

Sony Alpha A900 — 24 megapixels PERMALINK

I was out shooting most of this weekend with the 28-megapixel Mamiya DL28 and the 24-megapixel Sony Alpha A900 (the latter courtesy of LensRentals.com). Only 4 megapixels difference, yet a world of difference in image quality (and ergonomics).

I’m weary from a very long weekend but I’ll have more to say on both cameras in the week ahead.

While I like the Sony A900 so far, it has some interesting issues I’m still investigating so as to rule out operator error. (BTW it’s really dumb that Sony doesn’t make the RAW processing software available for download, so I’m stuck with ACR). Potential Canon 5D Mark II users should not lose any sleep over the A900.

Sony Alpha A900 + Sony/Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 ZA
(dreary, low-contrast day...)

Mamiya DL28 — 28 megapixels PERMALINK

I’m now officially sold on the virtues of medium format thanks to the Mamiya DL28 (not so sold on ergonomics though!).

The 28-megapixel (6096 X 4558) Mamiya DL28 consists of the Mamiya AFD III body, the Leaf Aptus-II 6 digital back and the Mamiya Sekor 80mm f/2.8 D lens. More than a little out of my price range at US$14999, it nevertheless offers a breakthrough price for a medium format system of that resolution.

Though there are shortcomings to pick on, I’m very impressed with the image quality at ISO 50. It clearly is a cut above the Canon 1Ds Mark III, not just in terms of detail, but also in terms of sheer “sparkle” and lifelike image quality. I’ll be writing it up in detail for DAP readers, and perhaps sharing more here as well.

The rain moved into northern California yesterday and yielded a exceptionally dreary and hazy day, quite a reversal after the world’s loveliest October I’ve ever enjoyed. What to do except head for cover under the redwood forest canopy?

Regarding the images below, I haven’t mastered the Leaf software yet, but I can say that the DL28 images offer tremendous potential when processed well. These are stabs at something presentable, and are really gorgeous at full size. (As small compressed JPEGs, they aren’t as impressive). Remember, the lighting was dark, blue/gray and really pretty awful.

Mamiya DL28 + Sekor 80/2.8D, 3.2 sec @ f/11, ISO 50

Mamiya DL28 + Sekor 80/2.8D, 10 sec @ f/16, ISO 50

Mamiya DL28 + Sekor 80/2.8D, 13 sec @ f/11, ISO 50

The level of detail really is stunning, even if one is used to the 21-megapixel Canon 1Ds Mark III. It’s not the modest 7 megapixel difference, since linearly (horizontally), the difference is only 8.5% (6096 vs 5616). Rather, the difference is almost certainly due to to the Canon’s anti-aliasing (blur) filter, and the lack of one in the Mamiya DL28.

The Leaf Aptus-II 6 back has no anti-aliasing filter, and the sharpness is stunning, though moiré does appear in places of very fine detail. Click the image below to see a larger version and some actual-pixels crops. What’s amazing is how much more detail and tone the camera renders than I could see with my own eyes, standing there!

Mamiya DL28 + Sekor 80/2.8D, 2.5 sec @ f/11, ISO 50

While at first I felt disappointed at having only the Sekor 80mm f/2.8 to shoot with, it turned out to be a very enjoyable lens to work with, forcing me to make do and find suitable subjects. There should be no doubt that it is a very fine lens indeed, at least on the 44 X 33mm DL28 sensor, where it shines at every aperture out to the far corners. As far as I can ascertain, depth of field and diffraction are the limiting factors for the 80mm, though stopping down to f/4 or f/5.6 picks things up very nicely.

Focus shift in 85mm lenses PERMALINK

Adding to my research with 50mm lenses, I’ve now added to DAP my findings on the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II, Canon EF 85mm f/1.8, Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar, Nikon 85mm f/1.4D and Leica 90mm f/2 APO-Summicron-R ASPH.

See the (free) introductory article on focus shift below.

A brief introduction to focus shift PERMALINK

Canon 50mm f/1.2L and/or 85mm f/1.2L image are soft?
Sigma 50/1.4 soft?
Nikon 50/1.4 images soft?

Focus was on the eye at right. Why is it blurry?

