• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

1DsMKIII sample photos from my new camera!

Will Thompson

Well-known member
012K0019.jpg


012K0031.jpg


012K0007.jpg


All shot 1/250, f8.0, ISO 800, EF 50mm f1.2 L USM

Shot with asher on saturday at my house.
 
Last edited:

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi Will

congrats!

one questuion, beyond these shots, what is you overall impression about the ds3? (don't be shy, you can post long!!!
 
It's certainly impressively sharp and the color looks good, but that moiré effect you can see on the full res crop of the camera could be a source of frustration. I don't recall if I read it here or somewhere else where someone said they usually avoided using their 5D for executive portraits, because it tended to produce moiré patterns in men's suits. Do you see that elsewhere?
 
Would it be possible to make a (throw-away) Raw file available for download? And to amplify on your impressions, particularly with respect to the 1Ds2?
 
It's certainly impressively sharp and the color looks good, but that moiré effect you can see on the full res crop of the camera could be a source of frustration. I don't recall if I read it here or somewhere else where someone said they usually avoided using their 5D for executive portraits, because it tended to produce moiré patterns in men's suits. Do you see that elsewhere?

Well, if anything, it proves that the AA-filter in the 1Ds3 is not too strong, therefore future reports that would claim it is, can be refuted. It also makes one wonder how it would have looked, heaven forbid, without an AA-filter. It is almost/practically impossible to suppress all moiré, unless one accepts reducing the effective resolution with an extemely strong AA-filter to less than half. However, in pathological cases, one can try to limit the high spatial frequencies that are at the root of the aliasing by introducing diffraction blur.

That camera subject proves to be very useful as a test object. My estimate is that an aperture of f/13 or narrower will effectively eliminate the effect on a sensor array with a 6.4 micron sensel pitch. An aperture series can be very useful in learning the exact aperture number for a sharp lens for those that shoot moiré sensitive subjects (e.g. fabric, distant architecture, etc.).

I'd welcome a follow-up test series to get a handle on the solution (other than defocusing). This is one subject that Live view can be useful for, because the interplay between the sensel spacing and the LCD element spacing will amplify the occurence of moiré on the LCD more than it will manifest itself in the final image, like an early warning system.

Bart
 
Will, can you test the effect of diffraction on IQ, maybe shoot at different apertures to compare detail lost or gained...

talk to you later, leonardo
ps happy shooting (Santa came early this year)
 

Ray West

New member
I do not think, at first sight, that the pattern is all due to the sensor/camera, more likely due to the flash, the cherries, and position of the silver chair. I think Will may have just invented another interferometer. I say this, since there does not appear to be any repetitive pattern in the plastic (or metal) face of the P&S.

Best wishes,

Ray

(I thought _the_ test shot was going to be a dollar bill and a cola can)
 
Will, can you test the effect of diffraction on IQ, maybe shoot at different apertures to compare detail lost or gained...

In my experience, diffraction becomes gradually noticeable as a loss of resolution when the diffraction pattern diameter exceeds 1.5x the sensel pitch or more (although the AA-filter also plays a role here). While the diffraction spot diameter varies with wavelength, the green portion of the spectrum (say at 550 nanometres) has a more significant impact than blue or red, which has to do with several things. To name a few, one thing is that the contribution of green to Luminance outweighs the contribution of blue and red combined. Another thing is that green sensels sample the incoming light more densely, so any loss there will impact the total more severely.

For the 1Ds3, with a sensel pitch of 6.4 micron, a diffraction loss of resolution will occur at f/7.1 or smaller apertures.

These are some diffraction spot diameters for 550 nm green light (for 6.4 micron sensel pitch):
f/5.6 = 7.589 micron (1.19 sensel widths)
f/6.3 = 8.519 micron (1.33 sensel widths)
f/7.1 = 9.562 micron (1.49 sensel widths) the onset of noticeable diffraction.
f/8.0 = 10.733 micron (1.68 sensel widths)
f/9.0 = 12.047 micron (1.88 sensel widths)
f/10 = 13.522 micron (2.11 sensel widths)
f/11 = 15.179 micron (2.37 sensel widths)
etc., etc.

Bart
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I do hope to have the first edition of my full review online shortly. Needless to say there's a lot more to do and we'll continue this a intended from the outset as a an interative analysis taking advantage of the broad and diverse experience and skills of our community.

We picked f 8.0 as it appeared we'd be below the diffraction limits. However we have a long way to go in out schedule for tests and we welcome constructive feedback. The job of OPF is to look at practical issues and not the glory of the flagship, as much as we are loyal to and love the brand!

So please PM me for specific requests and ideas and I'll endeaver to incorporate what we can as we progress.

Thanks for your support!

Asher
 
Bart, that is very impressive considering that the word "sensel" is not even in the dictionary yet..

