October 21, 2014, 02:20:28 AM

Author Topic: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?  (Read 21322 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14709
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2014, 10:15:33 PM »
I'm confused, the 5D mark ii, 70D and 6D have AA filters?

You sure? Then why do these people make AA filters for the above models?
http://store.mosaicengineering.com/Video-Aliasing-Filters_c_7.html

I thought only the mark 3 and the 1DX have AA filters.

They make AA filters designed for video that are stronger than the ones in the camera.  Video is more susceptible to moirĂ©, and since the resolution is much lower than stills, the loss of sharpness with the stronger AA filter doesn't matter.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2014, 10:15:33 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3346
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #16 on: January 09, 2014, 10:22:56 PM »
Quote
If you're a fashion or wedding photographer then if you're careless...
What, if maybe the bride might be wearing some lace or a veil, or the groom a pinstripe suit? Because that only happens if you're careless?
Exactly!

The photographer should have know that it was going to happen and should have deliberately shot the photos out-of-focus...... :)
The best camera is the one in your hands

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3086
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2014, 10:39:15 PM »
Quote
If you're a fashion or wedding photographer then if you're careless...
What, if maybe the bride might be wearing some lace or a veil, or the groom a pinstripe suit? Because that only happens if you're careless?
Exactly!

The photographer should have know that it was going to happen and should have deliberately shot the photos out-of-focus...... :)

LOL! It's very easy to review an image on the back of your camera and adjust the shot if necessary to mitigate moire.

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3086
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2014, 10:40:39 PM »
Well if you took photographs of real objects rather than test patterns on walls then you are very likely to not have to deal with it.
Real objects like buildings and striped shirts?

Were they photographs that you made?

Or just URLs that you found of other people's work?

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3086
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2014, 10:44:46 PM »
Well if you took photographs of real objects rather than test patterns on walls then you are very likely to not have to deal with it.
Real objects like buildings and striped shirts?
[/img]

I have to admit I chuckled - the detail that pops moire doesn't require uber fine detail, just detail at the right frequency????

It is highly likely that both images are crops from 100% zooms but we don't know because no background on the images is provided which kind of makes them useless.

Afterall, they could have been made with 2MP cameras - we don't know.

dolina

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1012
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2014, 11:01:20 PM »
I'd be the first in line to get a single digit AA-less SLR from Canon.
Visit my Flickr, Facebook & 500px and see my photos. :)

rs

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 663
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2014, 01:22:07 AM »
Quote
If you're a fashion or wedding photographer then if you're careless...
What, if maybe the bride might be wearing some lace or a veil, or the groom a pinstripe suit? Because that only happens if you're careless?
Exactly!

The photographer should have know that it was going to happen and should have deliberately shot the photos out-of-focus...... :)

LOL! It's very easy to review an image on the back of your camera and adjust the shot if necessary to mitigate moire.
You're sounding like someone that's never shot a wedding :)

The pace is so fast with non-repeatable moments in time that you don't have the opportunity to chimp every shot, and then if needs be, shoot it again after deliberately defocusing the shot to the point that non of the three dimensional object with the pattern is in focus - in other words, not just the eyes slightly out, but all of the happy couples clothes.

For me, personally, I'd rather have a camera which lightly blurs things enough to avoid this issue, leaving me with results which can use the tiniest amount of sharpening to produce images with detail beyond the clients expectations. And focus can be put exactly where the photographer intended.

Yes, you can get slightly more detail without an AA filter, but for many forms of photography the minor advantage is nothing compared to the major disadvantage. Also, some here have argued that if the number of MP are increased to the point where the sensor out resolves most lenses, you can get away without it. My question is, in that case, why do you need no AA filter? If the output is already optically blurred at a pixel level by the lens, no lack of AA filter will sharpen it back up. And then what happens if you buy a new yet-to-be-released super sharp lens in the future and it does out resolve the sensor at certain apertures? Moire, and you being forced to defocus some shots. So why not just keep the AA filter?

Landscape, fair enough - as long as your landscape shots always only contain non repeating patterns. And you never shoot anything with repeating patterns.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 04:01:13 AM by rs »
5D II | 24-70 II | 70-200 II | 100L | 40 | Sigma 50/1.4 | 40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 580 EX II | 1.4x TC II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2014, 01:22:07 AM »

Hesbehindyou

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Filter redundant due to in-camera processing
« Reply #22 on: January 10, 2014, 05:40:13 AM »
This would tend to suggest that the reason for it being there in the first place (combating moire due to hamming) is not nearly as prevalent or significant as once thought.

No. It suggests that Nikon are removing the moire using in-camera processing.

"the design decision [to remove the AA filter] was made possible by the improved image processsing provided by the new EXPEED 4 image processing circuit."

Read more: Nikon D3300 review: first look | PC Pro blog http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2014/01/07/nikon-d3300-review-first-look/#ixzz2pzUHHSq7

Quote
Question now has to be, when will Canon stop including it in their designs?

As soon as they can get a chip that removes it effectively without (m)any downsides - removing the filter gives them a free boost in IQ tests.

rs

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 663
    • View Profile
Re: Filter redundant due to in-camera processing
« Reply #23 on: January 10, 2014, 06:14:48 AM »
This would tend to suggest that the reason for it being there in the first place (combating moire due to hamming) is not nearly as prevalent or significant as once thought.

No. It suggests that Nikon are removing the moire using in-camera processing.

"the design decision [to remove the AA filter] was made possible by the improved image processsing provided by the new EXPEED 4 image processing circuit."

Read more: Nikon D3300 review: first look | PC Pro blog http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2014/01/07/nikon-d3300-review-first-look/#ixzz2pzUHHSq7

Quote
Question now has to be, when will Canon stop including it in their designs?

As soon as they can get a chip that removes it effectively without (m)any downsides - removing the filter gives them a free boost in IQ tests.

I don't buy that. Many things can be corrected in post, and moire isn't one of them. pcpro.co.uk aren't renowned for their photographic expertise. In this case I get the impression they just read a couple of marketing gimmicks and wrote it as fact.
5D II | 24-70 II | 70-200 II | 100L | 40 | Sigma 50/1.4 | 40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 580 EX II | 1.4x TC II

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3086
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #24 on: January 10, 2014, 08:10:00 AM »
...
You're sounding like someone that's never shot a wedding :)

Never as the official photographer anyway :)

Quote
The pace is so fast with non-repeatable moments in time that you don't have the opportunity to chimp every shot, and then if needs be, shoot it again after deliberately defocusing the shot to the point that non of the three dimensional object with the pattern is in focus - in other words, not just the eyes slightly out, but all of the happy couples clothes.

You don't mitigate moire through defocusing.

Quote
Yes, you can get slightly more detail without an AA filter, but for many forms of photography the minor advantage is nothing compared to the major disadvantage. Also, some here have argued that if the number of MP are increased to the point where the sensor out resolves most lenses, you can get away without it. My question is, in that case, why do you need no AA filter? If the output is already optically blurred at a pixel level by the lens, no lack of AA filter will sharpen it back up. And then what happens if you buy a new yet-to-be-released super sharp lens in the future and it does out resolve the sensor at certain apertures? Moire, and you being forced to defocus some shots. So why not just keep the AA filter?

Landscape, fair enough - as long as your landscape shots always only contain non repeating patterns. And you never shoot anything with repeating patterns.

Moire as an issue is over stated, especially for landscape shots. The way you say it, you make it sound like repeating patterns are common. They're not.

It could, however, be a problem for cat photographers :-D

This would tend to suggest that the reason for it being there in the first place (combating moire due to hamming) is not nearly as prevalent or significant as once thought.

No. It suggests that Nikon are removing the moire using in-camera processing.

"the design decision [to remove the AA filter] was made possible by the improved image processsing provided by the new EXPEED 4 image processing circuit."

Read more: Nikon D3300 review: first look | PC Pro blog http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2014/01/07/nikon-d3300-review-first-look/#ixzz2pzUHHSq7

Quote
Question now has to be, when will Canon stop including it in their designs?

As soon as they can get a chip that removes it effectively without (m)any downsides - removing the filter gives them a free boost in IQ tests.

And in-camera moire removal is just for JPEGs.

I don't buy that. Many things can be corrected in post, and moire isn't one of them. pcpro.co.uk aren't renowned for their photographic expertise. In this case I get the impression they just read a couple of marketing gimmicks and wrote it as fact.

So you would be saying that Adobe's moire correction brush cannot work, right?

MLfan3

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 119
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #25 on: January 10, 2014, 12:23:12 PM »
we still need the AA filter for video or some fashion or portrait works.

I've been shooting a couple of  D800Es, an A7R, a couple of  6Ds and an old 5D2 , and I know why Nikon did not go completely AA-less design with the D800E but decided to design special filter to eliminate the AA effect.

The A7R is indeed a bit (a tiny bit) sharper than the D800E at ISO50 -100 , but after that the D800E is actually sharper.

And , the A7R produces really annoyingly a lot of  luminance moire that I have never seen or able to  replicate with any of my other cameras.

so AA-less is only good for landscapers or nature shooters , it is really not good for any type of images including some artificial patterns.

and in case of the 24.3 mp FF sensor Nikon or Sony does not want to risk it with AA-less design , the RX-1R was a special exception designed  for forum chart  measurebators like some of us here(including myself).
personally, I could not resit trying it out my self for my kind of shooting and testing it out in real life and in my own lab (more like studio). but in real life, I never liked the RX1R due to its extreme moire, lack of proper AF , poor battery life and boring 35mm FOV, and I sold it just after a few hundred test shots I made with it.

the RX-1R was a great  landscape camera if you need only 35mm boring FOV, but it did not work for me , I need proper EVF , proper AF and at least 25mm and 85mm FOV at which I shoot most.

anyway, the only real reason why manufactures go AA-less is that they want to save the cost of designing and developing actually good AA-filters , after all , the AA-filters (especially good ones used in the 1DX, the D4,the D800 ,or A99v,etc) are really expensive.



 


Normalnorm

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #26 on: January 10, 2014, 12:51:25 PM »
Canon will probably offer a high MP camera without an AA as that is what the market is clamoring for. However it has most likely noticed that the world has moved a lot since the 1Dx and a mirrorless, high MP body with performance exceeding that of the current cameras (with and without mirrors) will be necessary to get the attention of those conferring uber-camera status.

9VIII

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 653
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #27 on: January 10, 2014, 02:06:33 PM »
Yes, you can get slightly more detail without an AA filter, but for many forms of photography the minor advantage is nothing compared to the major disadvantage. Also, some here have argued that if the number of MP are increased to the point where the sensor out resolves most lenses, you can get away without it. My question is, in that case, why do you need no AA filter? If the output is already optically blurred at a pixel level by the lens, no lack of AA filter will sharpen it back up. And then what happens if you buy a new yet-to-be-released super sharp lens in the future and it does out resolve the sensor at certain apertures? Moire, and you being forced to defocus some shots. So why not just keep the AA filter?

If we had 32MP APS-C sensors (83MP FF), I would just be jumping for joy if a lens came out that out-resolved it. Really, I doubt any lens will ever come out that significantly out-resolves current lenses at their best (usually macro lenses at f5.6). If we pick something good enough for those it shouldn't be a problem.
-100% RAW-

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #27 on: January 10, 2014, 02:06:33 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3346
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #28 on: January 10, 2014, 02:50:25 PM »
Quote
If you're a fashion or wedding photographer then if you're careless...
What, if maybe the bride might be wearing some lace or a veil, or the groom a pinstripe suit? Because that only happens if you're careless?
Exactly!

The photographer should have know that it was going to happen and should have deliberately shot the photos out-of-focus...... :)

LOL! It's very easy to review an image on the back of your camera and adjust the shot if necessary to mitigate moire.
You're sounding like someone that's never shot a wedding :)

The pace is so fast with non-repeatable moments in time that you don't have the opportunity to chimp every shot, and then if needs be, shoot it again after deliberately defocusing the shot to the point that non of the three dimensional object with the pattern is in focus - in other words, not just the eyes slightly out, but all of the happy couples clothes.
I can't speak for Dilbert, but I was being sarcastic. In the heat of the action you don't have time to look at each picture on a screen, a screen that is so tiny that it is doubtful that you would be able to see moire on it...

And yes, you can eliminate moire by de-focusing... the problem is that you ruin the image by doing so.
The best camera is the one in your hands

9VIII

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 653
    • View Profile
Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2014, 05:36:10 PM »
Quote
If you're a fashion or wedding photographer then if you're careless...
What, if maybe the bride might be wearing some lace or a veil, or the groom a pinstripe suit? Because that only happens if you're careless?
Exactly!

The photographer should have know that it was going to happen and should have deliberately shot the photos out-of-focus...... :)

LOL! It's very easy to review an image on the back of your camera and adjust the shot if necessary to mitigate moire.
You're sounding like someone that's never shot a wedding :)

The pace is so fast with non-repeatable moments in time that you don't have the opportunity to chimp every shot, and then if needs be, shoot it again after deliberately defocusing the shot to the point that non of the three dimensional object with the pattern is in focus - in other words, not just the eyes slightly out, but all of the happy couples clothes.
I can't speak for Dilbert, but I was being sarcastic. In the heat of the action you don't have time to look at each picture on a screen, a screen that is so tiny that it is doubtful that you would be able to see moire on it...

And yes, you can eliminate moire by de-focusing... the problem is that you ruin the image by doing so.

It's kind of funny, when I got my T3 I forgot to set focus on the first shot that I took, and compared to the SD780IS that I had been using it looked great.
It still makes me cringe to think of all the time I wasted with that thing (mostly fighting the horrible AF system, and there was no manual focus option).
-100% RAW-

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Will Canon ditch the AA Filter?
« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2014, 05:36:10 PM »