Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon 1DSMK3 test image compared to Phase Backs  (Read 75419 times)
lance_schad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 257


« on: December 19, 2007, 12:01:28 PM »
ReplyReply

We just got done some preliminary testing of the 1DSMK3 compared to a few Phase One backs that we had on hand at the time. The images are all of the same subject. They were captured with the following systems:

P21 RAW Scene 1 -1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFDII

P30+ RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

P45 RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

Canon 1DsMarkIII 1/100 f16, ISO 100 85mm

The images are available for download as tiff files linked from our current newsletter that can be accessed with the link below:
http://tinyurl.com/2kpsr7

The Canon has some nice features and will fit certain market segments and have a place in some photographers arsenal besides a medium format system. As far as image quality goes we will leave it up to you to decide decide.

We will be doing more testing in the future, but this being holiday season and end of year time is tight. So please take a look at the files and feel free to send us any comments. These tests were done up in our Atlanta office.

Happy Pixel Peeping.  

Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-534-5701 office
305-394-3196 cell
877-217-9870
www.captureintegration.com
lance@captureintegration.com
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 12:17:39 PM by lance_schad » Logged

LANCE SCHAD - DIGITAL TRANSITIONS - Phase One,Leaf/Mamiya,Arca-Swiss,Cambo value added reseller
direct/cell:610-496-5586  office:877-367-8537 x 224
http://www.digitaltransitions.com email:lns@digitaltransitions.com
samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2007, 12:42:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
We just got done some preliminary testing of the 1DSMK3 compared to a few Phase One backs that we had on hand at the time. The images are all of the same subject. They were captured with the following systems:

P21 RAW Scene 1 -1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFDII

P30+ RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

P45 RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

Canon 1DsMarkIII 1/100 f16, ISO 100 85mm

The images are available for download as tiff files linked from our current newsletter that can be accessed with the link below:
http://tinyurl.com/2kpsr7

The Canon has some nice features and will fit certain market segments and have a place in some photographers arsenal besides a medium format system. As far as image quality goes we will leave it up to you to decide decide.

We will be doing more testing in the future, but this being holiday season and end of year time is tight. So please take a look at the files and feel free to send us any comments. These tests were done up in our Atlanta office.

Happy Pixel Peeping.  

Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-534-5701 office
305-394-3196 cell
877-217-9870
www.captureintegration.com
lance@captureintegration.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161755\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, we have seen some differences already... but the theoreticism and charts will arrive soon....


Thank's for the files
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8884


« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2007, 01:07:30 PM »
ReplyReply

The Canon 1Ds3 has the pixel density of a 20D. One wouldn't expect it to perform as well at f16 as a format double the size with wider pixel spacing. Small sensors need sharp lenses used at apertures that are not diffraction limited.
Logged
Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2007, 01:12:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Canon 1Ds3 has the pixel density of a 20D. One wouldn't expect it to perform as well at f16 as a format double the size with wider pixel spacing. Small sensors need sharp lenses used at apertures that are not diffraction limited.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161768\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You can compare it against the P45, then, since the P45 and the 1DsIII are about the same pixel density (the 1DsIII is slightly higher, but not enough to make a difference). And besides, it is after all the systems you are comparing, so if one is softer than the other, for whatever reasons (diffraction effects or whatever), it still shows what the systems can do.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 01:16:07 PM by Mort54 » Logged

I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2370


« Reply #4 on: December 19, 2007, 01:15:01 PM »
ReplyReply

You can also rebuilt the 1DSIII until it is a P45, maybe that is the fairest comparison.

No kidding, I am all for tests in which you are just using bodies and comparing the results. This is also the way I photograph.

If I am photographing something I am not thinking about the fact whether my pixel-size or sensor-size is up to the task.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 01:44:14 PM by Dustbak » Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1521


WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2007, 01:41:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Dynamic range/contrast.

Change the curve of the Canon shot to make it darker and it will look better (much better), however blacks will be gone (no shadow detail).
That's what I see everytime when I change between the 5D and Leaf Aptus 22.
The MF backs have MUCH greater contrast range.

