Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16   Go Down

Author Topic: MF vs 1Ds3  (Read 141054 times)

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #40 on: April 13, 2008, 12:10:20 am »

I think it is a very valid and meaningful comparison, since it generates so much traffic in these posts it must be of interest!!!! I would ask Mr. Reichmann to consider doing the comparison not for the sake of which is the ultimate camera but detailing the strengths and weakness's of both in image quality not features. Michael has both the 1DsIII and a P45+ so it would be state of the art DSLR vs state of the art MFDB. I'm interested in how big the spread is.
Marc

5D:
[attachment=6078:attachment]

P30:
[attachment=6079:attachment]
Logged
Marc McCalmont

Justinr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1733
    • Ink+images
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #41 on: April 13, 2008, 04:35:00 am »

Marc

Pity that the pictures weren't the same scene and same time but even from you post might I dare suggest that the dark shadows on the 5D image might well have had an awful lot more detail if shot with the P45. Thats the big bonus of dFM, it doesn't give simply throw in the towel as soon as it sees a shadow, or should that be, doesn't see a shadow?

Justin.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #42 on: April 13, 2008, 06:38:59 am »

Of course, the reason I asked for RAW is because it's difficult to tell how much of the difference between two rendered images is due to the RAW converter settings and the cameras themselves. If Michael would jump in and do something like the "ultimate shootout" he did between the original 1Ds and drum-scanned 6x7 a few years back that would be awesome, especially if he made the RAWs available for download.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #43 on: April 13, 2008, 07:03:40 am »

Quote
Of course, the reason I asked for RAW is because it's difficult to tell how much of the difference between two rendered images is due to the RAW converter settings and the cameras themselves. If Michael would jump in and do something like the "ultimate shootout" he did between the original 1Ds and drum-scanned 6x7 a few years back that would be awesome, especially if he made the RAWs available for download.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I borrowed a 1Ds3 a couple of times for my own nutshell 1DS3 review.

[a href=\"http://techcomment.blogspot.com/2008/03/canon-1ds3-review-no-revolution-just.html]http://techcomment.blogspot.com/2008/03/ca...ution-just.html[/url]

 I told my contact at Canon that the firm  surely wouldn't dispute my finding that a 39MP camera captures better imagery than a 21MP camera, as all their ugrade marketing is based on that concept - there was loud laughter at the other end of the phone line

ROTFL

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #44 on: April 13, 2008, 07:13:55 am »

Edmund, I read that article several days ago, and found it interesting and well-written.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #45 on: April 13, 2008, 07:43:53 am »

Quote
Edmund, I read that article several days ago, and found it interesting and well-written.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189167\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Jonathan. The Pebble guy also has an interesting blog, with a different perspective, and the pix there are really nice.

I guess if you *already* have a Canon 1Ds3,  the differential up from the 21MP is there but it's simply isn't worth the money or the hassle except for those who really want the utmost file quality (beauty, fashion, architecture).

However, if you have a working Canon solution which isn't good enough for the best work, then it might make sense to get a back ***instead of upgrading the Canon***.

Let me be clearer:
- You already have a 1Ds3, why buy a back ?
- You have a 5D with little trade in value and some lenses, then keeping the 5D another 2 or 3 years and buying a Mamiya or Hassy for stuff that needs hi-rez might make sense if you can find a good deal. The 5D won't stop working and you'll be able to buy a spare really cheap if it does. I think the 1Ds3 also has some hidden costs in lenses, some of your existing glass would need an upgrade.


It's possible that the MF guys will fight back with better sensors and better lenses soon to recreate a real advantage for their product; for now they are hostages to the camera systems they rely on which are fast getting outdated.


Edmund
« Last Edit: April 13, 2008, 07:51:56 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #46 on: April 13, 2008, 09:20:14 am »

Right now I have a 1Ds Mark I, and a 1D Mark II.
Logged

Graham Mitchell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2281
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #47 on: April 13, 2008, 09:20:48 am »

Quote
- You already have a 1Ds3, why buy a back ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189169\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why do you keep asking when it's been answered so many times?

- maybe people need faster flash sync speeds
- maybe people need more dynamic range
- maybe people like to be able to push and pull an image more then Canon files can stand
- maybe people need more resolution
- maybe people prefer to work with waist-level or 45 degree finders
- maybe people need a digital solution for view cameras
- maybe people prefer the MF lenses
- maybe people prefer the colour and detail rendition
- maybe people prefer not to rotate the whole camera when shooting in portrait mode
- and believe it or not there are features which the Hy6 has which Canon does not, afaik, such as focus bracketing/focus trap

There could be more I can't think of right now.

