November 24, 2014, 04:52:56 PM

Author Topic: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files  (Read 41963 times)

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2765
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #15 on: May 21, 2013, 07:50:10 AM »
That doesn't answer the question and is patently false when you use my just as valid comparison, which is why I did it.

It seems nobody knows what component or process is used in 1 series cameras than enable more severe adjustments to a RAW file than a 5 series cameras RAW file.
Never look down on anybody, unless you are helping them up.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #15 on: May 21, 2013, 07:50:10 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • **********
  • Posts: 14939
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2013, 08:00:44 AM »
I'm sure someone knows, just no one on these forums.  ;)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

East Wind Photography

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 773
  • EWP
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2013, 08:28:48 AM »
No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

Don't patronize people who have far more experience than you.  I have been a pro photographer for over 30 years.  10 of them I worked on image intensification systems 1st through 3rd generation.  The issue IS in fact the amplification of the signal when there are far few photons to discern the signal from the noise.  It's quite obvious that your little brain cannot grasp the concept of photons across a surface area.  I suppose you have as many brain cells as fit in a singe pixel.  To me you are just noise.

I  am quite done with this.

That doesn't answer the question and is patently false when you use my just as valid comparison, which is why I did it.

It seems nobody knows what component or process is used in 1 series cameras than enable more severe adjustments to a RAW file than a 5 series cameras RAW file.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • **********
  • Posts: 14939
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2013, 08:45:34 AM »
No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

If that's the whole story, the 12 MP original 5D would have the most 'stretchable' RAW files. Does it?  The 20D would have the same latitude as the 5DII, since the pixel density is the same. Does it?
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1535
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2013, 09:11:24 AM »
Quote
one must not choose which camera based solely on the RAW performance

Why on earth not? If outright IQ is a major consideration RAW performance is the benchmark. Any lens can be made to work on pretty much any camera, but we can't swap sensors.

But I'd love to know the actual real reason.

You underestimate Canon's desire to cripple lessor bodies to protect higher margin products... After how ML unearthed the RAW video performance from the 5d3 that Canon crippled via firmware... this belief has only gained strength. I have no evidence for this specific case, but so seems to be the general trend. Canon will not let you have the best of breed by paying half price.

While I can understand the desire to increase margin rates, they should not be done at the expense of absolute margin numbers. Meaning, what made the 5d2 such a huge success? It was a value proposition. It gave a lot more for the price point than other products (including Canon's) provided on a per dollar basis. And while Canon can think the 5d2 stole some of 1Ds3's sales, why are they ignoring the massive cash stream that the 5d2 generated? The 5D2 did a heck of a lot more to win people over to Canon than the 1Ds3 ever did... in the long term, the halo related benefits continue to give Canon additional revenue despite the 5D2 not being sold anymore...  I digress.

Coming back to the topic, my vote goes to coding magic of the RAW files...
« Last Edit: May 21, 2013, 09:15:14 AM by K-amps »
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

sanj

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1630
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #20 on: May 21, 2013, 09:32:31 AM »
I have had both cameras for a bit now and have collected lots of RAW from both cameras and as I get time I process them and put them in correct folders.

I NEVER COME TO KNOW WHICH CAMERA TOOK WHICH PHOTO unless I check metadata.

My opinion: There is no difference in IQ. I may be wrong, but I would not pick either camera just for IQ. While shooting, it is a different story altogether.

Would love for someone to post photos and educate me. Not challenging, I want to learn.

Meh

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 701
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2013, 09:47:51 AM »
No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

Don't patronize people who have far more experience than you.  I have been a pro photographer for over 30 years.  10 of them I worked on image intensification systems 1st through 3rd generation.  The issue IS in fact the amplification of the signal when there are far few photons to discern the signal from the noise.  It's quite obvious that your little brain cannot grasp the concept of photons across a surface area.  I suppose you have as many brain cells as fit in a singe pixel.  To me you are just noise.