A large part of our perceived sharpness is in contrast .
The MF back file has MUCH more detail without a doubt but the contrast is for the me the thing that jumps out.
The letters on the 1DsIII file are very light compared to the nice dark version in the back.
While the black frame is on both dark.
Logged
Panopeeper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1805


« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2007, 01:58:38 PM »
ReplyReply

As the evaluation of this comparison is obviously much the question of religious affiliation, I see the need to declare, that

1. I am a Canon 40D owner,

2. I don't care for the label on my camera (I carried my Zensa Bronica a decade long in a large Nikon bag, for that offered the best arrangement :-);

3. I don't intend to purchase any of the cameras involved in the test.

So, I am interested purely on the photographic/digital side of the comparison without any personal/emotional involvement.

I have several problems with the comparison.

1. I don't see, which Canon 85mm lens has been used. There are two of them, the 85mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.2L. I am afraid, that the 85mm f/1.8 has been used, which is a very good lens on a cropping camera, but it is ridiculous to put it on an FF, $7000 camera. The 85mm f/1.2L has a never version "for digital", and I don't believe, that the owner of the 1DsMkIII would put any other on his camera. Or, has the P45 been tested with a Coke bottle?

2. It is dishonest (though expectable between competitors) to present processed images. The processing (raw conversion) plays a huge role, and it is funny to say, "look, how bad the other image is, if I process it".

The raw images have to be presented, and let's see, who what can make out of them.

For a starter:

- the 1DsMkII image is much brighter than the P45, and the mid- to brighter areas (not only the highlights) are less contrasty. I adjusted a bit, and suddenly it looks very different , for example the structure of the stonework in the forground becomes visible, the "Visit" signe gets more clear

- the P45 image is strongly sharpened; in fact, it is over-sharpened for pixel peeping, while the 1DsMkII image is undersharpened (if at all).

So, put up those raws and see, what can be made out them (and where is is written in stone, that DPP has to be used, not another raw processor - since when is the raw processor part of the "system"?)
Logged

Gabor
samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #7 on: December 19, 2007, 02:23:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As the evaluation of this comparison is obviously much the question of religious affiliation, I see the need to declare, that

1. I am a Canon 40D owner,

2. I don't care for the label on my camera (I carried my Zensa Bronica a decade long in a large Nikon bag, for that offered the best arrangement :-);

3. I don't intend to purchase any of the cameras involved in the test.

So, I am interested purely on the photographic/digital side of the comparison without any personal/emotional involvement.

I have several problems with the comparison.

1. I don't see, which Canon 85mm lens has been used. There are two of them, the 85mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.2L. I am afraid, that the 85mm f/1.8 has been used, which is a very good lens on a cropping camera, but it is ridiculous to put it on an FF, $7000 camera. The 85mm f/1.2L has a never version "for digital", and I don't believe, that the owner of the 1DsMkIII would put any other on his camera. Or, has the P45 been tested with a Coke bottle?

2. It is dishonest (though expectable between competitors) to present processed images. The processing (raw conversion) plays a huge role, and it is funny to say, "look, how bad the other image is, if I process it".

The raw images have to be presented, and let's see, who what can make out of them.

For a starter:

- the 1DsMkII image is much brighter than the P45, and the mid- to brighter areas (not only the highlights) are less contrasty. I adjusted a bit, and suddenly it looks very different , for example the structure of the stonework in the forground becomes visible, the "Visit" signe gets more clear

- the P45 image is strongly sharpened; in fact, it is over-sharpened for pixel peeping, while the 1DsMkII image is undersharpened (if at all).

So, put up those raws and see, what can be made out them (and where is is written in stone, that DPP has to be used, not another raw processor - since when is the raw processor part of the "system"?)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161783\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

We know it hurts, but this is the reality. Every test will show you the same results. But don't worry, we will be here waiting for your theories and explanations.  

The whole comparison is like saying "I can't create a Picasso myself but show me one and I'll copy it".
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8884


« Reply #8 on: December 19, 2007, 02:43:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I suppose if some of you guys were asked to compare 35mm with 8x10" format, you'd shoot a landscape with your usual f64 and then get confused because you couldn't find an f64 on the 35mm lens   .

