Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared  (Read 34596 times)

EricWHiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2639
    • Rolleiflex USA
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #60 on: December 05, 2007, 04:11:49 pm »

Quote
That's very true, Eric. But just as important as being able to see the differences is being able to understand what's causing the differences.

I find it a little disconcerting that as soon as a link to the images of this current test were posted, we had a number of DB owners claiming the P21 images were clearly superior to the 1Ds3 images. Such apparently was their need to have their preconceived notions confirmed, the fact that the methodology was seriously flawed seems to have escaped them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158454\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Your point is understood.  I have a more positive vibe on the good people reading and participating in the medium format forum.  My view is that they will do whatever it takes to achieve high quality images, whether it be opening the wallet, dropping plastic, or spending time to learn new technology and techniques.  I don't doubt that were the new canon to be compelling, most would not hesitate to trade their current set up for it (only after a short time of reconciliation).  So far though for me, I have only seen 1Ds3 images that fall short of my expectations for that camera so I don't plan on buying one.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2007, 04:13:28 pm by EricWHiss »
Logged
Rolleiflex USA

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #61 on: December 05, 2007, 10:44:09 pm »

Quote
  My view is that they will do whatever it takes to achieve high quality images, whether it be opening the wallet, dropping plastic, or spending time to learn new technology and techniques.  I don't doubt that were the new canon to be compelling, most would not hesitate to trade their current set up for it (only after a short time of reconciliation).  So far though for me, I have only seen 1Ds3 images that fall short of my expectations for that camera so I don't plan on buying one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158490\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For such people, I can see no good reason to choose a small 21mp sensor instead of a large 39mp sensor. It only becomes an issue when the choice is between the 1Ds3 and cameras like the ZD and P21 which feature in this test.

It may well be the case that the combination of factors such as the lack of an AA filter, the availability of better quality MF lenses (at the resolutions required by the larger sensor) will produce results unachievable by the 1Ds3.

The purpose of tests such as this one is surely to determine how significant such factors are in view of the obvious advantages of the Canons with regard to ease of use, portability, low light capability etc.
Logged

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
    • we are super
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #62 on: December 05, 2007, 11:35:56 pm »

Quote
That's very true, Eric. But just as important as being able to see the differences is being able to understand what's causing the differences.

I find it a little disconcerting that as soon as a link to the images of this current test were posted, we had a number of DB owners claiming the P21 images were clearly superior to the 1Ds3 images. Such apparently was their need to have their preconceived notions confirmed, the fact that the methodology was seriously flawed seems to have escaped them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158454\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Considering that I've seen 7 year old technology (kodak proback 16 megapixel files) which look better than my 1dsMkII I wouldn't be surprised.

Do you know what a bloody pain in the ass it is to set up cameras for testing?  It seems like there are a bunch of people who adamantly want to argue to feel better about themselves. You're just going to continue arguing your point anyway even if you're proven wrong.

I don't know about you but the way I find out whether I like something or not is that I go and test it myself.
In film days I don't go on forums and argue about whether a film is better based on some charts I see online. I buy a roll of film and shoot it myself and compare it for myself.

Why don't you go and test a digital back for yourself?
I'm sure you can find a dealer who'll be more than happy to let you try it out so you can save yourself the finger energy from all that typing arguments.

I am very sure that people who own digital backs have used DSLRs before. sheesh.
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #63 on: December 06, 2007, 12:50:09 am »

Quote
Do you know what a bloody pain in the ass it is to set up cameras for testing?

Of course I do. Just a few days ago, the issue of MLU came up again. Despite the fact I am at present travelling in Thailand, I went to the trouble of printing out a Norman Koren test chart, taping it to the wall of my rented bedsitter, then spent a whole morning testing the effect of MLU on the 2 cameras I'm carrying, attached to my ultra lightweight Manfrotto tripod.

Because I was careful and meticulous with my testing, I learned something. With the 20D and standard 50/1.8 lens on this particular tripod, MLU serves no significant purpose at any shutter speed. However, with the 5D with same lens on the same tripod, there is a significant blurring of the image at 1/30th sec exposure without MLU enabled. When one comes across unexpected anomalies like this, then of course one repeats the test.