I  am quite done with this.


You can get help for your anger issues.  There are experienced therapists waiting.  Some even have over 30 years of experience.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2013, 09:47:51 AM »

East Wind Photography

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 773
  • EWP
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #22 on: May 21, 2013, 09:48:29 AM »
You missed the point.  It's in the amplification process.  If the older body (or cheaper body) does not have a good enough amplifier to distinguish signal from noise then your resultant image will be mush.  Older sensor tech also is not a sensitive to photons as newer sensors.

But the OP was comparing 1DX and 5DIII raw and they are totally different sensors requiring completely different backend support.  No doubt that Canon uses higher end support components on the higher end cameras.  The reason is the same.  Failure of the amplifier to pull photons from the background noise.

No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

If that's the whole story, the 12 MP original 5D would have the most 'stretchable' RAW files. Does it?  The 20D would have the same latitude as the 5DII, since the pixel density is the same. Does it?

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1535
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #23 on: May 21, 2013, 09:54:39 AM »
You missed the point.  It's in the amplification process.  If the older body (or cheaper body) does not have a good enough amplifier to distinguish signal from noise then your resultant image will be mush.  Older sensor tech also is not a sensitive to photons as newer sensors.

But the OP was comparing 1DX and 5DIII raw and they are totally different sensors requiring completely different backend support.  No doubt that Canon uses higher end support components on the higher end cameras.  The reason is the same.  Failure of the amplifier to pull photons from the background noise.

No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

If that's the whole story, the 12 MP original 5D would have the most 'stretchable' RAW files. Does it?  The 20D would have the same latitude as the 5DII, since the pixel density is the same. Does it?

Unless someone can show me a photo of the DAC or op-amp used to amplify the signal is different in the 5d3 vs 1dx, I am not buying the different amp theory... but I can understand larger pixels will have less noise to begin with, but to me that is a function of ISO at the end of the day. If Both bodies shoot at lets say 160 ISO (fix ISO and vary shutter speed only) for both bodies, I suspect the noise levels will be similar in the RAW files... will they not?
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2765
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #24 on: May 21, 2013, 09:56:01 AM »
No it's not false and it precisely answers your question.  High pixel density captures less photons per pixel.

Don't patronize people who have far more experience than you.  I have been a pro photographer for over 30 years.  10 of them I worked on image intensification systems 1st through 3rd generation.  The issue IS in fact the amplification of the signal when there are far few photons to discern the signal from the noise.  It's quite obvious that your little brain cannot grasp the concept of photons across a surface area.  I suppose you have as many brain cells as fit in a singe pixel.  To me you are just noise.

I  am quite done with this.

That doesn't answer the question and is patently false when you use my just as valid comparison, which is why I did it.

It seems nobody knows what component or process is used in 1 series cameras than enable more severe adjustments to a RAW file than a 5 series cameras RAW file.

I believe, sir, you are the one taking a patronising tone "To me you are just noise" indeed! Experience, how would you know what experience I have?ยน As Neuro quite rightly points out your over simplification, is so oversimplified and patently false, it is of no value, and is certainly not the answer.

But you are not reading the words I write. Compare a same density and generation, heck it is the same sensor (effectively), 1Ds MkIII and a 5D MkII RAW file (which completely nullifies your suggestion about density and amplification) and you will see the difference. My "little brain" is interested in what, exactly, makes that difference. I am not surprised there is a difference, and I am certainly not underestimating built in obsolescence or model differentiation, but there are some members here with very in depth knowledge and interest in these things and the hope was one of them might have read and understood a white paper or patent or some such technical document that would actually answer, at least in part, the specific question.

You don't have the answer, by your reply I'd suggest you didn't even understand the question. I don't know the answer either, again as Neuro suggests, I suspect nobody here does.

Note: 1. For the record I got my first paid photography work in 1978 and shot my first wedding as primary (only) shooter in 1980. For whatever that is worth.............
Never look down on anybody, unless you are helping them up.

