Standardization of testing settings on 5D mkII

[Pancolart]

I'd like to assemble a group of photographers that would mutually comply to the agreed 5D mkII settings.
For manual focusing lenses testing purpose. And comparable results of course!

I found it's really great to shoot with the same lens and camera with the same settings. This way many distracting variables are removed and one really can see the difference in lens performance.

I would propose jpeg shooting to make it as simple as possible.

What do you think about other settings? Fixed WB only (no auto)?

I also wonder which resize program to use. It makes much difference when comparing sharpness. Smaller the uploaded photo dimensions bigger the chance program resize algorithm can fake sharpness.

[Orio]

If I had to test, not only I would use fixed white balance using grey card 18%,
but also manual metering of incident light.
And ISO 100, tripod with remote control and mirror lifted
A serious test should also not rely on resizing, but always offer the full size image.
(with small resize only for thumbnail use)

[Excalibur]

Well I suggested many moons ago that the top photographers here should agree to produce a sticky for an agreed shot/shots so we all could see if our monitors were calibrated properly Unless all monitors are the same how can you properly judge anyone photo
Reminds me of my son's partner who said recently "my shots looked terrible", and I replied "of course on your cheap dell laptop, your shots look crap on my Mitsubishi 22" CRT

[Arkku]

[Pancolart]

Arkku, what you're saying could only be discussed in theory. Even for my own usage i still found raws too awkward. OK, that is my own problem . Jpegs really simplify standardization since there are so many raw conversion programs and everyone likes his own. You cannot standardize variables in different programs. That is just impossible. I think it's easier for testers to shot jpegs then to use the same RAW conversion program.

I agree fixed WB would be much influenced by different lighting but that is also good right? I in fact don't like default WB on mkII but for purpose of testing and comparison it would still suit fine.

Totally avoiding resize could really be good idea Orio. What about shooting medium size jpegs in that case (though i always feel sorry to lose quality of some accidentally successful photos shooting this limited way - i guess the same feel those who are opposed to jpegs).

Anyway though i addressed standardization i didn't mean classic brick wall, wrist watch, bottle of Cognac testing here. Shoot what you like just submit photos that have variables for comparison reduced "only" to lens in question.

[Arkku]

[Orio]

[Pancolart]

I didn't want this to become jpeg promotion subject.

I wanted to compare results. I think there is a path between total artistic approach (many members shoot and post-produce like crazy, me too sometimes) and brick wall testing. I've seen it done on Pentax forum. We have agreed about jpeg settings on camera. We took photographs of similar subjects. The difference with the same lens were subtle.

I found it cool to compare subtle differences. It's impossible to achieve it without consensus about camera settings (or RAW conversion program if you like).

[Ramon]

It sound like a nice idea but not one I think you could ever achieve, although I do agree that any comparisons should be made with RAW files so that there is no in camera processing.

Even testing 2 different lenses on the same camera settings by the same user but under different lighting conditions give results that bear no comparison.

Try it for yourself, use the same lens to take shots on a nice bright sunny day and then identical shots on a dull day and I guarantee that you will be more impressed by the lens on the sunny day.

[Pancolart]

You cannot compare RAW file. You have to convert to Jpeg. So, choosing DSLR's internal processing engine is the easiest, the fastest, the most most distributed possibility. It's limited in control - true, thanks god . It's of lesser quality then RAW - yes, but still very acceptable for net evaluation. WB sucks - true, nothing to add there .

[poilu]

how to select jpeg on the 5DII, I have this camera 2 years, I look all the menus but could not find it

[Orio]

I don't agree on jpg, I expressed my objections in the message before and I think that they have not been addressed convincingly.
There is much more variations between in camera jpgs than between different raw converters, especially if the contractors
of this standard testing agree to use always the same values inside the RAW converters.

[Ramon]