When it comes to testing camera equipment, the adage, "If a job is worth doing, it's worth doing well' is particularly appropriate. If a test is not carried out meticulously and with sound methodology, you end up not only wasting your own time but everyone elses who might be tempted to think you know what you are doing.

Quote
You're just going to continue arguing your point anyway even if you're proven wrong.

Absolutely not! You don't know me at all. Prove me wrong and I'll be the first to concede the point. But I'm not going to take a dive and throw in the towel.

Quote
In film days I don't go on forums and argue about whether a film is better based on some charts I see online. I buy a roll of film and shoot it myself and compare it for myself.

Exactly what I do. I'd love to have the opportunity to just whizz round the corner and borrow or hire or test in the store a P21, ZD and 1Ds3 and do a proper comparison myself, but I just don't have this opportunity in Chiang Mai. I doubt whether I'd even have the opportunity in Brisbane, Australia. There have been many occasions when I would have liked to have hired a particular Canon lens for a weekend to try out before making a decision to buy, but was unable to find any place in Brisbane that rented the particular lenses I was interested in. I usually have to buy the lens from a store and then return it if I'm not satisfied, which I've done a couple of times, but you can understand one does not become popular if one does that sort of thing too often.

The fact is, the internet is a tremendous resource for saving the consumer time. One cannot possibly test every camera that's available and it's impossible to test cameras that are not available because of one's location or other circumstances.

Quote
I am very sure that people who own digital backs have used DSLRs before. sheesh.

Of course they have, but not necessarily the 1Ds3. What's your point? You seem to be reducing the discussion to a black& white issue of 35mm DSLR versus MFDB.
Logged

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
    • we are super
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #64 on: December 06, 2007, 01:41:45 am »

Quote
Of course I do. Just a few days ago, the issue of MLU came up again. Despite the fact I am at present travelling in Thailand, I went to the trouble of printing out a Norman Koren test chart, taping it to the wall of my rented bedsitter, then spent a whole morning testing the effect of MLU on the 2 cameras I'm carrying, attached to my ultra lightweight Manfrotto tripod.

Because I was careful and meticulous with my testing, I learned something. With the 20D and standard 50/1.8 lens on this particular tripod, MLU serves no significant purpose at any shutter speed. However, with the 5D with same lens on the same tripod, there is a significant blurring of the image at 1/30th sec exposure without MLU enabled. When one comes across unexpected anomalies like this, then of course one repeats the test.

When it comes to testing camera equipment, the adage, "If a job is worth doing, it's worth doing well' is particularly appropriate. If a test is not carried out meticulously and with sound methodology, you end up not only wasting your own time but everyone elses who might be tempted to think you know what you are doing.
Absolutely not! You don't know me at all. Prove me wrong and I'll be the first to concede the point. But I'm not going to take a dive and throw in the towel.
Exactly what I do. I'd love to have the opportunity to just whizz round the corner and borrow or hire or test in the store a P21, ZD and 1Ds3 and do a proper comparison myself, but I just don't have this opportunity in Chiang Mai. I doubt whether I'd even have the opportunity in Brisbane, Australia. There have been many occasions when I would have liked to have hired a particular Canon lens for a weekend to try out before making a decision to buy, but was unable to find any place in Brisbane that rented the particular lenses I was interested in. I usually have to buy the lens from a store and then return it if I'm not satisfied, which I've done a couple of times, but you can understand one does not become popular if one does that sort of thing too often.

The fact is, the internet is a tremendous resource for saving the consumer time. One cannot possibly test every camera that's available and it's impossible to test cameras that are not available because of one's location or other circumstances.
Of course they have, but not necessarily the 1Ds3. What's your point? You seem to be reducing the discussion to a black& white issue of 35mm DSLR versus MFDB.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158595\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

How about this, you go get a digital back and test it against a 1DsMkIII and post your results up online before you

You seem so keen on proving people wrong, so please prove your point by doing the test and sharing it with us instead of making these longwinded arguments based on a lack of practical information.

I make my points based on practical experience having used the cameras I've used.

You make your points based on assumptions seeing some web jpegs.

The ones here who use MFDB are aware of the pros and cons (you think we drop money on equipment for fun???) but you seem to want to keep comparing and comparing and comparing based on web jpegs are arguments about what makes a fair test.