Here are a couple of crop comparisons of the foreground of the 1Ds3 shot, before darkening and after darkening, plus a bit of contrast enhancement.

The P21 is on top.

[attachment=4319:attachment]  [attachment=4318:attachment]
Logged
Panopeeper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1805


« Reply #9 on: December 19, 2007, 03:07:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
this is the reality. Every test will show you the same results
Do you maintain a personalized reality, free of facts? Why are you afraid of a somewhat more objective comparison? No matter, what the result would be, that makes none of the cameras better, nor worse.

Most probably the top MFs are really better in certain settings, than the 1DsMkIII; it would be a shame otherwise. However, now the gap is probably smaller than before, which has only one serious consequence: new buyers have to thoroughly analyze if it is a good deal to pay several tens of thousands of dollars for the difference.
Logged

Gabor
geotzo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 19, 2007, 03:13:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Here we go again... while I do not generally see the point of this comparison, because every camera is for different purpose and that is why I personally own both digital medium format and Dslr, I have to admit there is something strange going on with the 1ds MkIII on this test. I would like to see the original RAW files to be honest. I would not epect huge differences between a P21 and a MkIII, I mean there will most defenetally be differences but not this. Could we pease see the raws? I have seen other comparisons on the net that "proved" things differently, so we need the Raws to be more precise,
thanks,
George
Logged
samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2007, 03:15:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do you maintain a personalized reality, free of facts? Why are you afraid of a somewhat more objective comparison? No matter, what the result would be, that makes none of the cameras better, nor worse.

Most probably the top MFs are really better in certain settings, than the 1DsMkIII; it would be a shame otherwise. However, now the gap is probably smaller than before, which has only one serious consequence: new buyers have to thoroughly analyze if it is a good deal to pay several tens of thousands of dollars for the difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161797\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually the difference in price isn't that big anymore.
My opinions are based in total reality. I own a MFB and I know how they can perform.

I'll leave the rest of the thread for you guys. I have a flight to take in the morning. Spain is waiting...
Merry Christmas Everyone.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 03:29:43 PM by samuel_js » Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 591


« Reply #12 on: December 19, 2007, 03:26:24 PM »
ReplyReply

RAW files please...
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1130


WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 19, 2007, 03:30:26 PM »
ReplyReply

i just posted this post in another forum, but i think i want it t be seen here too. ofcourse i like to work with mf and i see clearly the advantages for my work, but i dont think it serves anyone and even not any manufactors to create so much hype about the incredible clear advantage of mf, independent which back it is as long its mf. this is i.m.o. done with "tests" as this.

seeing the same crops than are showed here, let me think that the whole test seems to be - as so often - some marketing thing and little bit more.
the p21 ( and the other p files ) are sharpened and contrast treated, meanwhile the canon is not. sharpen the canon file, bring the crop to a similar size than the p files ( even upsampling does this job ), make some shadows/highlight contrast increasements in PS and the contrast and detail is not far from the p21 anymore,- where this things obviously have been done already.
its not a fair comparision and its not done with the goal to be fair..... or i am wrong herein?

found a nice link also in the net, and this one explains very well why i am not so good friend with the kodak sensors in general.
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/Ha...H3D/index.html

since generations they show exactly the kind of flaws which are described and shown here in this test. it doesnt matter if a leica, kodak, p1 or hasselblad is around ,- this behavor is "kodak - sensor design " specific and i personnally dont like it. i prefere dalsa sensors therefor, although the 33mp sensor has lost some of the advantages ´the 22mp sensor yet has had ( but gained others as well so finally its an improvement not just in terms of resolution ).

about the canon 1dsmk3:
i think they made a great job,- although i will not buy one but wait for the 5dmk2 and doing what i already do:
shooting with my sinar backs.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 03:31:25 PM by rainer_v » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 19, 2007, 03:31:25 PM »
ReplyReply

my comment to those tests: not fair and one can get much more out of the 1 DSMKIII. Simply adjust the contrast and add some sharpening.

Thierry
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 03:34:42 PM by thsinar » Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 19, 2007, 03:32:34 PM »
ReplyReply

hi Rainer,

absolutely in accordance with you!

Cheers,
Thierry

Quote
i just posted this post in another forum, but i think i want it t be seen here too. ofcourse i like to work with mf and i see clearly the advantages for my work, but i dont think it serves anyone and even not any manufactors to create so much hype about the incredible clear advantage of mf, independent which back it is as long its mf. this is i.m.o. done with "tests" as this.

seeing the same crops than are showed here, let me think that the whole test seems to be - as so often - some marketing thing and little bit more.
the p21 ( and the other p files ) are sharpened and contrast treated, meanwhile the canon is not. sharpen the canon file, bring the crop to a similar size than the p files ( even upsampling does this job ), make some shadows/highlight contrast increasements in PS and the contrast and detail is not far from the p21 anymore,- where this things obviously have been done already.
its not a fair comparision and its not done with the goal to be fair..... or i am wrong herein?

found a nice link also in the net, and this one explains very well why i am not so good friend with the kodak sensors in general.
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/Ha...H3D/index.html

since generations they show exactly the kind of flaws which are described and shown here in this test. it doesnt matter if a leica, kodak, p1 or hasselblad is around ,- this behavor is "kodak - sensor design " specific and i personnally dont like it. i prefere dalsa sensors therefor, although the 33mp sensor has lost some of the advantages ´the 22mp sensor yet has had ( but gained others as well so finally its an improvement not just in terms of resolution ).

about the canon 1dsmk3:
i think they made a great job,- although i will not buy one but wait for the 5dmk2 and doing what i already do:
shooting with my sinar backs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161807\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 591


« Reply #16 on: December 19, 2007, 03:48:07 PM »
ReplyReply

I sharpened the P45 file and the Canon 1Ds3 file with USM, 300, .3, 0, and I prefer the image quality of the 1Ds3 over the P45.  The Phase is kind of mushy.  If I could get my hands on the RAW files, both files would look a whole hell of a lot better, and the P45 would do much better, but with these files, the difference between 39 and 21MP is surprisingly SMALL.

And I see you used DPP for the Canon file.  Tsk, tsk.
Logged
canmiya
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158


WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 19, 2007, 04:41:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
my comment to those tests: not fair and one can get much more out of the 1 DSMKIII. Simply adjust the contrast and add some sharpening.

Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=161808\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
as an owner of both an afd2/leaf back and a 1ds3, i have to concur with you....
interestingly enough, i have not felt compelled to do an image quality comparison:  different tools, different strenghts and weaknesses...
the op also picked two dramatically different lenses with different optical qualities/characteristics  for use in the comparison...if i were so moved to try to compare images from the two cameras, neither of the canon 85's would be my choice to shoot against the mamiya macro.
Logged
lance_schad
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 257


« Reply #18 on: December 19, 2007, 04:52:18 PM »
ReplyReply

I think we all come to the consensus that not one product does everything. Look a carpenter has many different types of hammers, because you would not use a sledge to drive in a tack.
Yes you can also do some massaging to get the 1dsMK3 files to look closer to the Phase files, but that is time, when the Phase files look good right out of the chute without post. If you need extreme portability and fast frame rates, then you have no choice but to go DSLR.
Thats why we sell both solutions Canons and Phase One. There is no one solution. Each has its strengths and weaknesses and there is room for both in the photo world.

Have a happy holiday season.

L

Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-534-5701 office
305-394-3196 cell
www.captureintegration.com
lance@captureintegration.com
Logged

LANCE SCHAD - DIGITAL TRANSITIONS - Phase One,Leaf/Mamiya,Arca-Swiss,Cambo value added reseller
direct/cell:610-496-5586  office:877-367-8537 x 224
http://www.digitaltransitions.com email:lns@digitaltransitions.com
Panopeeper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1805


« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2007, 04:56:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes you can also do some massaging to get the 1dsMK3 files to look closer to the Phase files, but that is time, when the Phase files look good right out of the chute without post

Plain BS.
Logged

Gabor
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad