AA filter in the 5D mark IV

[Lenscracker]

I have seen nothing that suggests how much or what sort of AA filter is in the new 5D4. I really love the results I get with my 5Dsr. The effective removal of the AA filter has made a huge difference in the sharpness in the photos I get from the 5Dsr. I am not sure that I want another camera with an AA filter that is as heavy as the one on the 5D3. What is so difficult about making the AA filter switchable, or making it an option? Pentax does it.

 

[Loswr]

Pentax's 'switchable' AA filter isn't an optical low pass filter OLPF), but rather a simulated AA filter effect accomplished by moving the sensor during image capture. It uses their in-body image stabilization,so don't expect to see it on a Canon body any time soon. One potential with Pentax's approach is limited effectiveness at high shutter speeds (which would be a problem for me, for example, since bird feathers can show moiré and I generally use shutter speeds >1/1000 s).

Worth noting that Nikon patented a modified where (I'll simplify) a transmissive LCD is used in the OLPF and can be used for a low-pass canceling filter (light is split in one direction then recombined, vs. being split in one direction then the other). Because it's an LCD, it can be turned on or off.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

Not sure 100%, but judging from the samples DPR posted, there certainly appears to be a filter - perhaps even slightly stronger(?) than the one in the 5D3...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=canon_eos5ds&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=800&attr16_1=800&attr16_2=800&attr16_3=800&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.4848647313366422&y=1.0164753417379968

 

[scyrene]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

 

[tron]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

I do not think so. AlanF who uses 5DsR for birding a lot said that the lack of AA filter reduces the need for sharpening thus keeping the noise lower.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

After seeing this in action ... I give the IQ award to the 5DSR:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=nikon_d810&attr13_3=canon_eos5dsr&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.8905680083682159&y=0.177578358350828

Better pick up a body while they last. Thinking sales of the 5DSR are going to skyrocket!

I agree...and I'm doing just that!

This is the push I needed. Will be a nice compliment to my 5D3, and I can skip the 4.

 

[East Wind Photography]

After seeing this in action ... I give the IQ award to the 5DSR:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=nikon_d810&attr13_3=canon_eos5dsr&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.8905680083682159&y=0.177578358350828

Better pick up a body while they last. Thinking sales of the 5DSR are going to skyrocket!

I agree...and I'm doing just that!

This is the push I needed. Will be a nice compliment to my 5D3, and I can skip the 4.

But the 4 is all about pushing shadow detail 6 stops!

 

[East Wind Photography]

Not sure 100%, but judging from the samples DPR posted, there certainly appears to be a filter - perhaps even slightly stronger(?) than the one in the 5D3...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=canon_eos5ds&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=800&attr16_1=800&attr16_2=800&attr16_3=800&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.4848647313366422&y=1.0164753417379968

It will be stronger due to the increase in pixel density. Every incremental increase in resolution requires a bit stronger AA filter. Even the 5dsr doesnt remove the filter, they just cancel it with another filter.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

Not sure 100%, but judging from the samples DPR posted, there certainly appears to be a filter - perhaps even slightly stronger(?) than the one in the 5D3...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=canon_eos5ds&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=800&attr16_1=800&attr16_2=800&attr16_3=800&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.4848647313366422&y=1.0164753417379968

It will be stronger due to the increase in pixel density. Every incremental increase in resolution requires a bit stronger AA filter. Even the 5dsr doesnt remove the filter, they just cancel it with another filter.

I'm aware of the R's cancelled filter, but the other tidbit I didn't know, that's interesting. Still, even the regular 5DS (with filter) is noticeably sharper than those 5D4 crops so there has to be more to it.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Not sure 100%, but judging from the samples DPR posted, there certainly appears to be a filter - perhaps even slightly stronger(?) than the one in the 5D3...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=canon_eos5ds&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=800&attr16_1=800&attr16_2=800&attr16_3=800&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.4848647313366422&y=1.0164753417379968

It will be stronger due to the increase in pixel density. Every incremental increase in resolution requires a bit stronger AA filter. Even the 5dsr doesnt remove the filter, they just cancel it with another filter.

I'm aware of the R's cancelled filter, but the other tidbit I didn't know, that's interesting. Still, even the regular 5DS (with filter) is noticeably sharper than those 5D4 crops so there has to be more to it.

Yes there is more to it. The big one is almost twice the mp with the 5ds. Other factors that affect things, pixel density, pixel size, dual pixel, digic processor.

i compared images taken with the 7d mark ii and the 5ds on loan from cps at around the same pixel scale...that is an approximately close estimate of the same number of pixels across a subject and found little difference in image sharpness. If fact i saw very little difference in noise and noise patterns. The big difference was that the 5ds just had more pixels to work with.

The 5dsr was noticeably sharper but noise and patterns were still the same. I owned it for about 6 months. The purchase was my biggest mistake. Pure GAS purchase.

Anyway, i ended up trading in my 5dsr for a 1dx2 and kept my 7d2 as a backup. I shootly mostly sports and wildlife and the 5dsr was just too slow for most of my paid work. Do i miss it? Not at all. At times it would be nice but i wasnt using it enough to justify keeping it. High iso was poor and under stadium lighting it was a big stretch even with an f2.8 lens.

The 5dsr would make a great landscape camera and might be a good fair weather wildlife camera (more static use and less action). Its certainly not too rugged and not weather sealed as good as the 1dx2.... But i digress...

 

[Donkey_Kong]

Those comparison photos make the 5DIV look absolutely awful..what's going on? It can't actually be that bad

 

[AlanF]

Not sure 100%, but judging from the samples DPR posted, there certainly appears to be a filter - perhaps even slightly stronger(?) than the one in the 5D3...

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=canon_eos5ds&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=800&attr16_1=800&attr16_2=800&attr16_3=800&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.4848647313366422&y=1.0164753417379968

It will be stronger due to the increase in pixel density. Every incremental increase in resolution requires a bit stronger AA filter. Even the 5dsr doesnt remove the filter, they just cancel it with another filter.

I'm aware of the R's cancelled filter, but the other tidbit I didn't know, that's interesting. Still, even the regular 5DS (with filter) is noticeably sharper than those 5D4 crops so there has to be more to it.

Yes there is more to it. The big one is almost twice the mp with the 5ds. Other factors that affect things, pixel density, pixel size, dual pixel, digic processor.

i compared images taken with the 7d mark ii and the 5ds on loan from cps at around the same pixel scale...that is an approximately close estimate of the same number of pixels across a subject and found little difference in image sharpness. If fact i saw very little difference in noise and noise patterns. The big difference was that the 5ds just had more pixels to work with.

The 5dsr was noticeably sharper but noise and patterns were still the same. I owned it for about 6 months. The purchase was my biggest mistake. Pure GAS purchase.

Anyway, i ended up trading in my 5dsr for a 1dx2 and kept my 7d2 as a backup. I shootly mostly sports and wildlife and the 5dsr was just too slow for most of my paid work. Do i miss it? Not at all. At times it would be nice but i wasnt using it enough to justify keeping it. High iso was poor and under stadium lighting it was a big stretch even with an f2.8 lens.

The 5dsr would make a great landscape camera and might be a good fair weather wildlife camera (more static use and less action). Its certainly not too rugged and not weather sealed as good as the 1dx2.... But i digress...

My 5DS R when cropped to the same size as my 7D2 is certainly both noticeably sharper and less noisy. I work so much at the limits of resolution with telephoto lenses that I appreciate the 50 mp. The 5D IV is on my watch list as there are occasions when fewer mp. But, I wish Canon would have ditched the AA filter. Some commenter on DPR (not a troll) wrote that its presence was good for video but not for stills.

ps Intuitively, I would have thought that smaller pixels would require weaker filters as the defocussing would be over a smaller area.

 

[scyrene]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

I do not think so. AlanF who uses 5DsR for birding a lot said that the lack of AA filter reduces the need for sharpening thus keeping the noise lower.

I know, and while I respect photographers' opinions, that's not the same as presenting evidence. Is it even possible to quantify sharpness?

 

[tron]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

I do not think so. AlanF who uses 5DsR for birding a lot said that the lack of AA filter reduces the need for sharpening thus keeping the noise lower.

I know, and while I respect photographers' opinions, that's not the same as presenting evidence. Is it even possible to quantify sharpness?

1. Preferring the results.
2. Comparing with Canon DPP's by using the sharpness slider.

And/Or you can ask Alan (2 entries above)

 

[scyrene]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

I do not think so. AlanF who uses 5DsR for birding a lot said that the lack of AA filter reduces the need for sharpening thus keeping the noise lower.

I know, and while I respect photographers' opinions, that's not the same as presenting evidence. Is it even possible to quantify sharpness?

1. Preferring the results.
2. Comparing with Canon DPP's by using the sharpness slider.

And/Or you can ask Alan (2 entries above)

I don't like bothering people Anyway, preference is not quantification, right? We all have preferences, that doesn't make them objectively better.

I've personally never felt the AA filter had a negative effect on my pictures, but then it's hard to know without using a camera without. I just don't get how some people can claim it's a make or break thing - and that AA filters are definitely terrible and ruining their photos and any camera released with one is crippled, as some people around the place have done at times. Or to quote the OP "[t]he effective removal of the AA filter has made a huge difference in the sharpness in the photos I get from the 5Dsr".

The only side-by-side comparison I've seen is the dpreview test scene, and I can't see a big difference. The 5DsR is a little sharper, but it doesn't seem to be resolving much more detail, if any, and upping the sharpening on the 5Ds file would cancel out most of the difference, by the look of it.

 

[tron]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

I do not think so. AlanF who uses 5DsR for birding a lot said that the lack of AA filter reduces the need for sharpening thus keeping the noise lower.

I know, and while I respect photographers' opinions, that's not the same as presenting evidence. Is it even possible to quantify sharpness?

1. Preferring the results.
2. Comparing with Canon DPP's by using the sharpness slider.

And/Or you can ask Alan (2 entries above)

I don't like bothering people Anyway, preference is not quantification, right? We all have preferences, that doesn't make them objectively better.

I've personally never felt the AA filter had a negative effect on my pictures, but then it's hard to know without using a camera without. I just don't get how some people can claim it's a make or break thing - and that AA filters are definitely terrible and ruining their photos and any camera released with one is crippled, as some people around the place have done at times. Or to quote the OP "[t]he effective removal of the AA filter has made a huge difference in the sharpness in the photos I get from the 5Dsr".

The only side-by-side comparison I've seen is the dpreview test scene, and I can't see a big difference. The 5DsR is a little sharper, but it doesn't seem to be resolving much more detail, if any, and upping the sharpening on the 5Ds file would cancel out most of the difference, by the look of it.

The issue is by upping sharpness noise increases (ISO depended I guess)
Also you need 2 cameras (5DsR and 5Ds or 7D2) to compare. I have 7D2 and I am tempted since everyone says that a similarly cropped 5DsR is better.

 

[Deleted member 378221]

The only side-by-side comparison I've seen is the dpreview test scene, and I can't see a big difference. The 5DsR is a little sharper, but it doesn't seem to be resolving much more detail, if any, and upping the sharpening on the 5Ds file would cancel out most of the difference, by the look of it.

Well, that's probably because the 5DsR does have an AA filter, it just uses a cancelling filter later in the stack, to...well...cancel it out...however that works. I'm not an expert in optics at that level.

You can see a difference comparing the D800 and D800E, which has a "true missing" AA Filter: Link

However, that missing AA filter can result in nasty moire in fine details, so it's not all sunshine: Link

Personally I'm torn. While I'd have liked a sharper image, I certainly never want to see image defects like with my second link.

 

[scyrene]

It's good to like the kit one uses, but is there really much of a difference? Has anyone posted good evidence that removing the AA filter adds much appreciable sharpness? I hear these rather hyperbolic statements and demands on the subject, but reasoned comment has suggested that appropriate sharpening can all but cancel out the difference between e.g. the 5Ds and 5DsR - does anyone have anything definitive on this? Is it just a marketing gimmick that people have bought into?

I do not think so. AlanF who uses 5DsR for birding a lot said that the lack of AA filter reduces the need for sharpening thus keeping the noise lower.

I know, and while I respect photographers' opinions, that's not the same as presenting evidence. Is it even possible to quantify sharpness?

1. Preferring the results.
2. Comparing with Canon DPP's by using the sharpness slider.

And/Or you can ask Alan (2 entries above)

I don't like bothering people Anyway, preference is not quantification, right? We all have preferences, that doesn't make them objectively better.

I've personally never felt the AA filter had a negative effect on my pictures, but then it's hard to know without using a camera without. I just don't get how some people can claim it's a make or break thing - and that AA filters are definitely terrible and ruining their photos and any camera released with one is crippled, as some people around the place have done at times. Or to quote the OP "[t]he effective removal of the AA filter has made a huge difference in the sharpness in the photos I get from the 5Dsr".

The only side-by-side comparison I've seen is the dpreview test scene, and I can't see a big difference. The 5DsR is a little sharper, but it doesn't seem to be resolving much more detail, if any, and upping the sharpening on the 5Ds file would cancel out most of the difference, by the look of it.

The issue is by upping sharpness noise increases (ISO depended I guess)
Also you need 2 cameras (5DsR and 5Ds or 7D2) to compare. I have 7D2 and I am tempted since everyone says that a similarly cropped 5DsR is better.

Yeah, not many people have a 5Ds and 5DsR (or D800 and D800E) so side by side comparisons are hard to come by! The noise issue is a bit of a red herring in my opinion - if you apply sharpening to the whole image indiscriminately, then sure it'll add noise. But that's rarely the right way to do it. The threshold should be higher, so it's only applying to the sharpest areas, and in that case adds very little noise.

 

[scyrene]

The only side-by-side comparison I've seen is the dpreview test scene, and I can't see a big difference. The 5DsR is a little sharper, but it doesn't seem to be resolving much more detail, if any, and upping the sharpening on the 5Ds file would cancel out most of the difference, by the look of it.

Well, that's probably because the 5DsR does have an AA filter, it just uses a cancelling filter later in the stack, to...well...cancel it out...however that works. I'm not an expert in optics at that level.

Good point. I'm not sure how that affects things either.

 

[Loswr]

The only side-by-side comparison I've seen is the dpreview test scene, and I can't see a big difference. The 5DsR is a little sharper, but it doesn't seem to be resolving much more detail, if any, and upping the sharpening on the 5Ds file would cancel out most of the difference, by the look of it.

Well, that's probably because the 5DsR does have an AA filter, it just uses a cancelling filter later in the stack, to...well...cancel it out...however that works. I'm not an expert in optics at that level.

Good point. I'm not sure how that affects things either.

The canceling AA filter vs. no filter would nave minimal if any difference.

An AA filter is two sheets of a birefringent crystal material (lithium niobate) with a 1/4-wave plate in between them. The birefringent crystal spreads the light into two images offset a very tiny amount in one direction (e.g. vertical), then the 1/4-wave plate rotates the light 90°, then the second birefringent crystal spreads it a small amount in the other direction (e.g. horizontal). The 'strength' of the AA filter is determined by the thickness of the lithium niobate crystal sheet.

In a self-canceling AA filter, they omit the 1/4-wave plate and have the two birefringent crystals in opposite orientations, so the first one spreads (for example) vertical the images, then the second one recombines the images.