Go and TEST a back for yourself and then you can showcase your knowledge of ETTR, fair camera tests, etc etc.
I'll be waiting for your posting. Where do you live? Do you want me to get you in touch with a dealer? I'm sure he'll be happy to let you try out a back.
Logged

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
    • we are super
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #65 on: December 06, 2007, 02:00:02 am »

here's a rule of thumb
medium format backs of different brands generally have pretty similar quality when comparing similar sensor sizes and megapixel counts.
Differences in IQ are not huge, and differentiating points really depend on each person's needs (write speed, long exposure capabilities, etc)
It's pretty easy to compare digital backs because there are certain standard limitations and certain standard perimeters such as dynamic range (most backs are quite similar)
It's comparing granny smiths to fuji apples.
BUT
comparing MFDB with DSLR is a totally different ball game, they are so different it's comparing apples to oranges.
Now, I believe you CAN compare apples to oranges
but before you start comparing, you need to go and try it out and familiarise yourself with the pros and cons of MFDBs before

Maybe the reason why people can't see the extra tonalities and people discount the inherent sharpness of a MFDB image ("oh you can do local contrast sharpening in photoshop") is because they haven't acquainted themselves personally with that level of detail.
It's like strobe lighting, once you've used a Profoto it's hard to accept the light quality of a Speedlite. But if you've never used a set of Profotos  before then you have no prior experience with that kind of light quality and are less sensitive to the differences between the two.
It's like a good set of earphones, once you have heard a good pair you start to become more sensitive to nuances in sound quality. My great pair of earphones spoilt so in desperation I got a cheap pair from Best Buy and the music sounded like it was being played through a wall. Ask me a year back and I would have thought that was great quality sound (before I got my lovely high quality earphones)

I'm all for people testing stuff out.
I rather people test stuff out before making any judgements on products.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2007, 02:01:51 am by jing q »
Logged

free1000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 465
    • http://www.foliobook.mobi
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #66 on: December 06, 2007, 02:36:59 am »

Quote
 
It's like strobe lighting, once you've used a Profoto it's hard to accept the light quality of a Speedlite. But if you've never used a set of Profotos  before then you have no prior experience with that kind of light quality and are less sensitive to the differences between the two.
It's like a good set of earphones, once you have heard a good pair you start to become more sensitive to nuances in sound quality. My great pair of earphones spoilt so in desperation I got a cheap pair from Best Buy and the music sounded like it was being played through a wall. Ask me a year back and I would have thought that was great quality sound (before I got my lovely high quality earphones)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And you need clients trained to see the same thing as well...
« Last Edit: December 06, 2007, 02:37:18 am by free1000 »
Logged
@foliobook
Foliobook professional photo

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #67 on: December 06, 2007, 05:48:39 am »

Quote
How about this, you go get a digital back and test it against a 1DsMkIII and post your results up online before you

I've already explained this in my previous post. Did you not read it. There are no photographic stores in Chiang Mai, where I am at present, that carry either MFDBs or the 1Ds3. They would have to be ordered from Bangkok, if available there and I doubt the 1Ds3 would be available yet, and would have to be paid for in advance.

Quote
You seem so keen on proving people wrong, so please prove your point by doing the test and sharing it with us instead of making these longwinded arguments based on a lack of practical information.

I would like to very much, but did you not read my previous post. If I could rent these cameras for a few days, I'd do so, not to prove anyone wrong but simply to get at the facts and learn something. But naturally I'd rather someone else who already owns these cameras or who has easy access to them do a thorough comparison using sound methodology.

Your requests seem quite unreasonable to me.

Quote
The ones here who use MFDB are aware of the pros and cons (you think we drop money on equipment for fun???) but you seem to want to keep comparing and comparing and comparing based on web jpegs are arguments about what makes a fair test. 

Aware of what pros and cons of what equipment? Once again you seem to be reducing everything to a black & white issue of 35mm versus MFDBs as though all 35mm DSLRs are basically the same and all MFDBs are basically the same.  

Quote
I make my points based on practical experience having used the cameras I've used.

