Removing the 5D4's AA filter?

[Act444]

I'd still like to withhold final judgment until 5D3 upgraders start getting their 5D4 cameras and post first impressions and tests ...but, from what I see so far, and having been a former owner of the original 7D which had a strong AA filter and needing to apply high levels of sharpening to virtually every image from that camera...can't say I'm super impressed.

The 5D3 in my opinion is a great balance between AA filter strength and sharpness/resolving power. Even the regular 5DS can put out sharp SOOC pics (with the right lenses). We'll just have to see on this one...but so far, no buyer's remorse on the R!

 

[Mancubus]

That would be a deal breaker for me. I'm going to wait a little and then look more real application reviews and download raw files.

If the 5d4 isn't at least as sharp as the 5d3, I'll probably give it a pass since the DPRaw is probably not as good as it seems either.

Would that mean that you wouldn't risk the scenario, where you buy 5D4 and in 6 month after few success stories of removing the AA filter, you wouldn't do it yourself?

[/quote]

I watched the video, seems too risky to do it at home with such an expensive piece of gear (I'm talking about the 5d4, not the rebel).

If the results of a filter removal are outstanding, like getting the sharpness of a D810 or 5DSR, I'll probably get a professional service to do it for me.

 

[Josh Denver]

The 5DIV from DP samples seems to have less sharpness than the 5DIII but has more RESOLUTION.

Resolution is what matters, the amount of information you can see in the image. Canon seems to have lowered their in-camera sharpening or created a stronger AA filter, or the test simply isn't perfect.

In anyway, lower sharpness to start with is better, we in the video world are shouting for C-LOG because it's the softest profile and all the others apply some. If we can add sharpening in post to H.264 4:2:0 2mp images you can add it to 30mp 14bit raw ones.


An AA filter is there for a reason. It removes artefacts that can easily completely ruin an image.

BTW: When the MKIII came along it didn't have much sharper video so James Miller on Philipbloom removed the AA filter to increase sharpness, just as you intend to do:

philipbloom.net/blog/a-drastic-solution-to-increasing-sharpness-with-the-5dmkiii/

End the end: it's absolutely NOT worth it. MAYBE you'll get a slightly sharper image when viewed side by side at 100%, at the expense of losing warranty, bricking your new 3500$ camera, Autofocus failure, image plane innaccuracy, back/front focus, losing infinity, etc...

Will a client or a human being ever see the effect of the removed filter in your delivered file vs applying some sharpness? no.

Just be happy with the detail the 5DIV gives you and how the files have so little noise that can take lots of sharpening.

If you specifically find yourself needing (not wanting) more detail in your work and it's demanded, then you have no other choice but to go to the 5Ds R to see an appreciable difference, not remove a filter that removes aliasing from the sensor stack!

Don't do it.

 

[Phil Indeblanc]

Moire, LOL
OK I guess it can happen and with some lens and pixel pitch combo more than others....So 20 years and NO Moire with MF digital backs and 35mm cameras that have ZERO filtering/no AA.
How do I not get any moire? I don't know, ask the video guys that care so much. Maybe they know.

Its hardly an issue in stills, and we are shooting multiple frames of the same image enough times to be able to correct any of it if need be.


If you care about 3D looking images Use a sensore with NO AA filter
If you care about sharpness use a sensor without a AA filter
If you care about IQ use a sensor without a AA filter.

If you care about moire in your video use a sensor on a video camera

Honestly, its not the video guys fault! its Canon's fault for not having the option! 5DsR was released just a year or so ago. This is 12 years of me shooting stills and Canon NOW releases a AA "canceling" filter? WTF?!!(What The Filter?!)....

Canon, I love your hardware, but the marketing person and that 1 tech guy that keep overriding the group of shooters you have in that meeting are KILLING it for us photographers that want IQ!

Get that MILKY soft mesh of a filter off the sensor for crying out loud.
Every new camera release we have to beat this topic up!

Make the 5DMarkIV version without an AA.

One of the reasons it is hard to do after the fact is that the cleaning mech is on the filters, and likely a few other things. Stop making it this way!
Why do you think the A7RII is more comparable to the Medium Format backs vs any other. It doesn't have a AA filter.

 

[privatebydesign]

Moire, LOL
OK I guess it can happen and with some lens and pixel pitch combo more than others....So 20 years and NO Moire with MF digital backs and 35mm cameras that have ZERO filtering/no AA.
How do I not get any moire?

Maybe you aren't shooting the 'right' subjects to get it, some do.........

 

[d]

Moire, LOL
OK I guess it can happen and with some lens and pixel pitch combo more than others....So 20 years and NO Moire with MF digital backs and 35mm cameras that have ZERO filtering/no AA.
How do I not get any moire?

Maybe you aren't shooting the 'right' subjects to get it, some do.........

Indeed. When I used to shoot underwear and swimwear for a clothing retailer's catalogues and website, I was dealing with moire nearly every day. And that was with a 5D3.

So you'd just get the model to do a few more poses and take some extra shots as insurance

 

[tpatana]

Moire, LOL
OK I guess it can happen and with some lens and pixel pitch combo more than others....So 20 years and NO Moire with MF digital backs and 35mm cameras that have ZERO filtering/no AA.
How do I not get any moire?

Maybe you aren't shooting the 'right' subjects to get it, some do.........

Indeed. When I used to shoot underwear and swimwear for a clothing retailer's catalogues and website, I was dealing with moire nearly every day. And that was with a 5D3.

So you'd just get the model to do a few more poses and take some extra shots as insurance

Just remember to chimp on the screen often enough. If certain article is causing moire, just ask her to remove that one. Next shot should have less moire then. Repeat until no moire.

 

[Diko]

So far, so good

So far, so good.

@1200 mm (the stats are incorrect due to a Kenko extender) with ISO of 20 000 and speed of 1/1000 on a F12 with manual focus.

First two are screenshots. The third is the Original Jpeg (from RAW exported by FastStone Image Viewer 5.7)

 

[Diko]

And here is a screenshot of the "honest raw" of the ISO 20 000 in the new beta FastRaw Viewer 1.3.4 The above images were actually the embeded JPGs.

 

[d]

Not bad for 20,000.

 

[scottkinfw]

The 5DIV from DP samples seems to have less sharpness than the 5DIII but has more RESOLUTION.

Resolution is what matters, the amount of information you can see in the image. Canon seems to have lowered their in-camera sharpening or created a stronger AA filter, or the test simply isn't perfect.

In anyway, lower sharpness to start with is better, we in the video world are shouting for C-LOG because it's the softest profile and all the others apply some. If we can add sharpening in post to H.264 4:2:0 2mp images you can add it to 30mp 14bit raw ones.


An AA filter is there for a reason. It removes artefacts that can easily completely ruin an image.

BTW: When the MKIII came along it didn't have much sharper video so James Miller on Philipbloom removed the AA filter to increase sharpness, just as you intend to do:

philipbloom.net/blog/a-drastic-solution-to-increasing-sharpness-with-the-5dmkiii/

End the end: it's absolutely NOT worth it. MAYBE you'll get a slightly sharper image when viewed side by side at 100%, at the expense of losing warranty, bricking your new 3500$ camera, Autofocus failure, image plane innaccuracy, back/front focus, losing infinity, etc...

Will a client or a human being ever see the effect of the removed filter in your delivered file vs applying some sharpness? no.

Just be happy with the detail the 5DIV gives you and how the files have so little noise that can take lots of sharpening.

If you specifically find yourself needing (not wanting) more detail in your work and it's demanded, then you have no other choice but to go to the 5Ds R to see an appreciable difference, not remove a filter that removes aliasing from the sensor stack!

Don't do it.

Excellent argument.
Scott

 

[Jopa]

I'm wondering why the survey doesn't have an option "Yes, I'm going to remove it myself with the old grandpa's screwdriver?"

 

[raptor3x]

Hi everyone.

Was wondering about it. Having in mind 5DsR I am very inclined to combine the Sigma 50s ART with a sharper 5D4 AA filter-less.

What do you think? Any proposal on an alternative answer would be added. Additional opinions and advises would be also highly appreciated.

Some additional info: General primary body mostly for stills. Wild life, sport, Portraits, Events, low light, time-laps.

The main reason to ask: In the end of this video about 1:23 (5D4 vs 5DsR & 3:50 (5D4 vs Nikon 7200)...

Turning on DLO in camera will reduce the effect of the AA filter at the expense of burst rate.

 

[Diko]

I'm wondering why the survey doesn't have an option "Yes, I'm going to remove it myself with the old grandpa's screwdriver?"

Yeah, why not!

 

[Act444]

Hi everyone.

Was wondering about it. Having in mind 5DsR I am very inclined to combine the Sigma 50s ART with a sharper 5D4 AA filter-less.

What do you think? Any proposal on an alternative answer would be added. Additional opinions and advises would be also highly appreciated.

Some additional info: General primary body mostly for stills. Wild life, sport, Portraits, Events, low light, time-laps.

The main reason to ask: In the end of this video about 1:23 (5D4 vs 5DsR & 3:50 (5D4 vs Nikon 7200)...

Turning on DLO in camera will reduce the effect of the AA filter at the expense of burst rate.

Alternatively, you can shoot normal Raw and turn DLO on in DPP during post...but it takes a LOOOONNNGGGG time if you attempt to do it in a batch (say, >30). It helps, but it does add another (time-consuming!) step in PP. I've found setting it to 20 works nicely for 5D4 files. The default setting (50) I find to be too strong and begins to add artifacts, etc. (EXCEPT AT/NEAR BASE ISO)

 

[danski0224]

Just remember to chimp on the screen often enough. If certain article is causing moire, just ask her to remove that one. Next shot should have less moire then. Repeat until no moire.

I would follow the exact same process

 

[danski0224]

FWIW, I did a RAW comparison with 5D4 vs 5D3 files that DPReview supplied with their studio scene in Canon's new DPP 4.5...the 5D4 images are noticeably softer AT THE PIXEL LEVEL than the 5D3, but hold a slight edge on detail due to the megapixel difference between the two cameras. It even seems to be slightly softer than the 1DX II files. I'm assuming the AA filter strength has been increased in the new generation of Canon cameras (at least the ones with 4K video)?

Reaffirms my decision to go straight for the 5DS R...

I have a Canon 1D (2002) and the images need a *lot* of sharpening in DPP. Crank the slider to the right, and the images clear right up. I do not understand why this is, and I recall reading other similar anecdotes about using lots of sharpening in processing images from some of the other Canon 1D series cameras from the time period.

Maybe something similar is happening with the 5DIV... I don't have one of those to check and see.

 

[RayValdez360]

The 5DIV from DP samples seems to have less sharpness than the 5DIII but has more RESOLUTION.

Resolution is what matters, the amount of information you can see in the image. Canon seems to have lowered their in-camera sharpening or created a stronger AA filter, or the test simply isn't perfect.

In anyway, lower sharpness to start with is better, we in the video world are shouting for C-LOG because it's the softest profile and all the others apply some. If we can add sharpening in post to H.264 4:2:0 2mp images you can add it to 30mp 14bit raw ones.


An AA filter is there for a reason. It removes artefacts that can easily completely ruin an image.

BTW: When the MKIII came along it didn't have much sharper video so James Miller on Philipbloom removed the AA filter to increase sharpness, just as you intend to do:

philipbloom.net/blog/a-drastic-solution-to-increasing-sharpness-with-the-5dmkiii/

End the end: it's absolutely NOT worth it. MAYBE you'll get a slightly sharper image when viewed side by side at 100%, at the expense of losing warranty, bricking your new 3500$ camera, Autofocus failure, image plane innaccuracy, back/front focus, losing infinity, etc...

Will a client or a human being ever see the effect of the removed filter in your delivered file vs applying some sharpness? no.

Just be happy with the detail the 5DIV gives you and how the files have so little noise that can take lots of sharpening.

If you specifically find yourself needing (not wanting) more detail in your work and it's demanded, then you have no other choice but to go to the 5Ds R to see an appreciable difference, not remove a filter that removes aliasing from the sensor stack!

Don't do it.

Excellent argument.
Scott

That doesnt make logical sense. Not having an AA filter is more natural than adding sharpness in post artificially. The videos on the c100 and 5dsr seem more high res than the 5d3 and I can even crop the 1080p and still get a better image than a 5d3 or maybe even a 5d mark 4

 

[jeffa4444]

You are missing "No, It's there for a purpose!" as an answer.

Exactly, it's there to make our images softer and makes us get enraged, under the old excuse that the filter is there to prevent a "moire" that only bothers a handful of OCD video people.

I'd take moire over softness any day, wish I had a choice about the damn filter.

Take a look at the attached "videos"

A7R and 5DSR have noticeably more detail than the 5d4. The moire shown in these photos is a minor (very minor) issue that I wouldn't event notice if I wasn't looking for it.

They also have higher resolution from their sensors. For any serious video shooter the AA is still a must have.

 

[jeffa4444]

Last week I viewed on a large cinema screen footage shot on the Panavision Millennium DXL 8K camera and Primo 70 lenses. This camera has a AA filter and you can see razor sharp every detail within the depth of field and zero moire (more of an issue on moving images and larger magnification).

Ive shot with the Canon 5DS for over a year and enlarged shots well beyond the average person and found them again to be razor sharp within the DOF, and this camera has an AA filter. Would the 5DSr been marginally sharper, properly but not enough to live on the difference.

The effects of cancelling the AA filter are greatly exaggerated in modern high megapixel cameras and modern well designed AA filters.