July 24, 2014, 02:29:33 AM

Author Topic: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason  (Read 11020 times)

Hannes

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2013, 05:20:27 PM »
I am beginning to wonder if people aren't just preferring the look of the old 12-bit files more in general compared to the 14-bit ones they have now. Those files are a bit more contrasty natively it seems.

My old 350D did produce great photos and the 400D I have sitting on my desk creates gorgeous shots. I even don't mind the ISO 1600 shots, they remind me a lot about 400 ISO film.

I also know what you mean with the 1D files being very nice to work with. I recently picked up a used 1D III for similar money to a new canon 700D. It is certainly a lot more camera, the files look wonderful and the 10fps makes you giggle every time you use it. I wouldn't mind if it had a few more megapixels and a little bit better high iso noise performance but on the whole I'm very happy with the purchase. It was basically half the price of a used 5D II and about a third more than a 5Dc

canon rumors FORUM

Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2013, 05:20:27 PM »

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2057
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #46 on: October 21, 2013, 07:53:16 PM »
Both the 1D MkIII and the 1Ds MkIII both have 14 bit output in 16 bit files.
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

memoriaphoto

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #47 on: October 24, 2013, 10:43:16 AM »
For me it's not about the 12 vs 14 bit. It's just the old rendering of Canon sensors from the Digic II/III era. They must have used significantlly different color filters. I've read somewhere by a swedish sensor expert that Canon changed their RGB layout in the Bayer filter starting with the EOS 50D model, in some areas to the better but in daylight - sadly - worse. If this is true or not, I couldn't tell but there's a clear difference, I know that much.

Also, now after editing some 1Ds3 raw files I am absolutely convinced that they appear more pleasing to my eyes but also respond better in post processing.
5D3 (x2) | 1Ds3 | 16-35L | 50L | 85L | 100L Macro | 70-200/2.8 II | the 40 pancake and my beloved Fuji X100 which smokes all my fancy gear any day :-)   www.memoriaphoto.se

RustyTheGeek

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 731
    • View Profile
    • Images I've Shot...
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #48 on: October 25, 2013, 11:35:52 AM »
Yup, you're not imagining the difference.  This topic has been touched on in numerous, often vociferous debates here in the past. It's likely the tighter bandwidth of the CFA on the older sensors.
I don't know how much the in-camera processing differs, as far as generating raw files is concerned, but even using the same PP workflow I prefer "the look" from Canon images from the Digic 3 or older generations.  I sold off most of my newest Canon gear when switching to PentNikon but I retained my favorite Canon croppers; 40D, 450Ds and even 1000Ds.  I still prefer the older 350D in some ways, it also has "that look" that's very similar to the 5DC.  You can also find this difference, to a less extent, even in PnS cameras like the G-series.  G3 is one of my favorite old compacts for IQ.  Combined with the different low-iso noise character, those old cameras produced very pleasing results with minimal tweaks in post.  HI iso is no comparison, modern wins.

too bad Ankorwatt/Mikael isn't here to have his, "I told you so" moment. ;)

Couldn't agree with you more! Also, funny you should mention the 350D. I recently bought a used 450D for my mother who needed a light DSLR. Took it for a spin before handing it over, just to make sure everything was OK. When I loaded the RAW files in Lightroom I felt like ".yeah....these files...look....REALLY good!" Straight out of cam, normal light, normal ISO range, kit zoom... for a short second I thought to myself. ....man if only my 5D3 could look this good! Plus the other perfomance of course ;D  But still...that was a 250 dollar used camera.

Ditto!  I still have a lot of love for the 30D Digic 3 images I took and also the 40D.  My favorite body that I still occasionally use today is the 5D.  I've never gotten quite as close or connected with the 60D I own.  In fact, I may buy another 40D someday.  I really loved shooting the 30D and 40D.  Great cameras, great images.
Yes, but what would  surapon  say ??  :D

memoriaphoto

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #49 on: October 26, 2013, 04:23:04 PM »
Allright...just got me one! Pulled the trigger on a mint condition 1Ds3 yesterday. So far it really shines! On lower ISO it is indeed better than the 5D3, hands down. Images are clearer and crispier and can handle post production work way better. And colors more balanced and pleasing...absolutely LOVE it.  :D

The only thing I miss from the 5D3 is the AutoISO and silent shutter.... I thought the low-res LCD would be a potential issue, but it really isn't. Good enough...

What was it Obi Wan said? Taking the first step into a larger world? Nerdy reference but true nevertheless...
5D3 (x2) | 1Ds3 | 16-35L | 50L | 85L | 100L Macro | 70-200/2.8 II | the 40 pancake and my beloved Fuji X100 which smokes all my fancy gear any day :-)   www.memoriaphoto.se

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #50 on: October 26, 2013, 06:07:46 PM »
DXOmark measures the Sensitivity metamerism index for the 1DsIII to be 86 vs. 74 for the 5DIII (and 80 for the 5D2), all in daylight. The blue CFA filter is very "clean". I have this weird thought that the DXOmark data may be actually worth something...

Enjoy your new toy!

memoriaphoto

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #51 on: October 26, 2013, 06:26:49 PM »
Yes, I saw that on DXO as well...seems the 1Ds3 is one of the most color accurate cameras out there. Bad score for the 5D3 even though I often prefer its image character compared to the 5D2.

What's really surprising is that the mighty 1Dx scored about the same as the 5D3 (actually even worse). Not sure what that means in reality but I would have thought it'd be at least on par with the 1ds3

Sh*t, I've promised myself not ever EVER to go to DXO mark and look for charts and numbers.

5D3 (x2) | 1Ds3 | 16-35L | 50L | 85L | 100L Macro | 70-200/2.8 II | the 40 pancake and my beloved Fuji X100 which smokes all my fancy gear any day :-)   www.memoriaphoto.se

canon rumors FORUM

Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #51 on: October 26, 2013, 06:26:49 PM »

Aglet

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 904
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #52 on: November 01, 2013, 03:16:40 AM »
I was in a time-wasting mood tonite so looked at over 140 different camera specs on DxOmark and specifically for the metamerism sensitivity ratings.
YUP, 1ds3 and 5d are at 86 and 84 respectively, and these are 2 bodies that are extolled for their image quality.
another good image camera, the 20d, is at 83..  a score it shares with the sx50 compact superzoom and G1x!

Of all the ones I've looked at, there are few bodies on DxoMark that score higher in this metric, 2 are Canons.. and there's a few Sonys. I'm not a Sony fan so not familiar with them but they're included at the bottom.

Would you believe...
coming in at 87 is the....  50D! (my least favorite body because of it's high subjective noise levels)
and, in TOP SPOT, with a SCORING of 88 ...  (Can we have some trumpets please?)
  The lowly consumer body, LIKELY ONE OF THE CHEAPEST CONSUMER DSLRS EVER MADE...
THE 1000D!

Instead of everyone rushing off and wasting a lot more time to see how a bunch of Canon bodies fare (in daylight index), here's what I put together, below.
Generally, it seems that most cameras that score at least in the high 70s can provide pleasing color although we see that even 70 or lower can still provide a decent image, witness the 6D.
Combined with unobtrusive noise characteristics, better CFA results seem to be what's appealing to our visual sense of perceived image quality. (yet there's all those processing factors in there that should be able to make up for a good part of the difference?..)

Canon

88   1000d
87   50d
86   1ds3
84   5d
83   sx50
83   g1x
83   20d
82   1d4
81   400d
81   30d
80   550d pre-prod
80   5d2
80   450d
80   s100
79   s90
79   40d
79   350d
78   7d
78   500d
78   1100d
78   G16
77   70d
77   60d
76   g12
76   g11
75   700d
75   s95
75   m
74   5d3
73   650d
73   600d
73   100d
73   1dx
69   6d

Pentax

85   km
84   mx1
83   k52, k52s
82   k20
82   kx
81   q10
81   K10D
81   k7
78   k500
78   k5
78   k200
77   k50
77   k01
77   kr
76   q
76   k30
75   645D


Nikon

85   d60
85   d40x
85   d40
84   d300
84   d200
84   d70
84   d70s
84   d50
83   d700
83   d2xs
83   d2x
82   d90
81   1j1, 1v1,
81   p7700
80   d3200
80   d3000
79   1j3, 1v2,
79   coolpix p6000
79   d3s
79   d7100
79   d5200
79   d3x
79   d80
78   1s1, 1j2
78   p7800
78   d800
78   d7000
78   d5100
78   d3100
77   d800e
77   d4
77   d610
77   d600
77   d300s
77   d3
77   coolpix p30
76   coolpix a
75   d2h
73   p7100
71   p7000

Olympus

86   e520
84   410
83   pen ep2
83   510
82   e600
82   e420
82   e3
80   pen epm2
80   pen epl5
80   pen ep3
80   e5
79   pen ep5
79   omd em5
79   omd em1
79   pen epl3
79   pen epl2
78   pen epm1
78   pen epl1

Fuji

82   s5pro
81   s3pro
79   xf1
79   f800exr
78   f600exr
77   x100
76   xz1
74   xs1

I'm not a big Sony fan, but most of their stuff is pretty well placed in this area.

Sony

87   a900
86   a77, a230,
85   a99, a58, a450, a35,
84   a37
83   a33
82   a100
79   a200, a290
74   a700

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1678
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #53 on: November 01, 2013, 05:47:14 AM »
^

I think what you have proofed here is that at least one of the DXo measurements is a load of b******s, and is misleading when taken out of context with all the other characteristics of the sensor.

TrabimanUK

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 182
  • In the words of Brian Johnson - "Shoot to thrill!"
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #54 on: November 01, 2013, 06:58:55 AM »
I think what you have proofed here is that at least one of the DXo measurements is a load of b******s, and is misleading when taken out of context with all the other characteristics of the sensor.

Yep.  Using another set of DXO scores for image quality, you get the 6D joint top with the 1Dx with a score of 82. As Mark Twain, who wrote a book or two once said, "lies, damned lies and statistics".

If you like the colours / image quality / look of it then go for the one that you like / suits you.  One person's love for a 5Dc's image is differnt to someone elses love for a 7D or 1Dx's images.

Embrace your differences and maybe the world can be a better place  :) (cue the New Seekers and "I'd like to teach the world to sing")  ;)
Canon 5D, 60D, 40D, SX150-IR/UV, 50 f1.8, 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM 
Sigma 10 F2.8 EX DC DIAGONAL FISHEYE HSM, 24-70 f2.8 IF EX DG HSM

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1678
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #55 on: November 01, 2013, 07:12:00 AM »

 (cue the New Seekers and "I'd like to teach the world to sing")  ;)

 ;D

You're showing your age !

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #56 on: November 01, 2013, 10:00:31 AM »
I was in a time-wasting mood tonite so looked at over 140 different camera specs on DxOmark and specifically for the metamerism sensitivity ratings. [...]
coming in at 87 is the....  50D! (my least favorite body because of it's high subjective noise levels)

The metamerism sensitivity index is just one of the many possible measures of how close the color vision of the sensor is to the human one. It is not affected (much) by noise. DXO have a different way to measure what they call tonal range, which includes both noise and color separation. In that, I believe the 50D does not shine at all.

For good accurate color reproduction, you need CFA filters which project to a color space close to the human one but you also need low base ISO noise, and you need "good separation", which can keep the  values of the color matrix under control (the conversion from Bayer to rgb creates its own noise). Canon's cameras mainly differ by the blue channel separation.

BTW, DXO has ellipse charts or something of that sort for color noise. The 1DsIII performs very well compared to any other Canon, almost as good as a Nikon.  ;)

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2057
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #57 on: November 01, 2013, 10:43:07 AM »
DxO's metamerism test is so irrelevant even they don't use it in their sensor scores. In the opening line explaining their test concept they point out that "Digital processing permits changing color rendering at will".

To put the various scores in perspective. Take a picture with auto white balance, now take another with manual WB 1,500K different, that would score you a 50 on their test. Which is fine if you couldn't adjust WB in post! As for jumping on a camera that shows a difference of a few points, grow up, the differences are miniscule even if they weren't totally adjustable. Most camera phones are tested in the 40's and colour is not forefront in most peoples analysis of their IQ.

Oh, and make some decent camera profiles...........
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #57 on: November 01, 2013, 10:43:07 AM »

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #58 on: November 01, 2013, 11:10:07 AM »
DxO's metamerism test is so irrelevant even they don't use it in their sensor scores. In the opening line explaining their test concept they point out that "Digital processing permits changing color rendering at will".

To put the various scores in perspective. Take a picture with auto white balance, now take another with manual WB 1,500K different, that would score you a 50 on their test. Which is fine if you couldn't adjust WB in post! As for jumping on a camera that shows a difference of a few points, grow up, the differences are miniscule even if they weren't totally adjustable. Most camera phones are tested in the 40's and colour is not forefront in most peoples analysis of their IQ.

Oh, and make some decent camera profiles...........

This is a gross misrepresentation of what the index means. They do say that this index has a small impact of the IQ but no adjusting in color rendering can compensate for loss of information. You left out the most important part of that sentence, and by doing that, you distorted the meaning of that sentence, and its raison d'ĂȘtre. Here is the original:

The sensitivity metamerism index (SMI) is defined in the ISO Standard 17321 and describes the ability of a camera to reproduce accurate colors. Digital processing permits changing color rendering at will, but whether the camera can or cannot exactly and accurately reproduce the scene colors is intrinsic to the sensor response and independent of the raw converter.

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2057
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #59 on: November 01, 2013, 11:12:42 AM »
Show me pictures from two cameras with a difference of 10-15 points where the difference is not adjustable to the RAW file with a decent workflow.

P.S. If it is such a critical aspect of sensor design why don't even they include it in their proprietary sensor scores?
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 11:15:22 AM by privatebydesign »
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: "Downgrading" for a very specific reason
« Reply #59 on: November 01, 2013, 11:12:42 AM »