So do I. All the issues I've talked about here are based of years of practical experience with a number of different cameras including 35mm film, 35mm DSLRs, MF film and even small P&S digicams. I've been taking photos as an amateur, intermittently for 50 years. I've carried out numerous test on many of my lenses and equipment over the years, and I know how essential it is to get things right. Okay?
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #68 on: December 06, 2007, 06:10:31 am »

Quote
I've already explained this in my previous post. Did you not read it. There are no photographic stores in Chiang Mai, where I am at present, that carry either MFDBs or the 1Ds3. They would have to be ordered from Bangkok, if available there and I doubt the 1Ds3 would be available yet, and would have to be paid for in advance.
I would like to very much, but did you not read my previous post. If I could rent these cameras for a few days, I'd do so, not to prove anyone wrong but simply to get at the facts and learn something. But naturally I'd rather someone else who already owns these cameras or who has easy access to them do a thorough comparison using sound methodology.

Your requests seem quite unreasonable to me.
Aware of what pros and cons of what equipment? Once again you seem to be reducing everything to a black & white issue of 35mm versus MFDBs as though all 35mm DSLRs are basically the same and all MFDBs are basically the same. 
So do I. All the issues I've talked about here are based of years of practical experience with a number of different cameras including 35mm film, 35mm DSLRs, MF film and even small P&S digicams. I've been taking photos as an amateur, intermittently for 50 years. I've carried out numerous test on many of my lenses and equipment over the years, and I know how essential it is to get things right. Okay?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158623\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

and all this is so important just now that you have to sit in your hotel and write your fingers bloody in chiang mai?
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #69 on: December 06, 2007, 06:33:24 am »

Quote
BUT
comparing MFDB with DSLR is a totally different ball game, they are so different it's comparing apples to oranges.

This should be no problem for experienced DB users who are, as you have already pointed out, familiar with the pros and cons of both formats.

I doubt that I would have any major problem.

A sturdy tripod, remote release and MLU if the shutter speeds are slow, is a basic requirement.

Accurate focussing on the same spot is another basic requirement.

Matching the FoVs of both cameras is another basic requirement.

If the aspect ratios are different, then matching the FoVs of both dimensions in separate sets of comparisons is a basic requirement.

If the sensors being compared are different sizes, then matching DoF is a basic requirement if the subject is 3-dimensional, otherwise parts of one image are going to be more OoF than the same parts in the other image.

Choosing the best lenses available for each format, within a range of equivalent focals lengths, is highly recommended.

I really can't see why there should be any difficulty for an experienced photographer.

Quote
Maybe the reason why people can't see the extra tonalities and people discount the inherent sharpness of a MFDB image ("oh you can do local contrast sharpening in photoshop") is because they haven't acquainted themselves personally with that level of detail.

I hardly think this likely. The availability of excellent stitching programs that often work flawlessly even on hand-held shots of close up subjects means that anyone with a budget, cropped-format DSLR can produce images that far exceed the detail you would get from a single P45 shot.

Same applies to DR. Nowadays you don't even need a tripod to get in excess of 12 stops of DR through bracketing exposures and merging to HDR.
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #70 on: December 06, 2007, 06:40:43 am »

Quote
and all this is so important just now that you have to sit in your hotel and write your fingers bloody in chiang mai?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No. I'd be writing the same stuff if I were back in Australia. I'm not just on holiday in Chiang Mai. I'm retired. There is no pressure to rush around and see all the sights in 5 days before having to catch that flight back home to return to the grind mill. Okay!  
Logged

samuel_js

  • Guest
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #71 on: December 06, 2007, 06:51:09 am »

Ray, it's time for you to go to bed. You have no idea of what you're talking about here. Your numbers just show your inexperience with medium format and as a photographer in general.

/Samuel
Logged

Sean H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #72 on: December 06, 2007, 07:10:35 am »

Ok, having read through all four  pages of this post  I think that everyone has tried their best to help Ray with explanations. I am impressed with their patience --- you guys would make great teachers/professors. Everyone who has had a point to make, has made it. I'm not sure that there is much more that is productive and helpful, that could be said. Might I also suggest that reading some of the archived reviews, comments that Michael R has made might also be useful.

Hopefully, in the future, Ray will travel to a city where he can rent/experiment with a DMF (eg. Sydney, Singapore, KL or perhaps Bangkok come to mind).  I politely suggest that it is time to move on to another topic.