If you shoot a “fast” lens, you might be erroneously concluding that it’s not sharp. Understand why in my Introduction to Focus Shift, or get the full report on seven different 50mm lenses in DAP (with 85mm lenses planned too).

Goodbye Nikon again?PERMALINK

With the 21-megapixel Canon 5D Mark II due out in a few weeks, is this another Goodbye Nikon moment? Not for me—the Nikon D3 is a wonderful all-around camera, and particularly rewarding for low-light shooting. But judging by emails I’ve received, the Canon 5D Mark II holds considerable allure. Some readers are considering switching to Canon, but my advice is this: cameras are accessories and change every year nowadays; the lenses you shoot should be good for years to come.

With that in mind, consider what you shoot, and your favorite lenses for doing so.

On the zoom front, Nikon’s 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 200-400VR are more appealing lenses than the Canon alternatives (ergonomics and to some extent optics). But Canon has far better offerings (4) in the 70-200 range; NIkon’s is mediocre. And Canon’s 35/1.4L, 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L and 135/2L just aren’t there in the Nikon system. So consider your type of shooting, and the lenses you might use before “the switch”, keeping in mind that Nikon sooner or later will have a 21-24MP camera. See more below on lens choices for the Canon 5D Mark II.

Canon 5D Mark II lens choices PERMALINK

The Canon EOS 5D Mark II offers breakthrough 21-megapixel resolution at a relatively low price of about $2699, or about $3499 with the 24-105/4L zoom (about $1049 separately). Those 21 megapixels make a substantial difference in detail over 12 megapixel cameras like the Nikon D3/D700, as documented in DAP. But to get everything possible out of the entire sensor, you’re going to need top-notch optics. But remember, a shot not taken is zero megapixels, so don’t get hung up on the “perfect” lens.

The Canon EF 24-105/4L is a handy all-around lens, and it’s a wonderful match for the 5D body in terms of size, weight and just shooting fun and convenience, so I recommend owning one (a good copy of course). But do not expect it to deliver top quality across the entire frame, even stopped down to f/8; central 2/3 sharpness is superb, but it’s downhill from there, at least my copy is. The best way to get one is to save $250 by buying it with the 5D Mark II. The 24-70/2.8L (about $1110 after rebate) is a better performer, but not nearly as fun to shoot (ergonomically awkward compared to the 24-105).

So what other lenses should you match to the 5D Mark II? Forget about f/4 for low-light shooting; the 24-105 will frustrate there. But like the 24-105, the 70-200/4L IS (about $1025) is a pleasant lens to handle and shoot with—those two f/4 lenses make a terrific lightweight and relatively compact travel duo for the 5DM2.

You should have at least one low-light lens, but f/1.8 or even f/2 is fine for that. For most users, f/1.2 is overkill, hard to focus accurately, heavy and expensive.

For low-light shooting at a low price it’s hard to beat Canon’s 50mm f/1.8 II (about $89). This is your throw-away “sand and salt” lens! Sharpness is excellent. Bokeh will be better with the 50mm f/1.4 USM (about $325), but won’t matter much in the f/2 - f/4 range. The Sigma 50/1.4 EG DX (about $499) is also a very nice choice for (DAP report coming).

The value-priced EF 85mm f/1.8 (about $355) is an excellent choice also. It’s not f/1.2, but it doesn’t focus shift either! So it’s darn sharp at f/2 in practice with no fussing around (extreme corners do drop off abruptly, but the rest of the frame is outstanding).

Of course, you can spend a lot of money on the fancy medium range “L” glass: the 24/1.4L II, the 35/1.4L, 50/1.2L, 85/1.2L and 135/2L. In order of most useful, I’d choose the 35/1.4L ($1180), 85/1.2L II ($1829), 50/1.2L ($1400) and 24/1.4L II ($TBD). But it all depends on what you shoot. These lenses are useful if you regularly need to shoot in the f/1.4 - f/4 range.

If you’re not averse to manual focus, the Zeiss ZF/ZE lenses offer some very nice options (the ZE line for Canon will gradually become available in all the focal lengths).

Comments on Canon 5D Mark II PERMALINK

I finished reading the Canon EOS 5D Mark II PDF manual (no camera is available yet), and I have a few comments, some not necessarily specific to the 5DM2.