Do you work for Canon?
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10288
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #48 on: April 13, 2008, 09:54:20 am »

Quote
Why do you keep asking when it's been answered so many times?

- maybe people need faster flash sync speeds
- maybe people need more dynamic range
- maybe people like to be able to push and pull an image more then Canon files can stand
- maybe people need more resolution
- maybe people prefer to work with waist-level or 45 degree finders
- maybe people need a digital solution for view cameras
- maybe people prefer the MF lenses
- maybe people prefer the colour and detail rendition
- maybe people prefer not to rotate the whole camera when shooting in portrait mode
- and believe it or not there are features which the Hy6 has which Canon does not, afaik, such as focus bracketing/focus trap

There could be more I can't think of right now.

Do you work for Canon?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189183\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's always been clear to me that a bigger sensor with more pixels delivers better 'ultimate' results, from a technical point of view.

If ultimate 'technical' image quality is the goal, I would never try to argue that a camera such as the 1Ds3 could compete with a P45+.

The interesting aspects of 35mm/DB comparisons are analogous to the comparisons between the Olympus 4/3rds system and 35mm. The advantages of the 4/3rds system in relation to full frame 35mm is analogous to the advantages of FF 35mm (the 1Ds3) compared to DBs, except the differences in format size between FF 35mm and DBs is less.
Logged

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #49 on: April 13, 2008, 10:25:14 am »

I don't think this kind of threads are getting better or less which is a shame.

I shot with the Leaf Aptus22 and the 1DsIII on the Proimaging side by side.
When later working on the files a few things were VERY clear.

1. The 1DsIII has noise in the backgrounds where the Leaf Aptus on ISO50 is totally clear.
2. The 1DsIII files are less defined in shadow areas and look more harsch than the Leaf files.
3. The 1DsIII files are showcasing weak reds
4. The 1DsIII files clipped MUCH quicker than the Leaf files
5. The 1DsIII files were less defined in very small detail like hairs and the iris of the eye

But whatever someone says you cannot compare the two.
I shoot alot with the 80mm f2.8 wide open on the Mamiya system and the files I get with that combo are stunning and I could not get the same result with the Canon system, which is absolutly logical because the total system is different, and I really don't understand why that is so hard to understand.

Of course when you need speed and high ISO the 1DsIII cannot be beat.
If you want absolute best quality, great dynamic range, sharpness, color, smooth graduates, noise free operation on very low ISO's, ISO25 or real ISO50
MF is the way to go.

There is ABSOLUTLY NO NEED or SENSE to compare a 1DsIII to a MF system, unless the MF system uses a 1.8-2.0 crop factor, or untill the Canon system will get a sensor twice as big.

Comparing Phase one to Leaf or Imacon that is worth the effort.
Now the only thing that is equal between MF and Canon is the MP count, and we all know that means nothing.
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10288
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #50 on: April 13, 2008, 12:15:50 pm »

Quote
Now the only thing that is equal between MF and Canon is the MP count, and we all know that means nothing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189200\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not quite, Frank. It does mean something. Resolution tends to be equal, but DR favours the larger pixel.

In situations where DR is crucial, the DB with equal pixel count probably wins. But I'm not sure if it wins at high ISO.

The CMOS sensor has on-board processing for every pixel. Low level signals can be amplified before A/D conversion. I don't think this is the case for CCD sensors.

I would suspect that a Canon 1Ds3 would perform significantly better than a P21, or P25, in low light. Just how much better seems to be a trade secret.
Logged

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #51 on: April 13, 2008, 12:32:08 pm »

Apples and Oranges.
Sorry, it's a discussion which was on this forum already many times, and always with the same conclusion.

You know how it makes me think ?
And don't get me the wrong way, I LOVE my DSLR and would NEVER trade it for a MF only system, I shoot both and know which one to use when.

But the whole thing is as follows.

As soon as the DSLR MP count reaches the MF MP count there will be stories about a MF killer.

Let me put it this way.
When a BMW and a Tractor are compared do you agree that it doesn't make sense ?
They both have the same Horsepower (well in my example they do ), they both have 4 wheels and they both can drive.

Well actually some people will say that this is a ridicilous example and they are probarbly the people that did not work extensivly with a MF system, or did so in the past.

When I shot with the 1DsIII I fell in love with it, it's a wonderful machine, it's great, the files are stunning and the resolution is great.
However when I put the 80mm f2.8 on my Mamiya/Leaf combi and I shoot a model wide open with natural light the files and LOOK I get with that combi cannot be made with a DSLR.
The f2.8 wide open RAZORsharp compared to the canon lenses wide open.
The sensor is twice as big so the field of view vs DOF are totally different from both systems.