Sean
Logged

thsinar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2066
    • http://www.sinarcameras.com
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #73 on: December 06, 2007, 07:32:48 am »

I have already invited at my place in BKK to test out backs: I have friends here working with all kind of backs, PO, H, Sinar.

I just need to be informed early enough.

Thierry

Quote
Hopefully, in the future, Ray will travel to a city where he can rent/experiment with a DMF (eg. Sydney, Singapore, KL or perhaps Bangkok come to mind).  I politely suggest that it is time to move on to another topic.
Sean
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158632\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #74 on: December 06, 2007, 07:45:53 am »

Quote
Ray, it's time for you to go to bed. You have no idea of what you're talking about here. Your numbers just show your inexperience with medium format and as a photographer in general.

/Samuel
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158629\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm glad I've got the sense not to believe you, Samuel. If my numbers show my inexperience then why aren't you explaining to me in what way my numbers are erroneous.

If the shoe was on the other foot and I had a digital back which I was convinced produced results that could not be matched by a 35mm DSLR of the same pixel count, I'd be showing you exactly how and why with maximum quality jpeg crops.

I wasn't born yesterday, ya know.
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #75 on: December 06, 2007, 08:03:35 am »

Quote
Ok, having read through all four  pages of this post  I think that everyone has tried their best to help Ray with explanations.

God help us if those are your best explanations! (No offense meant, mind you. Should I be ducking for cover   ).

Quote
Everyone who has had a point to make, has made it.

Now how can you possibly know that, Samuel?

Quote
I'm not sure that there is much more that is productive and helpful, that could be said.

I agree. Now that I've clearly outlined the factors which should be taken into consideration when making such comparisons, there's probably not much more to add. Of course, there's always the possibility I might have overlooked something. I'm really far more modest that I might appear to be in this thread.  

Quote
Hopefully, in the future, Ray will travel to a city where he can rent/experiment with a DMF (eg. Sydney, Singapore, KL or perhaps Bangkok come to mind).  I politely suggest that it is time to move on to another topic.

For God's sake we're living in the 21st century, the age of computers and communication. You want me to make a special trip to Singapore just to compare a 1Ds3 with an MFDB of similar pixel count because no-one else is able to carry out a proper and thorough comparison.

C'mon, Samuel. Give me a break!  
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #76 on: December 06, 2007, 08:52:09 am »

Quote
Ray, please go away.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158650\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I shall, willingly and with joy if you can give me one good reason why I should? By a good reason, I don't mean, because I'm a PITA. That's not a good reason for anything.
Logged

Sean H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #77 on: December 06, 2007, 09:06:14 am »

Quote
God help us if those are your best explanations! (No offense meant, mind you. Should I be ducking for cover   ).
Now how can you possibly know that, Samuel?
I agree. Now that I've clearly outlined the factors which should be taken into consideration when making such comparisons, there's probably not much more to add. Of course, there's always the possibility I might have overlooked something. I'm really far more modest that I might appear to be in this thread.   
For God's sake we're living in the 21st century, the age of computers and communication. You want me to make a special trip to Singapore just to compare a 1Ds3 with an MFDB of similar pixel count because no-one else is able to carry out a proper and thorough comparison.

C'mon, Samuel. Give me a break! 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Please read carefully (and think about) what we are posting. It was not samuel that made all those comments but me (Sean). Pay attention to what you read and leave Samuel alone.

Thanks,

Sean
Logged

Sean H

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 332
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #78 on: December 06, 2007, 09:10:41 am »

Quote
I have already invited at my place in BKK to test out backs: I have friends here working with all kind of backs, PO, H, Sinar.

I just need to be informed early enough.

Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That was really nice of you Thierry. Again, I think that we have done all we can do for this guy -- and I don't even have a DMF camera (well, not yet anyway). I would rather the nice people on this forum spend their time on more interesting and exciting issues.

Sean
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Canon Mk3,P21 and ZD compared
« Reply #79 on: December 06, 2007, 09:16:54 am »

Quote
Please read carefully (and think about) what we are posting. It was not samuel that made all those comments but me (Sean). Pay attention to what you read and leave Samuel alone.

Thanks,

Sean
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Okay! Sorry, but Samuel's comments were in the same vein so I think I'm excused on the grounds I'm not perfect and when I do occasionally make mistakes I admit it, unlike some.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Up