Chuck Westfall & the 5D Mark III

[jrista]

The digital lens optimizer does sound great

I have to admit that I didn't even read Chuck's comments about this feature because I do not, nor will I ever, use DPP. Building proprietary features into your own proprietary RAW converter software seems like a waste of resources. Why not work with Adobe to make those features available in ACR and LR? Or release the specs so that Adobe can do it themselves? This seems like it would be a much greater service to Canon's customers.

Having said that, I'm completely ignorant on software development so maybe this isn't even feasible. But regardless, features like this that aren't available to ACR and LR users don't do most people any good.

As far as I understand, Canon does provide their specifications and even source code to the likes of Adobe, and even the community at large. Not long ago people were discussing DPP noise reduction and how it seemed better than Lightrooms. A Canon rep stated that they make their noise reduction algorithms public, and they were unaware of why Lightroom did not make use of them.

I don't think the problem is a lack of openness on Canon's part. It seems more to be a lack of interest on the part of parties like Adobe.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If it is just a matter of doing the math, an increase of 4mm from 15 to 19 should yield a significant 26.7% increase in coverage.

The coverage is a big step up from the 5D2 coverage, pretty impressive (if they were to ever put it into a 7D2 then holy smokes would it have amazing AF coverage of the frame).

 

[awinphoto]

The digital lens optimizer does sound great

I have to admit that I didn't even read Chuck's comments about this feature because I do not, nor will I ever, use DPP. Building proprietary features into your own proprietary RAW converter software seems like a waste of resources. Why not work with Adobe to make those features available in ACR and LR? Or release the specs so that Adobe can do it themselves? This seems like it would be a much greater service to Canon's customers.

Having said that, I'm completely ignorant on software development so maybe this isn't even feasible. But regardless, features like this that aren't available to ACR and LR users don't do most people any good.

As far as I understand, Canon does provide their specifications and even source code to the likes of Adobe, and even the community at large. Not long ago people were discussing DPP noise reduction and how it seemed better than Lightrooms. A Canon rep stated that they make their noise reduction algorithms public, and they were unaware of why Lightroom did not make use of them.

I don't think the problem is a lack of openness on Canon's part. It seems more to be a lack of interest on the part of parties like Adobe.

I will admit i haven't done any recent tests, but my last tests I did in raw NR and overall IQ I did almost 3 years ago vs Adobe Camera Raw vs DPP, DPP was more cumbersome, it wasn't pretty, but in the end, it was a cleaner file (3 years ago) than ACR. I do use ACR because of convenience and and seamless integration with photoshop, but maybe if Canon could develop a 3rd party plug-in for lightroom or photoshop for DPP, then maybe I would be more inclined to use that even more.

 

[3kramd5]

The digital lens optimizer does sound great

I have to admit that I didn't even read Chuck's comments about this feature because I do not, nor will I ever, use DPP. Building proprietary features into your own proprietary RAW converter software seems like a waste of resources. Why not work with Adobe to make those features available in ACR and LR? Or release the specs so that Adobe can do it themselves? This seems like it would be a much greater service to Canon's customers.

Having said that, I'm completely ignorant on software development so maybe this isn't even feasible. But regardless, features like this that aren't available to ACR and LR users don't do most people any good.

I don't like using multiple software packages either, but I could see myself running images through DPP on a case-by-case basis, doing nothing other than DLO, and then pushing into LR. It's a bit off putting that doing so will double file size. Seems... odd.

That said, IIRC, this isn't a 5D3/1Dx feature, but that all cameras through the 30D are supported. Pretty cool if I want to reach back and fix some old frames.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.

I found his response to the question about high ISO performance with RAW files more than a bit unsatisfying:
"These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies."

It sounds like the camera has a great autofocus system and I know that's what most 5D II people wanted, but as a 7D owner hoping for improvements in sensor technology, his comments aren't giving me a lot of confidence.

I literally laughed out loud when I read "These figures are not being disclosed". Really?!? REALY!!!???? He has got to be kidding us. For the life of me I cannot understand why canon would not want to disclose this. It's not like we're not going to find out in a few weeks anyways (I know, double negative). It just makes it seems like Canon his trying to hide something. If they are so proud of their improved jpeg performance, why not improved raw performance. It's the raw performance that the vast majority of 5d3 owners actually care about.

I'm a little baffled.

They are not trying to hide something. Results with RAW are entirely subjective and depend on the kind of post-processing applied, and how much effort you put into post processing. Given that the same RAW data was used to produce the JPEG's in the first place, there is really nothing to prevent a clever and hard working photographer from creating final output that is just as good as the in-camera JPEG. Its just that it could take a LOT of effort, and many photographers will be unwilling to expend the amount of energy necessary. As such, they can't publish any specific numbers, as results will vary from photographer to photographer.

But the results IN the RAW files themselves are the least subjective of all....

Granted I'm not sure Nikon has become any better at all of so and so many stops better due to jpg NR stuff recently either.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If the AF is as good or better than the 1D4 then there wont be many upset people

+1

My reading is that Canon thinks it has better algorithms than the 1D4 had and that the 5D3 can run through it's code faster and more often than the 1D4 can run through it's code and that they think the AF detector in the 5D3 is more precise and sensitive (in the past some of the sensitive ones have actually had more trouble under bright sun though, under glaring sun and white uniforms the old 20D tracked better than the 50D at times IMO, but that was xxD level stuff and hopefully only applies there) and it has better point spread and x-type above f/4, etc. So the only thing lacking is f/8 at first glance. The one place where the 1D4 is better is that the juice it has from it's battery means it gives full current to the super-tele (and perhaps a few other lenses?) AF systems so the lens themselves will be able to spin their AF faster when using the 1D4 compared to when using the 5D3, but the body's tracking algos with be more advanced and running and sampling more often. How that works out in the end, who knows.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.

I realize I'm pi$$ing into the wind on this issue but I am amazed, not just at this particular comment, but at all the negativity directed at Chuck Westfall. Is no one able to see beyond their own perspective to understand his? Chuck works for Canon. It is not his job to be a critic or to disclose proprietary plans or to answer every question that is asked. He is not supposed to be an objective observer who sees all sides. People may be frustrated with his lack of candor on certain performance parameters or Canon's future plans but he is always truthful—and you'll notice that he doesn't deny that issues exist.

To my knowledge, there is not another Chuck Westfall in this industry and we should be thankful that he works for Canon. He is genuinely knowledgeable about the products, how they work, and issues that users have with them. When he says Canon is aware of a situation and is looking into it, you know he is speaking from a position of knowledge. He's accessible to darn near everyone who has a question and if he personally doesn't know the answer he will find someone who does. He is an advocate for us within Canon and that's a very good thing when you're dealing with a company that doesn't always seem to be completely in touch with its customers.

Yeah, to be fair, what else did you expect him to say given his position?

 

[Terry Rogers]

Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?

 

[jrista]

I have to say, I'm not overly impressed with Westfall's interview.

I found his response to the question about high ISO performance with RAW files more than a bit unsatisfying:
"These figures are not being disclosed, but of course they will be lower than the noise reduction achieved with in-camera JPEGs and EOS Movies."

It sounds like the camera has a great autofocus system and I know that's what most 5D II people wanted, but as a 7D owner hoping for improvements in sensor technology, his comments aren't giving me a lot of confidence.

I literally laughed out loud when I read "These figures are not being disclosed". Really?!? REALY!!!???? He has got to be kidding us. For the life of me I cannot understand why canon would not want to disclose this. It's not like we're not going to find out in a few weeks anyways (I know, double negative). It just makes it seems like Canon his trying to hide something. If they are so proud of their improved jpeg performance, why not improved raw performance. It's the raw performance that the vast majority of 5d3 owners actually care about.

I'm a little baffled.

They are not trying to hide something. Results with RAW are entirely subjective and depend on the kind of post-processing applied, and how much effort you put into post processing. Given that the same RAW data was used to produce the JPEG's in the first place, there is really nothing to prevent a clever and hard working photographer from creating final output that is just as good as the in-camera JPEG. Its just that it could take a LOT of effort, and many photographers will be unwilling to expend the amount of energy necessary. As such, they can't publish any specific numbers, as results will vary from photographer to photographer.

But the results IN the RAW files themselves are the least subjective of all....

Granted I'm not sure Nikon has become any better at all of so and so many stops better due to jpg NR stuff recently either.

If you mean strait out of the camera, no modifications at all...yes, totally agree.

 

[unfocused]

Seriously, I don't know if Westfall just isn't very good at corporate PR or if Canon isn't very good at it, but in either case, the approach seems to be quite behind the times in comparison to how smart companies handle their public relations...

I personally dont know if i'd perfer canon's PR approach or Apples... Apple released an iphone for instance, big press conference, big announcement, big presentation, lots of buzz... and then after the announcement, the dark curtain gets drawn again until the release, albeit, to apples credit, their release is usually 1 week or less from the announcement date, and they do let developers in early to play, experiment, and build apps for the new product. But to the layman, there's no trade shows (focus), no outside interviews (chuck westfall)... I think part of his vagueness about future products and F8 is somewhat justifiable as I dont think he would really be privy to that info, probably very few are... The RAW info he probably knows but much like apple, mum's the word until it is released.

Not trying to turn this into some anti-Chuck Westfall thread. I just felt that in this interview, at least, he seemed a bit unprepared for questions that he should have expected and been prepared for. I would not expect any corporate spokesperson to divulge proprietary information, but I think he came across as either dismissive or poorly informed on issues that he should have known he would be asked about.

As an example, look at jrista's comments (shortened here):

Results with RAW are entirely subjective and depend on the kind of post-processing applied...As such, they can't publish any specific numbers, as results will vary from photographer to photographer.

A similar answer from Westfall would have been much more useful and candid and would have served Canon better.

As far as Apple goes, I would say they are not exactly a great example of good corporate communications either. Apple relies on a loyal fan base and a carefully cultivated mystique. It's been successful for them, but I don't think it's a good example of the way corporate communications should be handled.

 

[awinphoto]

Seriously, I don't know if Westfall just isn't very good at corporate PR or if Canon isn't very good at it, but in either case, the approach seems to be quite behind the times in comparison to how smart companies handle their public relations...

I personally dont know if i'd perfer canon's PR approach or Apples... Apple released an iphone for instance, big press conference, big announcement, big presentation, lots of buzz... and then after the announcement, the dark curtain gets drawn again until the release, albeit, to apples credit, their release is usually 1 week or less from the announcement date, and they do let developers in early to play, experiment, and build apps for the new product. But to the layman, there's no trade shows (focus), no outside interviews (chuck westfall)... I think part of his vagueness about future products and F8 is somewhat justifiable as I dont think he would really be privy to that info, probably very few are... The RAW info he probably knows but much like apple, mum's the word until it is released.

Not trying to turn this into some anti-Chuck Westfall thread. I just felt that in this interview, at least, he seemed a bit unprepared for questions that he should have expected and been prepared for. I would not expect any corporate spokesperson to divulge proprietary information, but I think he came across as either dismissive or poorly informed on issues that he should have known he would be asked about.

As an example, look at jrista's comments (shortened here):

Results with RAW are entirely subjective and depend on the kind of post-processing applied...As such, they can't publish any specific numbers, as results will vary from photographer to photographer.

A similar answer from Westfall would have been much more useful and candid and would have served Canon better.

As far as Apple goes, I would say they are not exactly a great example of good corporate communications either. Apple relies on a loyal fan base and a carefully cultivated mystique. It's been successful for them, but I don't think it's a good example of the way corporate communications should be handled.

Fair enough... I agree it could have been more carefully orchestrated and or answered, just about everything is better than no comment. While I never been a fan of chucky, I feel he did as well as anyone really in their heart of hearts felt he would, even though we deep down wished for more down and dirty info.

 

[mccrum]

How Chuck Westfall is able to remain employed by Canon will always be a mystery to me. What complete non-answers.

See, I always figured this is exactly why people like Westfall are employed by places like Canon. Do you think it's easy to actually sound like you've answered the question but haven't when you actually know the real answer which would just be easier to just say?

 

[zhap03]

In the mean time... people are unwrapping their D4's while we wait for our 1Dx to arrive. Canon must be putting the finishing touches on the instruction manual. *sigh*

 

[briansquibb]

Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?

It is too early to compare a 5D3 and 1D4.

 

[akiskev]

My favorite part:

AH: Given the increased burst speed why doesn’t the 5D Mark III support class 10 SD-UHS cards?

CW: The EOS 5D Mark III supports Class 10 SDXC and SDHC memory cards, but not the UHS standard.

;D

 

[tt]

Chuck also had an interview at http://blog.planet5d.com/2012/03/questions-answered-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-hdmi-video/ with a bit more Q&A
1st question about the focusing screen also.

Shame that they couldn't create a custom. 5DMkIII which just has an EgS like screen even if it wouldn't be replaceable!

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?

It's also a lot slower fps, no f/8 AF, drives super-tele more slowly, probably not a lot. The 1Ds3 may plummet though.

 

[briansquibb]

Since the 5D3 will have better IQ and AF than the 1DIV, will that cause a price drop in used 1DIVs?

It's also a lot slower fps, no f/8 AF, drives super-tele more slowly, probably not a lot. The 1Ds3 may plummet though.

I hope the 1Ds3 price plummets. I can tell you that there is nothing nicer than framing a bird at 1200mm with 21mp. Max on the 5D3 is 840mm :-[

 

[rlarsen]

I enjoyed reading Chuck's interview and I was very pleased to learn about significant improvements to 5D auto focus. It's important to me to be able to use the new camera to shoot action. Six frames a second with high-end auto focus sounds really good to me. I had planned to buy one DX, but damn, it's nearly $7000, and it's pretty darn heavy.
Instead I'm getting 2 5D MK lll's in a few days and I really look forward to many of it's features.
Chuck Westfall is a great guy and he supports photographers. For years, nearly every time I called him, he picked up the phone and helped answer my technical questions and offered advice. He was always friendly, and patient.

Chuck will never discuss future Canon technology or products, but he and fellow tech expert, Rudy Winston, always pass on photographer's suggestions, wishes (and complaints) to Canon Japan.

Chuck, Rudy, and other Canon USA techs don't always agree with decisions made in Japan but from what I can tell they are loyal to their company while always supporting and speaking up for photographers.

During my 36 years as a pro using Canon there have always been a few things with their products that drive me crazy and I question, but I use Canon for their innovation, leadership, and all the things they do well.

For some reason, if you go to the Super Bowl, World Series, NBA Finals, the White House, Iraq, Fashion Week in New York or Milan, the Olympics, you will see a lot of white lenses.

Use the gear that works best for your needs and budget, but don't knock Chuck Westfall, he supports photographers.

Rex
Michigan

 

[briansquibb]

I enjoyed reading Chuck's interview and I was very pleased to learn about significant improvements to 5D auto focus. It's important to me to be able to use the new camera to shoot action. Six frames a second with high-end auto focus sounds really good to me. I had planned to buy one DX, but damn, it's nearly $7000, and it's pretty darn heavy.
Instead I'm getting 2 5D MK lll's in a few days and I really look forward to many of it's features.
Chuck Westfall is a great guy and he supports photographers. For years, nearly every time I called him, he picked up the phone and helped answer my technical questions and offered advice. He was always friendly, and patient.

Chuck will never discuss future Canon technology or products, but he and fellow tech expert, Rudy Winston, always pass on photographer's suggestions, wishes (and complaints) to Canon Japan.

Chuck, Rudy, and other Canon USA techs don't always agree with decisions made in Japan but from what I can tell they are loyal to their company while always supporting and speaking up for photographers.

During my 36 years as a pro using Canon there have always been a few things with their products that drive me crazy and I question, but I use Canon for their innovation, leadership, and all the things they do well.

For some reason, if you go to the Super Bowl, World Series, NBA Finals, the White House, Iraq, Fashion Week in New York or Milan, the Olympics, you will see a lot of white lenses.

Use the gear that works best for your needs and budget, but don't knock Chuck Westfall, he supports photographers.

Rex
Michigan

+1 - Chuck is the conduit between Canon and photographers