Meh

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 701
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #25 on: May 21, 2013, 10:41:00 AM »
Failure of the amplifier to pull photons from the background noise.

Please explain what you mean by this statement.

Northstar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #26 on: May 21, 2013, 11:01:16 AM »
I have had both cameras for a bit now and have collected lots of RAW from both cameras and as I get time I process them and put them in correct folders.

I NEVER COME TO KNOW WHICH CAMERA TOOK WHICH PHOTO unless I check metadata.

My opinion: There is no difference in IQ. I may be wrong, but I would not pick either camera just for IQ. While shooting, it is a different story altogether.

Would love for someone to post photos and educate me. Not challenging, I want to learn.


i think you're correct sanj....i would say there is no discernible difference between the two in good light with nothing moving..imo.

but i think bdun was referring to higher iso shots....and I would agree with him, the 1dx is slightly better when working a raw image in post at higher iso.....imo.

this past winter i shot a lot of hockey, and spent considerable time trying to "work" the dark areas under hockey helmets so that i could see more and better face detail...the 1dx was slightly better than 5d3 for this at iso 1600 and up
Sport Shooter

1dX and 5d3... 24-70 2.8ii, 70-200 2.8ii, 1.4xiii and 2xiii, 85, 40mm, 300 2.8L IS....430ex

pwnagepeter

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2013, 11:13:41 AM »
For those interested, here is from someone who reverse engineered the CR2 raw's:

From a data container perspective there's a lot to learn.

Haven't had the time to go through everything to answer OP's question whether there really is more raw data (read: more POWER ;-)) in the 1Dx raws or not.

Please enjoy the read:
http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/
« Last Edit: May 21, 2013, 11:17:52 AM by pwnagepeter »
5D Mark III, 7D, Sigma 8-16, 24 1.4L II, 24-70 2.8L II, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 100 2.8L IS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2013, 11:13:41 AM »

East Wind Photography

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 773
  • EWP
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2013, 11:18:01 AM »
Certainly, let me use an analogy which might help.  Lets say you are recording a violinist onto a tape recorder using a high quality tape.  When the violinist plays softly you have to amplify the signal to increase the volume.  As you do so you also increase the noise from the tape.  Maybe the violinist is playing so soft that their sound level falls to the point where it's difficult to tell if it's a violin or tape hiss (noise).  Depending on which tape you use (high quality or cheap quality) and what equipment you are using (radio shack tape deck or Yamaha digital tape deck)  you will have more or less noise when recording that violinist at the same recording level.

This also holds true for image sensors.  When the brightness is low such as in a shadow or low light situation the photon levels are so low that they are mixed with noise.  Depending on the sensor and supporting backend electronics there may be more or less noise.  Amplification, same as with that tape deck, amplifies not only the photons but also the noise level.  Higher quality components (better sensor, larger pixels, better amplifiers) can all contribute to less noise compared to the signal and more DR in the shadows.

You absolutely cannot compare sensor IQ without also considering the supporting electronics used in processing the signal.  Even if the cameras use the exact same sensor, different electronics on the back end will affect the IQ.  There are a lot of different points to consider.  What causes IQ differences in 5D3 and 1DX may be different in other models depending on the generation of support electronics also used.

Remember also that the image as it hits the sensor is still analog.  It's not converted to digital until after any amplification has already occurred.

Failure of the amplifier to pull photons from the background noise.

Please explain what you mean by this statement.

polarhannes

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 91
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2013, 11:29:33 AM »
Thank you for sharing this information - quite interesting!

For those interested, here is from someone who reverse engineered the CR2 raw's:

From a data container perspective there's a lot to learn.

Haven't had the time to go through everything to answer OP's question whether there really is more raw data (read: more POWER ;-)) in the 1Dx raws or not.

Please enjoy the read:
http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/
"The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera." - Dorothea Lange

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2013, 11:29:33 AM »