Topic: Canon 1DsMKIII let down? (Read 30889 times)

Christopher · « **Reply #20 on:** April 24, 2008, 06:30:02 pm »

deleted

Ken R · « **Reply #21 on:** April 24, 2008, 07:11:28 pm »

U know, Ive been using the 5D for a few years with great results so with some trepidation I got the 1Ds mk3 because for some jobs I needed larger files. I wasnt expecting a huge improvement in Image Quality. But man, was I pleasantly surprised.

The Image quality out of my 1Ds mark III is just awesome. Even when used handheld, out on the street, high iso, with a zoom lens like the 17-40mm f4L , wide open, wow. Detail is just superb but the largest surprise, was the color, WOW. Whites are just so much better and color depth is just great without having to overly increase saturation. I do a lot of product (tabletop) photography with profoto lights and the first time I used the camera under those controlled conditions the results were just incredible. Not only are the files big, pixel quality was just great.

Regarding the shot posted, at f16 you are getting decreased sharpness due to difraction. f8 is optimum.

David Anderson · « **Reply #22 on:** April 24, 2008, 07:48:07 pm »

Quote

Sorry but you don't know what sharp means. Also look at the results from any medium format camera and you'll understand what a beautiful image is.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191670\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Is it good at F 1.2 ?
Low noise at ISO 1600 ?
How's the bokeh on the 400 2.8 ?
How many frames a second ?
Does it handle some rain ?

I love the DSIII - though agree with the comments that to get the best you need too shoot with some care and the best lenses.

IMHO there is no better way to photograph people.

sojournerphoto · « **Reply #23 on:** April 24, 2008, 08:43:32 pm »

I've just processed about 150 mixed fles through LR - many shot in low and difficult gym light (WB3600 +64). I used the 5D and 1Ds3 and both produced useable images, but the 1Ds3 files are noticeably better and more malleable - to an extent that I was surprised, e.g. iso 1600 +2.5 stops and fill light and curves, and still printable with a bit of NR.

At more usual isos (for me) I find the file quality to be outstanding and have become convinced that it is much better overall than the 5D, which remains excellent, but it has taken me a while to get used to capture sharpening appropriately.

I'm more pleased 2 months in than when I bought it.

Mike

Kika Livno · « **Reply #24 on:** April 24, 2008, 09:17:41 pm »

Will Really Right Stuff L-plate for 1Ds MkII..... f i t 1Ds MkIII ?

Cheers

woof75 · « **Reply #25 on:** April 24, 2008, 10:31:12 pm »

Quote

here's a simple ( please don't critique... just a simple setup ) shot taken just a few hours ago... 1ds3, iso 100, 70-200 f4L @ f13 1/125 around 85mm ( get file info in photoshop to get actual meta )

http://www.1080studio.com/1ds3witz.zip

in the folder you will find a full rez 16 bit tiff and a screen shot of the sharpening settings I use in acr.
I don't see why anyone would have a problem with a good copy of this camera!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191680\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I had a look at your file and it isn't bad but it feels both oversharpened and a little unsharp at the same time. I had to rent a 5d the other day (long story, usually shoot phase one) and it was sharper than the example you posted, maybe if I had to print bigger it would be a different story. I was actually pleasantly suprised by the 5d, it was sharper than my old 1ds mark 2 and the 1ds mark 3 seems to be a slightly softer version of the mark 2.

Josh-H · « **Reply #26 on:** April 24, 2008, 10:37:23 pm »

Quote

Will Really Right Stuff L-plate for 1Ds MkII..... f i t 1Ds MkIII ?
Cheers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191743\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No.

Kika Livno · « **Reply #27 on:** April 24, 2008, 11:12:57 pm »

Quote

No.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191763\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

samuel_js · « **Reply #28 on:** April 25, 2008, 02:45:50 am »

Quote

Yes I really have to say we can only see fantastic photographs in your recent work thread over in the MFDB section ... ;-)

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191694\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Except the nudes of course, the 35mm forum has some wonderful nudes on page 5.

