July 31, 2014, 01:04:17 PM

Author Topic: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files  (Read 38531 times)

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #45 on: May 23, 2013, 11:38:57 AM »
My neighbor / cousin-in-law...just last week, bought a 1DX with his newly earned "toy money"...and claims he has now relegated his 5D3 to his wife, with a 50 1.4 attached, to make it easier for her to carry around. 

So I hope to attempt to put the 1DX to the test in low light at some point, hopefully with my 135L mounted.

I must say, holding his 1DX with 70-200 f/2.8 series 1, mounted...and then my 6D with 70-200 f/4 (non-IS), it was quite a lot more weight.  Holding his was kind of like holding three bricks, mine fealt light as a feather.  I would not want to walk around with that weight all day.  I own one lens that is a bit more weight than a 70-200 2.8, but I use it on a monopod.  I've rented superteles, and used them on the monopod also (or a tripod).

I might be seen as stupid for asking this, but it seems like much of the recent discussion in this thread, has degenerated into speaking about the 1DX's dynamic range and s/n ratio, at lower ISO.  And yet, the OP shoots basketball games, etc...in less than ideal light at higher ISO.  So why even discuss the low ISO capability, especially if all the independent tests indicate that higher ISO is where the 1DX really shines, and was obviously meant to be used?

It seems to me, that rather than compare the 1DX to Nikon crop bodies at low ISO, or to the 5D3 at most any ISO...that it should be compared to the Nikon D3s.  I suspect the D3s would give it a serious run for its money, perhaps in the ISO range from 1000 to 25,600.  Of course the file dimensions are only 12 MP from the D3s, but it would still be interesting to compare...because if the D3s really does have lower noise of both types, then the actual or practical resolution from the RAW files might be equal or even superior to the 1DX (at least as ISO goes up, perhaps above ISO 4000 or 5000).

It's interesting that the noise pattern of the 1DX might be larger and more difficult to overcome in post editing, since I've found the same true going from the 5D3's files, to my 6D.  The 6D's noise, especially the luminance noise (or "grain")...is about 1/3 the size of the 5D3's...at least on these particular bodies that I've used.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 11:45:37 AM by CarlTN »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #45 on: May 23, 2013, 11:38:57 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #46 on: May 23, 2013, 11:44:37 AM »
So why even discuss the low ISO capability, especially if all the independent tests indicate that higher ISO is where the 1DX really shines, and was obviously meant to be used?

Why?  Because that's Mikael/ankorwatt's hobby horse that he likes to ride into every thread that he visits.   ::)

But he was absolutely correct in stating,

no , they have not the same sensor, there are different regarding CFA  ,  FWC , QE and read out noise
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #47 on: May 23, 2013, 11:45:11 AM »
My neighbor / cousin-in-law...just last week, bought a 1DX with his newly earned "toy money"...and claims he has now relegated his 5D3 to his wife, with a 50 1.4 attached, to make it easier for her to carry around. 

So I hope to attempt to put the 1DX to the test in low light at some point, hopefully with my 135L mounted.

I must say, holding his 1DX with 70-200 f/2.8 series 1, mounted...and then my 6D with 70-200 f/4 (non-IS), it was quite a lot more weight.  Holding his was kind of like holding three bricks, mine fealt light as a feather.  I would not want to walk around with that weight all day.  I own one lens that is a bit more weight than a 70-200 2.8, but I use it on a monopod.  I've rented superteles, and used them on the monopod also (or a tripod).

I might be seen as stupid for asking this, but it seems like much of the recent discussion in this thread, has degenerated into speaking about the 1DX's dynamic range and s/n ratio, at lower ISO.  And yet, the OP shoots basketball games, etc...in less than ideal light at higher ISO.  So why even discuss the low ISO capability, especially if all the independent tests indicate that higher ISO is where the 1DX really shines, and was obviously meant to be used?

It seems to me, that rather than compare the 1DX to Nikon crop bodies at low ISO, or to the 5D3 at most any ISO...that it should be compared to the Nikon D3s.  I suspect the D3s would give it a serious run for its money, perhaps in the ISO range from 1000 to 25,600.  Of course the file dimensions are only 12 MP from the D3s, but it would still be interesting to compare...because if the D3s really does have lower noise of both types, then the actual or practical resolution from the RAW files might be equal or even superior to the 1DX.

It's interesting that the noise pattern of the 1DX might be larger and more difficult to overcome in post editing, since I've found the same true going from the 5D3's files, to my 6D.  The 6D's noise, especially the luminance noise (or "grain")...is about 1/3 the size of the 5D3's...at least on these particular bodies that I've used.

Interesting.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #48 on: May 23, 2013, 11:48:59 AM »
Haha...ok :).

Wow, you both pounced on my post before I even edited it...I added the stipulation "above 4000 or 5000".

Another thing I noticed on his 1DX, with the speed at 12 fps, I could not distinctly hear or feel it clicking...it just sounded like a continuous "buzz".  I guess I will experiment more with that...whenever he lets me.  (By contrast, the 1D4 that I rented, at 10fps, I could definitely hear distinct clicking...the vibration feel through the body was probably similar).

He likes to shoot everything in "program" mode, but I've suggested he try shutter priority, or manual mode...both with ISO in automatic.

I also wish he had bought a 300mm f/2.8...even a used series 1 would be nice.  He likes shooting birds with his 600 series 1, more than other wildlife, so I doubt he'll ever get a 300.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 11:56:39 AM by CarlTN »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #49 on: May 23, 2013, 11:55:14 AM »
He likes to shoot everything in "program" mode

Isn't that how everyone uses their 1D X?   :o
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #50 on: May 23, 2013, 11:57:07 AM »
He likes to shoot everything in "program" mode

Isn't that how everyone uses their 1D X?   :o

It's not how I would use it!

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #51 on: May 23, 2013, 12:07:17 PM »
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.

EWP

Let me pose the following, it is a question that I have wondering about for a while.

If I take the native signal from the sensor as capture let's it would be a proper exposure at ISO 800.  At ISO 400 the electronics would amplify the signal "half" as much.   At ISO 100 the amplification would be an "eighth.  Let me take the image from ISO 800 and from ISO 100.  I then increase the exposure of the ISO 100 image by 3 stops in PS.

Naively they should give very similar results, but electronic gain gives a better picture.  Why?  Does the electronic amplification provide a more continuous signal?

And to take this one more step further, how does statistics of counting random events which is described by a poison distribution enter into the discussion (or is the number of photons generally so large that signal noise except at very high ISO values does not matter)?

I can do this very experiment today.  RAW's at 1Dx/5D3 one stop underexposed at ISO 400, then at ISO 800, 4 photos.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #51 on: May 23, 2013, 12:07:17 PM »

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #52 on: May 23, 2013, 01:25:16 PM »
Hehe, well this is going to be more difficult than it looks.  At the same everything, again, at -1EV, 0EV, and +1EV (ISO 200, 400, 800) the 1Dx files are darker than the 5D3 files.  The exposure is different.  On my 1Dx I checked and have not done any AE micradjustment, just 0EV base.  Can someone refresh my memory as to why this is, because I've noticed it before this test.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

wockawocka

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
    • Wedding Photography
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #53 on: May 23, 2013, 02:19:08 PM »
Right ladies, lets clear this up.

I own the 1DX, 5D3 and the Hasselblad H4D50 (Which has by far the smallest pixels).

It's all about the sensor and how the information is read from it.

The 5D3 is half the price of the 1DX, the 1DX has the best sensor by default.

Pixel size isn't really that relevant, my H4D50 pixel sizes are half that of the 1DX, yet produce a superior image out of the three of them. And, I can push an ISO 50 file 3-4 stops, with better highlight and shadow recovery that even the 1DX.

It's about the type and quality of the sensor and how the camera reads the information from it. It's not all about pixel size. Fat pixels help, but as an example the D800 can be pushed wayyyyy up in the shadow department yet has tiny pixels. The 7D pixels are the same at the D800 but it's IQ sucks balls.

Maybe the 1DX has gold sensor lines vs copper on the 5D3. Who cares really?

You could try to work out why this is, but frankly don't bother, go out and take some photos. Let the guys in the labs keep designing great sensors for us to take advantage of.

1DX, 5D3 and Hasselblad H Series owner.