Some people will say, get the 85mm 1.2 and put it on the canon and you will have the same results, I can say no.
First off I cannot get that much space between my model in a hotelroom.
Second the field of view is radical different, the compression of the scene is different, the DOF is different.
And third and maybe the most important factor I hardly ever shot my Canon glass wide open expecting razorsharp images, they were good (read very good on some lenses) but they were nowhere near as sharp as the MF lenses deliver.

As long as the sensor of a MF system is different from the DSLR there is no comparision possible.
Of course when you have to buy into a system you can now have high resolution DSLR's which equal the MF backs, but only on resolution.

People always use the high ISO as a difference and that is true.
But let me take that another route, did you ever shot your Canon on ISO25 ?
Do you know how important that can be for fashion/model photography ?

For me it's vital.
At the moment the fastest sync for flash is 1/125 (with the new leaf lenses for the mamiya AFD/III that will be more) and ISO25 gives me the oppertunity to shoot with full power studio strobes outside and still get a very nice shallow DOF.

For every point there is a counter point.
My opinion in short is that both systems are stunning and are really delivering for their market, however I did not choose MF for the MP's, I choose it for the DOF, lower ISO's and Dynamic range.

If Canon releases a 1DsIII with 12 stops dynamic range, REAL ISO25 and 22 MP's I will probarbly be in doubt in which to invest if I would have to start over again.
At that moment there is only one difference and that is sensor size.
And to be honest I even than think I would invest the money into a MF system.

I have to add that you would probarbly never (although I never say never) see me invest in a back with a crop factor smaller than my leaf aptus22 and when there is a full size MF back I will probarbly invest and buy that one when it's in my price range.

At the moment however it's like comparing a xxD with 22MP's with a 1DsIII with 22MP the sensor is different so the LOOK and FEEL of the pictures are different.
Everyone should have experienced that in the past when stepping up from a crop camera to a FF camera.
With MF systems the difference is even bigger (when using a appropriate back of course)
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10288
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #52 on: April 13, 2008, 12:47:52 pm »

Quote
Some people will say, get the 85mm 1.2 and put it on the canon and you will have the same results, I can say no.
First off I cannot get that much space between my model in a hotelroom.
Second the field of view is radical different, the compression of the scene is different, the DOF is different.
And third and maybe the most important factor I hardly ever shot my Canon glass wide open expecting razorsharp images, they were good (read very good on some lenses) but they were nowhere near as sharp as the MF lenses deliver.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189231\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can't understand this, Frank. The relationship between focal length, crop factor, format size and F stop, is very clear. Some people may argue about subtle differences in the way things pan out in practice, but generally you can get a pretty close equivalence by making the appropriate adjustments.

Lens quality is another matter. Lens quality has always been a big issue in Photography.
Logged

marcmccalmont

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1780
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #53 on: April 13, 2008, 02:28:36 pm »

Quote
Marc

Pity that the pictures weren't the same scene and same time but even from you post might I dare suggest that the dark shadows on the 5D image might well have had an awful lot more detail if shot with the P45. Thats the big bonus of dFM, it doesn't give simply throw in the towel as soon as it sees a shadow, or should that be, doesn't see a shadow?

Justin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189149\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes the most noticeable differences I have seen are in the shadows and a smoothness the added resolution makes. Never the less I would still like to see a comparison of SOTA DSLR vs MFDB, is the margin between them decreasing, constant or increasing?
Marc
Logged
Marc McCalmont

Jack Flesher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2592
    • www.getdpi.com
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #54 on: April 13, 2008, 02:36:25 pm »

I have avoided this thread for three days because of the "train wreck" direction it was headed, but now it seems folks have calmed down to the point where some meaningful information may get ultimately shared.  

I have shot MF digital for a while, but have never owned any of the HR digital backs, so my comments are relegated to my most current cameras to compare, the Mamiya ZD and 1Ds3.  

Not wanting to repeat much of what has already been said, here are a few of my own observations:

First is re the MF "look":  Yes, the 80 f2.8 lens on MF has a totally different look than an 85/1.2 on FF.  Not even the same ballpark; the 80 on biggest MF is about an effective 55 FoV, yet the f2.8 aperture renders more like f1.4 in FF terms.  Total DoF may be deeper on MF, but it clearly falls off to a smooth OOF rendering faster. And as pointed out, the MF 80's wide open are extremely sharp compared to most FF 50's at f1.4.  IMO it is a pointless exercise to get into cropped MF frame with an 80/2.8 compared to FF with 85 -- anybody with a MF camera is going to mount a 140/150 (~ a 95 - 105), not crop the 80.  If you compare a 140/150 f3.5 wide open to an 85/1.2 wide open at comparable FoV, the 85/1.2 will show shallower DoF at the PoF, but the overall look of the two images is surprisingly similar.  Sidebar: I shoot with a Hassy 110 f2 lens on my Mamiya via an adapter which is about equivalent to a 75 on FF.  Compared to the Canon 85/1.2 wide open, the Hassy 110 is significantly sharper at the PoF with DoF falling off *much* faster with the 110...  