Christopher · « **Reply #29 on:** April 25, 2008, 05:58:03 am »

Quote

Except the nudes of course, the 35mm forum has some wonderful nudes on page 5.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191792\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

no comment on these

Craig Lamson · « **Reply #30 on:** April 25, 2008, 06:58:36 am »

Quote

U know, Ive been using the 5D for a few years with great results so with some trepidation I got the 1Ds mk3 because for some jobs I needed larger files. I wasnt expecting a huge improvement in Image Quality. But man, was I pleasantly surprised.

(snip)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have a 1DsMKI, had a 1DsMKII and have a 5d. I recently added the 1dsMKIII.

Just a few days ago I was asked by an agency for some samples of my files and in the process of making them I processed files from all of the cameras. The MKIII is still new but man those files simply trounce the files from the other cameras...hands down. I have loved using all of these cameras, but for my money the MKIII is by far the best of the bunch.

BUT! and its a big but...my MKIII failed in less than a month of ownership. Its at Canon right now. Of all of the Canon cameras I have owned this is the first failure.

I had not planned to upgrade to the MKIII. My MKII was still going strong, my clients were quite happy with the files and it printed double page CMYK wonderfully. Sadly the MKII was destroyed and I replaced it with the MKIII. I may yet buy another MKII as a backup or perhaps wait and see what the new 5d is like. If the 5d is 14 bit that will be my choice.

sojournerphoto · « **Reply #31 on:** April 25, 2008, 07:18:59 am »

Quote

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191766\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You need the plate for the 1D Mk 3 - the body is the same. I've got one on mine. and have no problems plugging in the remote release.

Mike

woof75 · « **Reply #32 on:** April 25, 2008, 07:47:52 am »

Quote

I have a 1DsMKI, had a 1DsMKII and have a 5d. I recently added the 1dsMKIII.

Just a few days ago I was asked by an agency for some samples of my files and in the process of making them I processed files from all of the cameras. The MKIII is still new but man those files simply trounce the files from the other cameras...hands down. I have loved using all of these cameras, but for my money the MKIII is by far the best of the bunch.

BUT! and its a big but...my MKIII failed in less than a month of ownership. Its at Canon right now. Of all of the Canon cameras I have owned this is the first failure.

I had not planned to upgrade to the MKIII. My MKII was still going strong, my clients were quite happy with the files and it printed double page CMYK wonderfully. Sadly the MKII was destroyed and I replaced it with the MKIII. I may yet buy another MKII as a backup or perhaps wait and see what the new 5d is like. If the 5d is 14 bit that will be my choice.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191817\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thats interesting, in what way do you prefer the files? What do you think to the sharpness compared to the 1ds mark 2 and the 5d (which I thought seemed sharper than the 1ds mark2)?

witz · « **Reply #33 on:** April 25, 2008, 08:17:38 am »

Quote

I had a look at your file and it isn't bad but it feels both oversharpened and a little unsharp at the same time. I had to rent a 5d the other day (long story, usually shoot phase one) and it was sharper than the example you posted, maybe if I had to print bigger it would be a different story. I was actually pleasantly suprised by the 5d, it was sharper than my old 1ds mark 2 and the 1ds mark 3 seems to be a slightly softer version of the mark 2.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191760\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

your kidding right?

I'd love to see a raw file from your golden 5d.

I've had a few 5d's and they don't compare to the ds3.

woof75 · « **Reply #34 on:** April 25, 2008, 09:57:14 am »

Quote

your kidding right?

I'd love to see a raw file from your golden 5d.

