Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Hi Mark,
I tend to use LR3 as a sort of 'import it, catalogue it and see what I got' solution (I know it's a beta but I have been using it for months now and it seems very stable to me, I make backups of the originals and it gets more details out of the files than LR2 for most cameras). However, if I want to get that real MF hyper-real look, extracting the last drop of detail, then, C1 is best by far. It's not a free lunch though: it is more prone to show color moire and moire in fine architectural detail, it tends to oversharpen as Guy has noted and needs toning down a bit, and it can, even at lower than default sharpening, exaggerate noise in darker mid-tones. But what it DOES do is extract that jaw-dropping detail that an MF file with no AA filter has - and which you just never, ever see from a DSLR.
HTH,
Tim
ps I have had an issue with 'centrefold' on some files from my replacement S2 (the first one had a sensor fault and was replaced) and so the second one has gone back to be fixed. It wasn't by any means visible in all files - in fact it was somewhat rare - and is far less visible in C1. Has anyone else seen this? I hear it happens in Hassy files from time to time but I have no experience there...
Tim I had the S2 all week with us in the Salton Sea workshop and mostly let Terry have free rein with it and only shot it once but did not get a chance to play with any files this time but I have been wondering if the latest C1 is any better in regards to the S2 than when Jack and I ran our tests and yes you hit the nail on the head what we where seeing back than. Wondering if you seen any changes with the latest version.