First an amusing entry (on page 13, no less): “When you shoot continuously ...holding the hot camera can cause slight skin burns”. Skin burns?! That’s a new first for digital cameras. Might be useful in Alaska in the middle of winter though, and maybe Nikon can really leverage their “skin-burn free” offerings! Just don’t shoot intensively on Fridays and Triskaidekaphobiacs should definitely consider this worrisome characteristic.

Second, does anyone know if Compact Flash cards are actually sensitive to strong magnetic fields? The manual states “do not store use the card near anything having a strong magnetic field, such as a TV, speakers, or magnet”.

The focus point coverage of the 5DM2 is very limited relative to the frame area. This is a failing of all full-frame cameras today, one area where reduced size sensors are definitely superior. When focus sensors do not cover the subject (I frequently shoot off-center), then one must focus and recompose (“focus lock and recompose”), which throws the plane of focus off the subject. This can be a source of quite significant focus error, especially at wide apertures, such as f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8.

Some minor pluses and minuses:

• Appears to have the same non-locking mode dial as the 5D. I don’t like dials that can move by mistake.
• Same uncomfortable camera strap. Get an Optech strap.
• Same lousy eyepiece cover. It should be built-in.
• The peripheral illumination correction is a welcome feature, but it appears that using it with non-EF lenses is not advised.
• Why is color space still limited to sRGB and AdobeRGB? This matters with some extreme subjects.
• The Remote Control RC-1 or RC-5 look useful for some situations. Remote release cables begone!
• It’s unfortunate the sun should not be included in Live View movie mode (“the sun’s heat can damage the camera’s internal components”).
• The addition of autofocus to zoomed Live View mode is a big plus (assuming it works with precision).
• Face detection mode in Live View is dubious, since one will have to hold the camera at arm’s length to compose...good luck on making a crisp image.
• Does anyone actually print images directly from the camera?
• I’ll likely install the Eg-S Super Precision Matte screen, though I wish it had the grid lines of the Eg-D. (Standard screen is Eg-A).
• One still cannot choose ISO 50 or 100 if Highlight Tone Priority is set. This is silly. Just let me change the ISO, and remember my HTP setting appropriately.

The 5D Mark II is going to win a lot of fans. But next year, there will be something better, so think about your lenses carefully.

32GB Mac Pro memory on the way PERMALINK

Be sure to see my new site MacPerformanceGuide.com.

Courtesy (loan) of Other World Computing (see All About Mac Pro Memory), I have 32GB of memory and four of the new 1.5GB Seagate drives coming. These items will be put to the test and my DAP article Optimizing Photoshop Performance guide updated accordingly.

A Mac Pro memory riser card with 4 FB-DIMMS

The short story on Photoshop performance for large files: striped RAID and 16GB memory. See All About Mac Pro Memory.

Focus shift in fast 50mm lenses PERMALINK

Just published in DAP (see description): Focus Shift in 50mm Lenses — or why your fast lens is sharper than you might think, just not where you expect it. This is a prelude to a forthcoming review of the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG.

Focus was on the eye at right, but it is blurred—why?

Focus shift is caused by spherical aberration and affects most fast lenses out there (f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses). Understanding when and why this happens, and what to do about it will raise your keeper rate, and (maybe) keep you from sending in your camera for service for non-existent autofocus errors.

Mamiya DL28 medium format digital system PERMALINK

On the way to me later this week is a promising newcomer to the medium format arena: the Mamiya DL28 system, a combination of the Mamiya 645 AFD III and the Leaf Aptus II 6 28-megapixel digital back.

Mamiya DL28 system

This exciting new system promises a very competitive price point for medium format ($14999 MSRP), as well as top-notch image quality. I expect to receive the evaluation system with the new Sekor AF 80mm f/2.8 D and Sekor AF 150mm f/2.8 IF D lenses, reportedly outstanding performers.

The Leaf Aptus II 6 back on the DL28 offers promising specifications, including a 44X33mm sensor (68% larger than full frame DSLR), ISO from 50-800, 16-bit color, 12-bit dynamic range and a whopping 3.5" LCD touch screen. The new 645 AFD III also should prove interesting.