I am a layman regarding diffraction theory, so, can we translate this to photographic terms and say that a camera with smaller sensels will complain more -- in theory -- of diffraction syndrome that one with larger sensels?

And, what would be the best aperture for, say a 50mm/ f 1.4 ?
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
012K0031crop.jpg


Please post questions in this thread for faster response.
This, crop of actual pixels. The image is, BTW, is 3.2:1 magnification (at Mac screen resolution), of the tiny 4.9 cm pewter chair!

We'd have to look at the RAW file to see if the Moiré artifact is as obvious in the native image.

Asher
 
I knew it, it's a French word ! An English man would say "brilliant". Personally I like the notion of a sensel well, where the electrons "fall" to be perceived by the Sensor Electronique.


Ray, I'm happy to see that you remember that test "(I thought _the_ test shot was going to be a dollar bill and a cola can)" The film people never showed up, so I guess we won that one, no?

Maybe Will wants to shoot a dollar bill and a cola can ... knowing him, I would say ... not, maybe Asher will...

So, is this deffraction thing going to stop the "Back Killer" from killing all MF backs? or is it a minor non-issue issue?

I think that the Mk3 is a milestone and will be good for all photographers. It will probably bring prices down from Hasselblad to Leaf.. but probably the opposite will happen with lenses. There may be a race to produce better --and more expensive-- glass just to keep up with the resolution power of the millions of Sensor Electronique.
 
Bart, that is very impressive considering that the word "sensel" is not even in the dictionary yet..

In my book ;-) it's just short for Sens(or) El(ement), to differentiate between the sensor array and the individual elements making up that array.

I am a layman regarding diffraction theory, so, can we translate this to photographic terms and say that a camera with smaller sensels will complain more -- in theory -- of diffraction syndrome that one with larger sensels?

Yes. The diffraction pattern diameter is determined by the aperture number. The only variable (if we keep the wavelength constant) is therefore the size of the area sample (micro-lens on the sensel) we take from the diffraction pattern projection. Smaller apertures will create increasingly larger diameter diffraction patterns untill they cover more than a single sensel and also influence neighboring sensels. That happens sooner if the sensels are small, and vice versa for larger sensels.

And, what would be the best aperture for, say a 50mm/ f 1.4 ?

The aperture number alone determines the diffraction spot diameter. Therefore all lenses produce the same diffraction pattern (assuming an ideal circular aperture) at the same f/# number.

The important variable is the sensel pitch as an indication of the sampling area, smaller sensels are hit by diffraction limitations at wider aperture numbers. The 1Ds2 and the 1D3 with their 7.2 micron sensel pitch e.g. hit 1.5x sensel pitch at a little narrower than f/8, so at a third stop narrower aperture than the 1Ds3.

Now, there is more to the actual diffraction pattern than a simple calculation. Microlenses can change the area samples, and the AA-filter spreads multiple images of the diffraction spot partially over multiple sensels. And the lens itself is not perfectly free from some blur (residual aberrations) either. But all that still translates to approx. 1.5x sensel pitch for the diffraction pattern diameter to start having a noticeable visual effect, in my experience sofar.

Bart
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi folks
I've started to play with mine (not enough!)

What software do you use on Macs to open the raw files?
C1 3.7 doesn't accept the files
C1 4ß does but doesn't display the right WB (far from that!)
ACR doesn't recognize the files nor Lightroom

And I don't like very much DPP…

Any suggestions?

[EDIT] Just found the Lightroom and ACR updates on Adobe website… dum meself![/EDIT]
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Thanks Michael
I'll give it a trial…

My first tests show very good IQ at 100 ISO, not too bad at 800 but let's be carefull with CA…!!!

For now C1 ß4 gives better results than ACR or Lightroom though it doesn't handle correctly (by far!) the in camera white bal…

Will be back later, for now, I'll attend to Marianne Faithfull recital in Bordeaux… another trip!
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Would it be possible to make a (throw-away) Raw file available for download? And to amplify on your impressions, particularly with respect to the 1Ds2?

Not throw away! All the files will be online for you to process according to you workflow and then post with comments or else if it is substantial it can be offered for our review as part of an interactive in depth OPF effort.

Soon!

Asher
 

John_Nevill

New member
Adobe update Camera Raw to 4.3.1 to support:
  • Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III
  • Canon PowerShot G9
  • Nikon D3
  • Nikon D300
  • Olympus E-3
  • Olympus SP-560 UZ
  • Panasonic DMC-L10
Here
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Thanks John

this is the one I tried already (or maybe that was 4.3.0 only) it reads the 1Ds3 files but booooo, stiil prefer C1! (even the ߅)
 
If anyone has the chance, how is the automatic WB doing on the Ds3, and how do you find skin tone rendering under a variety of lighting conditions? Thanks in advance.
 
Top