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #54 on: May 23, 2013, 02:29:20 PM »
You said, "right ladies, let's clear this up"

But upon reading your post, you have no idea either.  I'm not being disrespectful it's just that you cleared up nothing.  Sorry.   ::)
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #55 on: May 23, 2013, 03:56:28 PM »
You said, "right ladies, let's clear this up"

But upon reading your post, you have no idea either.  I'm not being disrespectful it's just that you cleared up nothing.  Sorry.   ::)

Agree!  And I'm no lady...sometimes barely a gentleman !!
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 04:15:33 PM by CarlTN »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #56 on: May 23, 2013, 04:15:04 PM »

Maybe the 1DX has gold sensor lines vs copper on the 5D3. Who cares really?


I tell ya what, I care...and frankly this proves how little you know about electronics and electricity transfer.  Gold is actually a far inferior conductor of electricity than copper.  The only reason gold is used on electrical contacts, is because it does not degrade much over time as it oxidizes (and it oxidizes very little).  However, gold is very soft and malleable, and there are other materials and compounds that are less costly and/or more durable than gold, that are sometimes used at the electrical contact point (where exposure to oxidation is at its strongest...and also where the two contacts are exposed to pressure and torque as connections are tightened).  Speaker connection terminals on highend audo loudspeakers are known to use rhodium, and all other manner of materials...sometimes plated onto copper, sometimes machined solid.  They all have various sonic signatures, and certainly impart a signature on the electrical signal, however minute the difference might be in practical terms, where the higher current is present in such a signal.

With signals of low current and higher voltage components, such as those occurring within a digital camera, it seems to me that solid gold traces would actually inhibit signal transfer, as compared to copper.

However, silver conducts electricity better than all other materials (including copper and gold), other than hyper-cooled "superconductors".  Also, silver oxide conducts electricity, while copper oxide does not.  Some highend audio companies such as "Audio Note" have used silver cabling with a clear dielectric, so that you can see the silver was intentionally pre-oxidized, and thus appears more of a gold-ish color.  Some audio cable companies do use gold, or else gold appears in the alloy, because they like its sonic signature.

So it seems to me, that if copper is not used, then silver should be used for signal traces within or between silicon substrates...perhaps plated with gold if the environment is exposed to a higher degree of oxidation.  But solid gold only inhibits the flow of electricity compared to copper...and is not much different in its conductivity than aluminum.

wockawocka

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
    • Wedding Photography
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #57 on: May 23, 2013, 05:30:38 PM »
This is the thing. There is nothing really to clear up.

What are you going to do with the information once you have it... become engineers?

The 5D3 and 1DX have different sensors. That's why the Raw files have different qualities. It stands to reason that the more expensive flagship model gets the best stuff and quite rightly has the best IQ.

That's all that we need to know. Different sensors, different results. It's common sense and you don't have to have any tech knowledge to work that out.

If you really must know go on the DWF forum and ask Chuck Westfall why there's a difference.

Copper / Gold was figuratively speaking. But to compare.... the Generation 4 ipod had something called a Wolfson DAC inside it. This was and still is considered the best DAC and therefore led to the best sound quality on the ipod. Ever. It's why I have an old one in my car, when using FLAC files the clarity is amazing. Apple use a different one now and it's not the same.

Canon are not only using different sensors, but different components. Higher quality components to get a cleaner image.
1DX, 5D3 and Hasselblad H Series owner.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #57 on: May 23, 2013, 05:30:38 PM »

vscd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 156
  • 5DC
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #58 on: May 23, 2013, 06:28:49 PM »
This is the thing. There is nothing really to clear up.

What are you going to do with the information once you have it... become engineers?

We become smarter. Asking questions is what it's all about.

Quote
Apple use a different one now and it's not the same.

Apple is gay and the users don't ask questions. We all know.  :-X
5DC, 24-85, 85 1.2L II, 80-200 2.8L, 100 2.8L IS, 14 2.8, 35 1.4, 75-300 IS, 40STM

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #59 on: May 23, 2013, 06:33:01 PM »
This is the thing. There is nothing really to clear up.

What are you going to do with the information once you have it... become engineers?

We become smarter. Asking questions is what it's all about.

Quote
Apple use a different one now and it's not the same.

Apple is gay and the users don't ask questions. We all know.  :-X

But it doesn't matter.  You don't NEED to know.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« Reply #59 on: May 23, 2013, 06:33:01 PM »