I've had a few 5d's and they don't compare to the ds3.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191830\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No I'm not kidding. The 1ds mark 3 reminds me of my old 1ds mark 2. Here's a quick couple of crops, one from the mark 3 file that was posted and one is a quick crop of the 5d, neither are resized. The 5d file seems to have more clarity. The bigger eye is of course the 1ds mark 3 eye. (the full image is about the same size in both files).
Based on what I've seen so far I really think canon made the AA filter too strong on this new camera.

witz · « **Reply #35 on:** April 25, 2008, 01:57:07 pm »

Quote

No I'm not kidding. The 1ds mark 3 reminds me of my old 1ds mark 2. Here's a quick couple of crops, one from the mark 3 file that was posted and one is a quick crop of the 5d, neither are resized. The 5d file seems to have more clarity. The bigger eye is of course the 1ds mark 3 eye. (the full image is about the same size in both files).
Based on what I've seen so far I really think canon made the AA filter too strong on this new camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191854\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Am I supposed to compare those without seeing the actual amount cropped from?

also.... your sample is just to small to compare! please post a raw file or at least a tiff at full size please.

lovell · « **Reply #36 on:** April 25, 2008, 04:46:48 pm »

I've had the 1D mark II, IIn, 1DS, 1DS Mark II, and 5D bodies.

The ONLY body that betters the 5D in image quality is the 1DS Mark III.

The 5D provides better IQ then the Mark I and Mark II bodies of DS series, both of which were too noisy at ISO 800. Only body build and ergonomics of those better the 5D, but these attributes do nothing for IQ.

I really do not understand why anyone would buy a used 1DS, or 1DS Mark II....great bodies sure, and straight out of camera jpgs very good as well, but that is it.

I think a better body at the expense of image quality, especially if a lessor costing body provides higher IQ shows priorities I personally do not understand.

To be fair, I'm not especially happy with the ergo's of the 5D, nor it's lack of sealing, however the prime directive of a DSLR is IQ, and everything else is 2nd.

woof75 · « **Reply #37 on:** April 25, 2008, 05:07:32 pm »

Quote

Am I supposed to compare those without seeing the actual amount cropped from?

also.... your sample is just to small to compare! please post a raw file or at least a tiff at full size please.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191891\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hey, the full image is about the same crop as the one in the 1ds mark 3 file which is why it's about half the size due to the lower resolution. I can't upload full files as my clients and models etc would be a little miffed.

woof75 · « **Reply #38 on:** April 25, 2008, 05:10:30 pm »

Quote

I've had the 1D mark II, IIn, 1DS, 1DS Mark II, and 5D bodies.

The ONLY body that betters the 5D in image quality is the 1DS Mark III.

The 5D provides better IQ then the Mark I and Mark II bodies of DS series, both of which were too noisy at ISO 800. Only body build and ergonomics of those better the 5D, but these attributes do nothing for IQ.

I really do not understand why anyone would buy a used 1DS, or 1DS Mark II....great bodies sure, and straight out of camera jpgs very good as well, but that is it.

I think a better body at the expense of image quality, especially if a lessor costing body provides higher IQ shows priorities I personally do not understand.

To be fair, I'm not especially happy with the ergo's of the 5D, nor it's lack of sealing, however the prime directive of a DSLR is IQ, and everything else is 2nd.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191918\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thats interesting, I thought the 5d was sharper than my 1ds mark 2. So do you think the 1ds mark 3 is sharper than the 5d? Looking at the 1ds mark 3 files, they seem a little"thicker" for want of a better word maybe than the 1ds mark 2 or 5d files. Do you find this to be the case?

Christopher · « **Reply #39 on:** April 25, 2008, 06:28:52 pm »

Quote

Thats interesting, I thought the 5d was sharper than my 1ds mark 2. So do you think the 1ds mark 3 is sharper than the 5d? Looking at the 1ds mark 3 files, they seem a little"thicker" for want of a better word maybe than the 1ds mark 2 or 5d files. Do you find this to be the case?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191924\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Love your to crops. have to say your 5D rocks

Author Topic: Canon 1DsMKIII let down? (Read 30889 times)

samuel_js