Look for my report late next week, after I’ve had a chance to work with it in the field.

I’ll be picking up the Mamiya system at my local dealer, Keeble & Shucat Photography in Palo Alto. If you’ve never visited K&S, be sure to check it out sometime—they have a huge range of products far beyond what you’ll find at any other peninsula store. They’re also having a “no tax” day promotion for Canon products this coming Friday/Saturday (Nov 7/8).

Optimizing Photoshop performance PERMALINK

Be sure to see my new site MacPerformanceGuide.com.

Just added to DAP is my research on optimizing Photoshop performance on the Mac Pro (but the ideas should apply to PC users as well). I’ve researched the use of 8/12/16GB of memory, along with 1/2/3/4/5/6 drives RAID stripes for the scratch disk. There are very clear results here, along with some other tips and hints. I’ll be adding results for 32GB memory and the new Seagate 1.5TB hard drives soon as well.

If you’re working with large files that hit the scratch disk, you’ll definitely want to read this report (login required). If you don’t yet subscribe to DAP, here’s the short story: get 16GB memory and use striped RAID. The full multi-page report contains all the results, as well as how to set everything up, and why.

Update: a few hours after I published, a reader suggested using Bigger Tiles (wow!), and I discovered another trick as well—together good for an amazing 33% reduction in test time.

First look — Zeiss ZE 85mm 1/4 Planar For Canon EOS PERMALINK

Zeiss recently loaned me the brand-new ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar for evaluation (it’s the Canon mount version of the outstanding ZF 85mm f/1.4 Planar for Nikon).

The ZE 85/1.4 Planar looks like just a Canon EF lens at rear—but the build quality is a much higher grade than the standard (non-L) Canon EF offerings, consisting of metal and glass—no plastics, with engraved (not printed) numerals. It’s a beefy lens, solidly built and very attractive.

Canon’s L glass is also superbly built, but uses high grade plastics, whether these are better or worse for impact and wear is unclear, but the all-metal ZE build is esthetically more pleasing to me, something that will always look and feel like quality. But in the end, all that matters is the optics, and whether they arrive and stay in tune.

Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 Planar: ZE for Canon (left), ZF for Nikon (right)

Unlike the ZF model, the ZE model has no aperture ring, and is controlled fully electronically in 1/3 aperture stops. Perhaps we’ll see Zeiss move in this direction with “chipped” Nikon lenses soon too, and that would be an improvement, so long as an aperture ring remains, so that a lens adapter allows shooting on Canon as well as Nikon.

According to Zeiss, the ZE 85/1.4 Planar is optically identical to the ZF model, the latter being reviewed in detail in Zeiss ZF Lenses (on both Nikon and Canon with an adapter!).

As with Nikon’s in-viewfinder focus assist mechanism, Canon’s focus assist is just as useless for precise focus; I did better by eye on the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III. So the practical usefulness of the ZE model is automatic aperture control, along with no need for a lens adapter.

The following differences were noted with the Nikon-mount ZF model:

• no aperture ring on the ZE line; aperture is controlled electronically in 1/3 stop increments, and there are gold-plated contacts at the rear of the ZE lens.
• A 16% greater weight: the ZE 85/1.4 Planar is 100g heavier than the ZF 85/1.4 Planar, 721 grams vs 620 grams with hood (and without caps);
• The ZE model is bulkier and has a more evenly cylindrical lens barrel, along with a wider focusing ring (the latter is slightly better in my view);
• Focusing in the opposite direction from the ZF lens, as per Canon standard;
• No AI-S Nikon prong (of course) as on the ZF model.

All in all, the ZE 85/1.4 Planar is both bulkier and heavier than the ZF model, it feels like a different lens, but not much different. The focus “throw” and feel are very similar, so it really boils down to automatic aperture control via the camera.

Image quality so far appears entirely consistent with the ZF model, which is to say excellent.

Canon rebates PERMALINK

Canon is offering rebates through Jan 17, 2009 (this happens just about every year).

My two top picks: the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM (or the f/2.8 version), the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II. Just be aware of sample variation.

If you’re a buyer, your purchases through the B&H and/or Adorama and/or Amazon links at top right of this page are greatly appreciated.

Canon rebates through Jan 17, 2009