5D MarkII

[Daniel Browning]

1.) The camera only can take images when the AF has achieved focus although you press the shutter button straight down.

If you use the enable the AF-ON button, then it will take a picture every time the shutter button is pushed, even if the AF has not achieved focus.


That is how I use my 5D2. It only takes a few minutes to get used to having full control over AF and shutter with two different buttons, rather than partial control with a single button.

Therefore I should like to set the settings as follows most of the time: Drive Mode - continuous shooting / AF AI focus (I don´t talk about metering and ISO speed) Are there reasons why I shouldn´t do that.

I use that mode most of the time as well.

Can this setting be set as one the C1/C2/C3 ?

Yes.

That would be very conviened because I could switch to One shot or another C(2-3) setting immediately

Indeed. What I find frustrating about the C1/C2/C3 modes are that changes are lost everytime you switch settings. Every time you change a setting (white balance, etc.), you have to go into the menu and save it (which takes several steps), otherwise it is lost as soon as you switch out of that C mode. For me that limits the utility significantly, but I understand others like it that way (they want to be able to change something, switch out, and have it revert to their "safe" settings.)

3. The 5DMark II features 3 different levels of RAW files. RAW files can be processed lossless.

Well, the sRAW files are very different from full raw. They're not really lossless; they have color information removed (on top of the obvious loss in resolution).


JPEG has very little processing that can be done to it. sRAW has quite a bit more latitude, but still nowhere near as much as full raw.

But my question is: If I use RAW 2 the file is not larger than Jpeg S in terms of the printing size. Why use this compression as well as RAW 1?

Personally, I never use sRAW. But if you're absolutely drowning in 25 MB raw files, and you just can't take it anymore, and you don't mind the huge loss in resolution and processing options possible with full raw, then I can see why you'd use sRAW.

If bought a FF Camera and using the compressed Raw files I cut if down to APS-C. Is that right, or do I make a mistake?

That's kind of right. If you bought a FF camera for the 21 MP resolution, then using sRAW files would not make sense. But there are many other advantages to FF cameras, such as lens selection, low light performance, etc. that are not lost when using sRAW. (Still, I don't recommend it.)

think about capturing JPEG and RAW of the same picture. The advantage of a RAW is obvious. Nevertheless I will capture JPEGs because most or the majority of the images must not be changed.

Sounds great.

But for those which have to be processed, I will use the RAW file, convert to JPEG and then throw the RAW file to the trash. What do you think about that?

Throwing the raw file away is like throwing the film negative away. I would never do it, but if you're absolutely certain you will never want to improve this picture in the future (after your post processing skills have improved, or after software has advanced to a new level, or to use a new color space that a new printer is capable of, etc.), then it would be OK. But disk space is so cheap these days (even with triplicate backups), that I keep every single raw file. There have been so many times that I thought I was done with a picture, but I came back to it years later and did a much better job with newer software and skills.

4. This has nothing to do with the camera itself: What is your experience in terms of sRGB vs [Adobe RGB]?

If I had an Adobe RGB monitor, I would probably use that. For digital intermediates I use Pro Photo RGB (when I'm using Lightroom) and BetaRGB when I'm using other raw converters. For final output I often use sRGB because that's what my printing services prefer. I'd like to get my own printer some day and use better output color spaces.