Noise: Go to 200 on my ZD back and you will see what looks like a lot of noise in the shadows, yet when printed to the same final size as an equivalent 1Ds3 at 200, the MF print is notably smoother.

MF has better tonal range and better color.

FF has higher ISO options, is more portable, faster frame rates, faster image reviews, better AF, better AE and better AWB. It also has broader selection of focal lengths both wider and longer, more zooms and more  special-purpose lenses.  

Weight and overall handling ease of a body with a prime are essentially a wash if compared to a pro-level FF camera like the 1Ds3.  Obviously mid-level FF cameras like the 5D are much lighter in weight.

Other points of consideration: In MF, you have either focal-plane shutter bodies or leaf-shutter lens bodies. A body with a focal plane shutter can generally be adapted to use other manufacturers lenses. For example, I can mount and shoot with older Mamiya 645 manual lenses, Hasselblad F or CF lenses, several older generation 6x7 system lenses and even large format lenses if attached to a bellows.  I am limited to a 1/125th flash sync speed with this system, a disadvantage in studio applications.  On leaf-shutter lenses, you are generally limited to the lenses specifically designed for the camera body, but can gain flash synch speeds up to 1/800th second. Horses for courses...

Cheers,
« Last Edit: April 13, 2008, 02:38:35 pm by Jack Flesher »
Logged
Jack
[url=http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #55 on: April 13, 2008, 03:28:33 pm »

deleted
« Last Edit: April 13, 2008, 03:31:55 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10288
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #56 on: April 13, 2008, 10:11:27 pm »

I would think one could get a pretty good idea of the sort image quality difference between FF 35mm and DBs by comparing a Canon 40D (or the new 450D) with the Canon 5D, at base ISO.

Both cameras have a similar pixel count but the 40D is a smaller format with a smaller pixel pitch. The difference in format size, between the 40D and 5D, is only slightly greater than the difference in format size between a 1Ds3 and Mamiya ZD when the FF 35mm is cropped to the 4:3 format of the ZD. The 40D has a crop faxtor of 1.6 in relation to FF 35mm and FF 35mm has a crop factor of 1.5 in relation to the ZD.

Most photographers who use DBs seem to prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio. I don't think I've seen any comparisons between a 1Ds3 and P21 (or ZD) where the long side of the frames have been matched with respect to FoV, which would give the 35mm format a 1.33 crop factor in relation to the ZD.

When the heights of the frames are matched, the 1Ds3 becomes effectively an 18.7mp camera and the 1Ds2 a 14.8mp camera.

I don't own a Canon 85/1.2, but I do have the 50/1.4, the TSE 90/2.8, a 40D and a 5D body.

With a slight adjustment of shooting distance, I should be able to get a fairly close match using the 50/1.4 at full aperture with the 40D, and the TSE 90/2.8 at full aperture with the 5D. The differences in image quality between two such shots should be comparable to the differences that many MFDB users experience when they use FF 35mm with an 50/1.4 lens at f1.4 instead of a P21 with 80mm lens at f2.8.  

Agreed?
Logged

thsinar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2066
    • http://www.sinarcameras.com
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #57 on: April 13, 2008, 10:37:41 pm »

Ray,

if you really want to compare FF 35mm with a DMFB then do compare it by taking such a camera and such a back. Period. You won't compare the same type of sensors in play with your test.

Thierry

Quote
I would think one could get a pretty good idea of the sort image quality difference between FF 35mm and DBs by comparing a Canon 40D (or the new 450D) with the Canon 5D, at base ISO.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189330\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com

bryanyc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 98
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #58 on: April 14, 2008, 12:16:14 am »

Well, I first want to say that I have gathered some valuable information from this thread and so thank you to the folks who have spent the time and posted a thorough rundown of their talking points between the two systems in question.  It is really invaluable information coming form those who have used both systems extensively.  So thanks again, I appreciate it.
Logged

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
MF vs 1Ds3
« Reply #59 on: April 14, 2008, 12:19:11 am »

I applaud John Black for his PebblePlace website, because it has better information than anything this dreadful forum will ever contain.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16   Go Up