doh. Actually I didn't misunderstand, I just forgot the original subject of my thread (!) - we were justtalking about the tweener ISOs weren't we?...thanks for clarifying.


couple things:


Would you avoid using HTP if you're going to convert with ACR? I don't use HTP because I don't trust it ("understand it" is probably more accurate). The 40D manual says it "improves the HL detail," and the "dynamic range is expanded from the standard 18% gray to the brightest highlights." So that means if you meter a white dress it will actually record as white; you don't need to apply EC for white (non-specular) highlights? Anyway, since I may eventually want to start using it (bridal shots), will you share your thoughts on using HTP and then converting in ACR? Is DxO a better all-around converter? (the only other one I know besides DPP, which I don't like at all)


Something else: Does the "separate analog amplifier" used in the 5D (and the other bodies you mentioned) mitigate, or eliminate the negative effects of the 'tweener ISOs? I don't think you commented on that. (I do know there's a reason why that 5D churns out such buttery smooth, satisfyingly sharp pix - maybe it's the pixel pitch, those big ol' 8.2µm receptor sites...?)


and finally, from earlier in the thread -


Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
I should mention that tweeners can sometimes help broken raw
converters. Canon's DPP, for example, doesn't use the correct white
point for many of their own cameras. They set it too low, ignoring
plenty of good data in the highlights completely.

Does this explain why everything in DPP looks so washed out compared to ACR? The contrast, the colors, really everything looks so much worse in DPP. This is why I said I don't like it at all. I've opened both apps side by side and have been astounded how differently they present the same image. I can tweak away and get them to match, but the ACR image begins from a superior state to my eye.


As always, thank you Daniel - as much as you're willing to write...!