Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: That famous AA filter...  (Read 21445 times)
Plekto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551


« Reply #40 on: January 06, 2009, 07:29:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Bob Smith
For a portrait or fashion photographer that is constantly shooting a variety of fabrics, an AA filter is a no brainer.  For landscapes or most product photography I can very happily live without it.

And, if you use a program like Zero Noise(see discussion on this site for those who aren't familiar with it) and bracket the shot, the effects of not having an AA filter pretty much become a non-issue.  Win-win for outdoor photography types.  Indoor and wedding photographers... probably want an AA filter and them some.  

Of course, if the makers were smart, they would offer two models - one with and one without for a small up-charge.
Logged
joofa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 488



« Reply #41 on: January 06, 2009, 10:12:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
From this discussion it sounds like the only way to not have this as a problem is a sensor than can resolve greater than any lens you can put in front of it?

Or if you are willing to downsize your image, then one can get rid of aliasing with proper filtering even after it has corrupted an image.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2009, 10:13:59 PM by joofa » Logged

Joofa
http://www.djjoofa.com
Download Photoshop and After Effects plugins
Bob Smith
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83


WWW
« Reply #42 on: January 07, 2009, 04:38:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Plekto
Of course, if the makers were smart, they would offer two models - one with and one without for a small up-charge.

Kodak took that approach years ago except that it wasn't two models.  They simply made the AA filter user interchangeable.  Originally most cameras came with an AA filter.  The user could easily remove it and replace it with one that only filtered IR for a modest cost.  Later models came with only the IR filter to hold down cost.  Those that wanted AA could add it for about $1K USD (not exactly a small upcharge).  These things were fragile enough that you didn't want to swap AA and IR filters in the field but it was a trivial task to do in the studio before a shoot where you knew you needed one particular type of setup or the other.  The 14n series was the only later model to come without an AA filter and no option to add one (HUGE marketing blunder).  

Kodak had many superb ideas that were way, way ahead of their time.  I still cringe at how some less than brilliant marketing decisions forced the demise of that line of cameras.

 
Logged

docmaas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


« Reply #43 on: February 12, 2009, 03:14:14 AM »
ReplyReply

You'll only be able to have one of two aa filters removed.  The aa filter in the portrait orientation also serves as the sensor cover glass and cannot be removed.

Been there done that.

Mike

Quote from: Bob Smith
AA filters do very good things.  The problem is that most subject matter in most images doesn't need them at all (especially as camera resolutions keep increasing) and your images are sharper without them.  The few areas that do need them can look horrible without them.  The trade off is how much time/effort are you willing to devote in software to fixing the problem areas versus accepting the softening of everything that the AA filter provides.  Various sharpening techniques and todays higher res cameras help a lot but you can't get all of what the AA filters suppresses back again.  For a portrait or fashion photographer that is constantly shooting a variety of fabrics, an AA filter is a no brainer.  For landscapes or most product photography I can very happily live without it.

Without an AA filter ALL of your images will be slightly sharper but a few will look horrible.  With an AA filter all of your images will be very slightly softer but none will look horrible.  If you're a marketing manger for a DSLR maker, which do you pick?

If I get a 5dII soon, I'll send my original 5D for a mod to remove the AA filter.

Bob Smith
Logged
docmaas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


« Reply #44 on: February 12, 2009, 03:21:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Mitchell Baum
Has anyone here had Maxmax remove the AA filter? How was the result?

Best,

Mitchell

Yes,  have a look here.

http://www.pbase.com/masimo/5d_hotrod
Logged
ACH DIGITAL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 373



WWW
« Reply #45 on: May 17, 2009, 05:42:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Bob Smith
AA filters do very good things.  The problem is that most subject matter in most images doesn't need them at all (especially as camera resolutions keep increasing) and your images are sharper without them.  The few areas that do need them can look horrible without them.  The trade off is how much time/effort are you willing to devote in software to fixing the problem areas versus accepting the softening of everything that the AA filter provides.  Various sharpening techniques and todays higher res cameras help a lot but you can't get all of what the AA filters suppresses back again.  For a portrait or fashion photographer that is constantly shooting a variety of fabrics, an AA filter is a no brainer.  For landscapes or most product photography I can very happily live without it.

Without an AA filter ALL of your images will be slightly sharper but a few will look horrible.  With an AA filter all of your images will be very slightly softer but none will look horrible.  If you're a marketing manger for a DSLR maker, which do you pick?

If I get a 5dII soon, I'll send my original 5D for a mod to remove the AA filter.

Bob Smith

Hi Bob,

I have both cameras and I shoot jewelry and product and I have tested them both together . The original 5D has softer AA filter, the 5d MKII has it stronger don't know why. I would recoment, what I would like to do soon, to send the 5D MKII for removing the AA filter. The only thing I don't like about it is that they take the sensor cleanig off..

Antonio Chagin
Logged

Antonio Chagin
www.achdigital.com
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad