Why Canon made 1Dx best specification ... II

Started May 24, 2013 | Discussions
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,450
Like?
composition
In reply to qianp2k, May 28, 2013

qianp2k wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Yeah a well known math.  higher pixel density, you need a higher shutter to deliver similar per-pixel or 100% cropped sharpness.  I am not even trying to dispute resolution but just on better technique.

Or can your D800 thru heave cropping from a 200mm or 300mm lens deliver such photos belows?  

...is that if the Nikon 500 / 4 VR II were at least as sharp as your 500 / 4L IS II (and even if it weren't quite as sharp, but close), that the 36 MP of the D800 would have resolved better than the 22 MP of your 5D3.

But you know that's not what I am talking about, right?

Not always easy to tell. You do jump around quite a bit and often to unrelated concepts.

My 10mp 1D3 airshows photos proved amount of pixels are far less important than native FL lenses, shooting skills and most importantly AF performance and overall speed.

That's a good example of "unrelated" to the topic GB was speaking about. Perhaps you misunderstood his intent

Just not a hard concept to understand, really -- unless one is *actively* trying to be obtuse.

18mp or 22mp is sufficient to most people especially someone like me....

That is very true. The type and style of ones shots/output often won't really benefit much at all from an improvement in sensor quality. Nothing wrong with that at all, and many can learn from that. Improvements in composition and technique are often a bigger bang for the back. F10 and 1/250 for example. On the other hand, some really can take advantage of improved sensor tech and can make the improvements obvious. Those folks are few. There work though is impressive and a joy to see.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
qianp2k
Senior MemberPosts: 9,794Gear list
Like?
Re: Weird...
In reply to jjnik, May 28, 2013

jjnik wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Now he is talking downsampling to 5D3 size   See you tomorrow.

-- hide signature --

I meant that last post to be my last response to you - but I can't let you use your typical spin to mischaracterize what I actually said - which was

"Maybe - because, as I've tried unsuccessfully to educate you, we would not be looking at the same thing!!!  As with the D4 example above, at the image level the D800 will still look as sharp or sharper even if I crop into it to provide a 5D3 size image and, if I downsize to the 5D3 image size, I can get better apparent sharpness and detail... AND I could still print bigger with better sharpness than the 5D3 file."

You know I just said you do need use faster shutter to have similar per-pixel sharpness from D800 when compared to D4. You were arguing on that. Now you shifted topic to per-picture level. Sure D800 does have more resolution but I will dispute you will see much difference at 20x30" (or even to 28x40") no mention viewed at 1080p monitor.

DXOMark tested show difference is very small with respective lenses.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Which-lenses-should-you-choose-for-your-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs.-Nikon-D800-Competition-is-closer-than-expected

Several reputable photographers with their own experiences also said the difference is very small.

...meaning that looking at a 100% crop from a D800 and a 5D3 is looking at two different things.  The D800E 100% crop is capturing a more magnified view/smaller section of the target.  However, as I've demonstrated to everyone except you, it is possible to get sharp per pixel detail (100% crop) with a D800 without taking any extraordinary methods (as you insist must be done).

Sure everthing is possible.  But chance to get that per-pixel level sharpness from D800 with the same low speed should be lower than from your D4.  That's why I suggested to do a scientific test by fire a group of 20 shots each from D800 and D4 with VR turn-off on the lens see which camera has higher average sharpness at 100% cropped level.

So as long as you used the same technique and shot conditions as the 5D3, then even if the D800 results at100% view were not quite as sharp (though I demonstrated to most that they can be) as then 5D3 (which, remember, is a different, less magnified view of a larger part of the target), then the image level view (which is the real end goal for non-measurebators) of the D800 will still look as sharp or sharper than the 5D3.   This would also be true if I downsized the D800 image to the 5D3 image size as the downsizing/oversampling will provide better apparent sharpness and detail in the resultant smaller image (I'M NOT SAYING YOU SHOULD DO THIS - just stating the reality if you did!!)

Well because of lower pixel density, my 22mp 5D3 will have higher percentage of 100% cropped or per-pixel level sharpness than your D800 when shooting at the same technique such as hand-held. Then the gap between 5D3 and D800 in resolution will be smaller than if we shoot at better technique such as both on tripod. Which means as I said as well as DPR review said you will waste 36mp potential.

-- hide signature --
 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,450
Like?
Robbed
In reply to qianp2k, May 28, 2013

qianp2k wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:


 

That doesn't mean Canon cannot do that either.  This one was taken from 100-400L on 5D3, an inferior lens compared to your 70-200G/4.0 VR or 70-200G/2.8 VR II.  Since it's too big to be added into DPR gallery, so I provide this 100% cropped photo, oh, yeah on 1:1 full size   Better to download to view it clearly, or need to wait several seconds until the photo is fully rendered.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3MrYp_nWjPGaktYX19PT3BtNmc/edit?usp=sharing

The image dimensions are not 5760 x 3840 but instead 5241x3432. Perhaps you down sampled or cropped? Quite a bit of grain as well, strange. You cut off the horns, but left lots of space behind. Not a good example I think.

There are no grains.

None? Strange that you say that. Perhaps I should have said noise.

I just showed 5D3 also can deliver very high resolution even with an inferior lens.

I'm sure it's possible... Just not a lot of actual detail resolution in the example subject. Expected though. Not easy to squeeze water from a rock.

r can your D800 thru heave cropping from a 200mm or 300mm lens deliver such photos belows?

Certainly no worse regards sharpness, but more detail could have been captured. That's natural.

Seriously you think D800 + 300mm lens can outresolve 5D3 + 500mm lens?

Of course it can...given all else equal including framing.

All taken from the yesterday Junes Beach airshow.

F10 and 1/250? ....you are correct and better technique can make a difference. No need for f10 here. Still, all very nice colors,  though a bit to aggressive with the sharpening slider in LR for my taste.  Thanks for sharing...I do enjoy aviation.

It's clear you don't have much experience in plane photos. The key here is 1/250 not F10 to slow down the propellers' capturing for necessary motion blur rather having a surreal frozen propellers as the planes going to drop .

My bad, I didn't notice you changed the subject from a resolution example to a discussion about visual effects. OK to show blur, but certainly robbed you of the detail the discussion was about. Nice colors though.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
qianp2k
Senior MemberPosts: 9,794Gear list
Like?
Re: composition
In reply to Mako2011, May 28, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Yeah a well known math.  higher pixel density, you need a higher shutter to deliver similar per-pixel or 100% cropped sharpness.  I am not even trying to dispute resolution but just on better technique.

Or can your D800 thru heave cropping from a 200mm or 300mm lens deliver such photos belows?  

...is that if the Nikon 500 / 4 VR II were at least as sharp as your 500 / 4L IS II (and even if it weren't quite as sharp, but close), that the 36 MP of the D800 would have resolved better than the 22 MP of your 5D3.

But you know that's not what I am talking about, right?

Not always easy to tell. You do jump around quite a bit and often to unrelated concepts.

It's clear that GB doesn't answer my point above that overcropping from D800 will not compensate shorter FL lens as I saw and will be confirmed by DXOMark in resolution test that no way D800+300mm lens can outresolve 5D3+500mm lens that latter will be noticeable higher.

My 10mp 1D3 airshows photos proved amount of pixels are far less important than native FL lenses, shooting skills and most importantly AF performance and overall speed.

That's a good example of "unrelated" to the topic GB was speaking about. Perhaps you misunderstood his intent

Exactly related from what I said. It's him actually shifted topic to shoot at the same FL. But then still not the same as others are not equal. 5D3 is a better camera than D800 in action shots.

Just not a hard concept to understand, really -- unless one is *actively* trying to be obtuse.

18mp or 22mp is sufficient to most people especially someone like me....

That is very true. The type and style of ones shots/output often won't really benefit much at all from an improvement in sensor quality. Nothing wrong with that at all, and many can learn from that.

Actually in at least 95% of real world photos you will not see much difference between 5D3 and 800. See in that yellow car photo, highlight at left side is still overblown and I still see obvious noise in D800 shadow areas after lifting (such as on that bird that its left wing under shadow is very noisy).

Improvements in composition and technique are often a bigger bang for the back. F10 and 1/250 for example.

Exactly.  It's the shooter behind the VF matter.

On the other hand, some really can take advantage of improved sensor tech and can make the improvements obvious. Those folks are few. There work though is impressive and a joy to see.

Sure everyone wants a better sensor.  But for my needs Canon cameras are still excellent and fully capable to deliver excellent photos.  Lens' choice, AF speed and overall performances are more important.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

-- hide signature --
 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,450
Like?
good point
In reply to qianp2k, May 28, 2013

qianp2k wrote:

Well because of lower pixel density, my 22mp 5D3 will have higher percentage of 100% cropped or per-pixel level sharpness than your D800 when shooting at the same technique such as hand-held. Then the gap between 5D3 and D800 in resolution will be smaller than if we shoot at better technique such as both on tripod. Which means as I said as well as DPR review said you will waste 36mp potential.

So the point you're actually making is that if ones photographic techniques are poor, they would better be served by a lower pixel density camera. I can see how you might come to that conclusion. They could also go ahead and get the higher pixel density camera and simply downsample to 22mp till they get better. That way they'll have high resolution available for the few times they get it right. Best of both worlds and not limited.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
qianp2k
Senior MemberPosts: 9,794Gear list
Like?
Re: Robbed
In reply to Mako2011, May 28, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:


 

That doesn't mean Canon cannot do that either.  This one was taken from 100-400L on 5D3, an inferior lens compared to your 70-200G/4.0 VR or 70-200G/2.8 VR II.  Since it's too big to be added into DPR gallery, so I provide this 100% cropped photo, oh, yeah on 1:1 full size   Better to download to view it clearly, or need to wait several seconds until the photo is fully rendered.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3MrYp_nWjPGaktYX19PT3BtNmc/edit?usp=sharing

The image dimensions are not 5760 x 3840 but instead 5241x3432. Perhaps you down sampled or cropped? Quite a bit of grain as well, strange. You cut off the horns, but left lots of space behind. Not a good example I think.

There are no grains.

None? Strange that you say that. Perhaps I should have said noise.

My sample covers a much wider scene than your goat's head, from very bright sunlight to much darker area. But there is no obvious noise/grain. Anyway just show that 5D3 is fully capable to resolve to hair level details even with an inferior lens.

I just showed 5D3 also can deliver very high resolution even with an inferior lens.

I'm sure it's possible... Just not a lot of actual detail resolution in the example subject. Expected though. Not easy to squeeze water from a rock.

The point is that you will not see much difference at 20x30" print (that is only I print to) and in 1080p monitor.  Many reputable photographers own and experience both and said the same on even bigger size prints.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51219749

r can your D800 thru heave cropping from a 200mm or 300mm lens deliver such photos belows?

Certainly no worse regards sharpness, but more detail could have been captured. That's natural.

Seriously you think D800 + 300mm lens can outresolve 5D3 + 500mm lens?

Of course it can...given all else equal including framing.

In birding and airshows, how 300mm could have the smae framing from 500mm on the same FF AOV?  Please show us photos rather empty talking.  Too bad DXOMark has not tested 300G/2.8 VR but will not very close based on other lens' tests on D800 by DXOMark.

All taken from the yesterday Junes Beach airshow.

F10 and 1/250? ....you are correct and better technique can make a difference. No need for f10 here. Still, all very nice colors,  though a bit to aggressive with the sharpening slider in LR for my taste.  Thanks for sharing...I do enjoy aviation.

It's clear you don't have much experience in plane photos. The key here is 1/250 not F10 to slow down the propellers' capturing for necessary motion blur rather having a surreal frozen propellers as the planes going to drop .

My bad, I didn't notice you changed the subject from a resolution example to a discussion about visual effects. OK to show blur, but certainly robbed you of the detail the discussion was about. Nice colors though.

It's that you don't know what you're talking about. Are you kidding that I changed the subject? I just addressed your words that no need to shoot at F10, so you suggest F20 will be better at the same 1/250 but ISO 100, or freeze propellers to have surreal looking? Prop planes are the most challenging in airshow as there are many kinds at different speeds.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

-- hide signature --
 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
qianp2k
Senior MemberPosts: 9,794Gear list
Like?
Re: good point
In reply to Mako2011, May 28, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Well because of lower pixel density, my 22mp 5D3 will have higher percentage of 100% cropped or per-pixel level sharpness than your D800 when shooting at the same technique such as hand-held. Then the gap between 5D3 and D800 in resolution will be smaller than if we shoot at better technique such as both on tripod. Which means as I said as well as DPR review said you will waste 36mp potential.

So the point you're actually making is that if ones photographic techniques are poor, they would better be served by a lower pixel density camera. I can see how you might come to that conclusion.

A photog with poor technique <> a good photog using less technique. But it's true high MP camera such as D800 will be wasted for anyone mainly shoot in P&S. Just check in reality how many serious professional photog shooting MF camera P&S for landscape for example?

They could also go ahead and get the higher pixel density camera and simply downsample to 22mp till they get better.

Not always true. As DXOMark tests show the difference between 5D3 and D800 with respective lenses is very small. Then 5D3 with good lens such as 24-70L II will beat D800 with 24-85 kit if latter using poor technique. After downsampling the difference certainly will disappear at 20x30" prints.

That way they'll have high resolution available for the few times they get it right. Best of both worlds and not limited.

But in reality you will not get a camera with the most MP and fastest speed. There are different needs for different markets. I'd pickup a 22/24mp 10fps camera over a 36/46mp 5fps camera any day on my needs.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

-- hide signature --
 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
qianp2k
Senior MemberPosts: 9,794Gear list
Like?
Re: Except...
In reply to John Sheehy, May 28, 2013

John Sheehy wrote:

Danga wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Blurry?    1DIII + Canon 100/2.8 macro (non-IS version) hand-held .

100% of a macro photo...I wonder what the original macro photo looks like.

The original looks like it is reduced to 50% its original pixel dimensions with the nearest Neighbor algorithm, and then sharpened.  Peter is operating upon a few layers of illusion.

After double checking that few macro shots were taken at sRAW that it seems I accidentally bumper file type to sRAW. But actually this shows even a 5mp (or actually only 2.5mp) camera still able to deliver amazing sharpness and details. So related to your OP, amount of pixels are not direct factor of sharpness. How many stunning action photos were generated from a 8mp 1DII?

-- hide signature --
 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
qianp2k
Senior MemberPosts: 9,794Gear list
Like?
Re: Why Canon made 1Dx best specification ... II
In reply to John Sheehy, May 28, 2013

Anyway this thread as from part I shows 18mp 1DX or 22mp 5D3 or 20mp 6D are sufficient to deliver details and high resolution photos.  Are you going to have a part III? 

-- hide signature --
 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,450
Like?
Re: composition
In reply to qianp2k, May 28, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Yeah a well known math.  higher pixel density, you need a higher shutter to deliver similar per-pixel or 100% cropped sharpness.  I am not even trying to dispute resolution but just on better technique.

Or can your D800 thru heave cropping from a 200mm or 300mm lens deliver such photos belows?

...is that if the Nikon 500 / 4 VR II were at least as sharp as your 500 / 4L IS II (and even if it weren't quite as sharp, but close), that the 36 MP of the D800 would have resolved better than the 22 MP of your 5D3.

But you know that's not what I am talking about, right?

Not always easy to tell. You do jump around quite a bit and often to unrelated concepts.

It's clear that GB doesn't answer my point above that overcropping from D800 will not compensate shorter FL lens as I saw and will be confirmed by DXOMark in resolution test that no way D800+300mm lens can outresolve 5D3+500mm lens that latter will be noticeable higher.

My 10mp 1D3 airshows photos proved amount of pixels are far less important than native FL lenses, shooting skills and most importantly AF performance and overall speed.

That's a good example of "unrelated" to the topic GB was speaking about. Perhaps you misunderstood his intent

Exactly related from what I said. It's him actually shifted topic to shoot at the same FL. But then still not the same as others are not equal. 5D3 is a better camera than D800 in action shots.

Just not a hard concept to understand, really -- unless one is *actively* trying to be obtuse.

18mp or 22mp is sufficient to most people especially someone like me....

That is very true. The type and style of ones shots/output often won't really benefit much at all from an improvement in sensor quality. Nothing wrong with that at all, and many can learn from that.

Actually in at least 95% of real world photos you will not see much difference between 5D3 and 800. See in that yellow car photo, highlight at left side is still overblown and I still see obvious noise in D800 shadow areas after lifting (such as on that bird that its left wing under shadow is very noisy).

Improvements in composition and technique are often a bigger bang for the back. F10 and 1/250 for example.

Exactly.  It's the shooter behind the VF matter.

On the other hand, some really can take advantage of improved sensor tech and can make the improvements obvious. Those folks are few. There work though is impressive and a joy to see.

Sure everyone wants a better sensor.  But for my needs Canon cameras are still excellent and fully capable to deliver excellent photos.  Lens' choice, AF speed and overall performances are more important.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads