1Ds is a noisy machine

[Mishkin]

Thanks, Fred, that makes sense. Sorry for the hype.

The default crop straight from the camera without any
sharpening/editing applied that should be there instead, was posted
below:



Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Best,
Fred

"The above image is virtually noiseless and has incredible detail
at ISO 200."
( http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html )

I applied ridiculously high USM 500/2/0 to emphasize noise. Traces
of brush are clearly visible.

Just want to let you know, that Fred Miranda has cheated with 100%
crop of the ISO 200 image. It was photoshoped to hide noise, and
the levels was set incorrectly to make it alldarker.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html
And look at the parts, that was not bloured, they are so nosiy! And
this is just a ISO 200!

--
Fred Miranda
http://www.fredmiranda.com

 

[Mishkin]

No, click on the picture to show it full, and look at the right. Don't you see how noiseless it is there compared to the left?

You know that really doesn't make sense.

"The above image is virtually noiseless and has incredible detail
at ISO 200."
( http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html )

I applied ridiculously high USM 500/2/0 to emphasize noise. Traces
of brush are clearly visible.

Just want to let you know, that Fred Miranda has cheated with 100%
crop of the ISO 200 image. It was photoshoped to hide noise, and
the levels was set incorrectly to make it alldarker.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html
And look at the parts, that was not bloured, they are so nosiy! And
this is just a ISO 200!

 

[Peter G]

Different colours/intensities often show different noise character. It doesn't look any different than the one Fred just posted.

You know that really doesn't make sense.

"The above image is virtually noiseless and has incredible detail
at ISO 200."
( http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html )

I applied ridiculously high USM 500/2/0 to emphasize noise. Traces
of brush are clearly visible.

Just want to let you know, that Fred Miranda has cheated with 100%
crop of the ISO 200 image. It was photoshoped to hide noise, and
the levels was set incorrectly to make it alldarker.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html
And look at the parts, that was not bloured, they are so nosiy! And
this is just a ISO 200!

 

[Steven Noyes]

When I looked at that top birds 100% crop yesterday, there were two
spots on the bird that looked out-of focus. One on the beak and the
other in the top right part of the head. Just on the border of the
background. And it is not there any more.

This is a standard aspect of many of my pictures so I recognized it
for that. The second bird had no filtering.

Steven

The 200 ISO 100% crop does not look noisey at all to me.

Yes, but it was bloured.

--
---
My really bad Fall Adventures:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/fall_adventures_2002

 

[Adam-T]

If he also blurred the shots from the 17-35L to make the 16-35L look better too !!!!

The 17-35L I tried was no great shakes but they one he had for the shootout was far worse at f2.8, in fact it looked like he got it mixed up with the Sigma 17-35!

--
Olympus C2100UZI +B300 +A28, Canon D60.

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 

[Mark38311]

Looks like you might STILL have something "mixed up"

Even after refreshing the browser, The 100% crop you show on that page appears to have a different color cast than the others.

The 100% crop looks warmer than either sample....

 

[Mishkin]

I think Igor can find out Just kidding, no offense to Igor, Fred or Adam.

Well, at least I did not blur this on purpose while testing 24-70L to make people buy discounted 28-70L's like crazy to clear stocks

If he also blurred the shots from the 17-35L to make the 16-35L
look better too !!!!

The 17-35L I tried was no great shakes but they one he had for the
shootout was far worse at f2.8, in fact it looked like he got it
mixed up with the Sigma 17-35!

--
Olympus C2100UZI +B300 +A28, Canon D60.

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 

[Don Lashier]

If he also blurred the shots from the 17-35L to make the 16-35L
look better too !!!!

No, I think this was an honest mistake. The test shot was not focused properly and no one noticed. DavidP can tell you all about wrt his tests of the same lenses.

• DL

 

[Fred Miranda]

Even after refreshing the browser, The 100% crop you show on that
page appears to have a different color cast than the others.

The 100% crop looks warmer than either sample....

Ok, let's make it clear:

The "Unsharpened 100% crops" were all straight from the camera. They were converted from RAW to tiff and then saved as jpeg for the web.

The thumbnails and resized images were edited by me: Some tone/color correction, sharpening, resizing was performed.

Be well,
Fred

 

[Adam-T]

I bet that's a 35-135USM really isn't it! - LOL

I can sell you a Sigma 28-80 for £45 which will take far** better pics than that!!! ---

Send it back ASAP

I had an ex-demo 28-70L which was even worse at 70mm ! it was totally duff at any stop!.... they got it calibrated but I'd got a new one by then for less money!...

--
Olympus C2100UZI +B300 +A28, Canon D60.

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 

[Adam-T]

No, I think this was an honest mistake. The test shot was not
focused properly and no one noticed.

Maybe Fred should pull those pics too then

DavidP can tell you all about his tests of the same lenses.

Thanks, I'd be interested to see that as the 17-35L I tried wasn't up to much and so far has been struck off the list as a possible 16-35L substitute

--
Olympus C2100UZI +B300 +A28, Canon D60.

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 

[Jeffrey Behr]

...when you post your idiot belches.

--
http://community.webshots.com/user/jeffreybehr

 

[andy888]

Just want to let you know, that Fred Miranda has cheated with 100%
crop of the ISO 200 image. It was photoshoped to hide noise, and
the levels was set incorrectly to make it alldarker.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/1Ds_review/index_noise2.html
And look at the parts, that was not bloured, they are so nosiy! And
this is just a ISO 200!

Thats OK Igor...you can go back and lust after your grey halos and blown out highlights.

 

[MikeA]

Hang in there, Fred. The best is yet to come. They haven't even yet gotten to the part where you and Phil Askey, after sneaking away from the grassy knoll, were spotted (by someone who has a friend who's a national sales rep for some company) being flown around in one of those top-secret unmarked stealth black helicopters, receiving your massive under-the-table payouts in unmarked bills from Canon or some other shadowy government/corporate agency. I don't know why they bother putting the table in the helicopter, but there you have it. (Say...while we're at it, I've been wondering: is it difficult trying to use a Wacom tablet when you're being flown around in one of those things?

 

[Peter Gregg]

Just want to let you know, that Fred Miranda has cheated with 100%
crop of the ISO 200 image. It was photoshoped to hide noise, and

Just wanted to let you know you have a mouth and a half.

Coming on and saying someone cheated is about the level of a 10 year old child. Sounds like someone running to his mommy crying someone cheated on him. It also is a very pointed and serious accusation. They are fighting words and if you intended to start a fight you used the right terminology.

The proper thing to do was to bring it out and suggest this is what you found and ask if it was perhaps in error? That would have been polite and polished. But it didn't happen that way did it.

Your post speaks volumes.

Peter Gregg

 

[wolfwatcher]

Igor, Fred Miranda would never do what you are acusing him of. He has too much integrity to do as you suggest. He is no more paid to "sell" the 1Ds than you are paid by a competator to run it down. You are not being paid are you???? You should be ashamed of yourself. If you do not like the noise, say so and do not buy it, but do not put this on Fred.

Why would Fred Miranda cheat us??

Cuz he was payed by Canon, to advertise it.

Isn't he trying to give us the
best possible information?

He is trying to give the best possable advertisement to the 1Ds.

I liked his review.

Not bad but.... unfaithful.

I expect that if the
1Ds were a noisy beast, he'd tell us and Canon right away!

Dont you see it yourself?
BTW, did you look at the 100% crop of the ISO 100 image at all?

--
Chris

 

[Isaac Sibson]

Igor-

Have you ever written an extensive review of an item?

I write reviews for a computer hardware website, and I have to say I feel for fred here. It is incredibly difficult to sort things out which may appear very simple from the outside, but you have no appreciation of how much work is involved in a review until you start writing them. The reviews I write are fairly short compared to the one fred wrote of the 1DS, and so I can tell you that what he's done there is quite a lot of work.

Now, he's not being paid for this either.

And yet you find a mistake, and then jump in and throw around accusations of cheating and claiming that his review is biased, etc, etc, etc...Maybe you have to accept that people aren't all as perfect as you might like to think, and that means EVERYONE.

And to Fred... thanks for taking the time to bring us this review. Even if some people don't appreciate it the majority do. And if you ever want any help on PC hardware...

 

[DavidMillier]

Igor

Do they have libel laws where you come from?

If you accuse someone of being paid to lie about something you risk impugning their professional reputation unless you can prove it in court.The internet may encourage the frank expression of opinion but it does not free anyone from liability for slander and libel!

I would suggest more circumspection might be in order!

Why would Fred Miranda cheat us??

Cuz he was payed by Canon, to advertise it.

Isn't he trying to give us the
best possible information?

He is trying to give the best possable advertisement to the 1Ds.

I liked his review.

Not bad but.... unfaithful.

I expect that if the
1Ds were a noisy beast, he'd tell us and Canon right away!

Dont you see it yourself?
BTW, did you look at the 100% crop of the ISO 100 image at all?

 

[Stephen Eastwood]

here is a cropped section from the 1DS, at 100 percent, straight conversion from raw, no sharpening, no leveling nothing, then reopened cropped at 100% then saved level 11 of 12 in PS 7.0 that crop ws then reopened run through my 1DS interpolation action only, still no leveling, sharpening nada, to just a few pixels over 400% original size and then saved at 100 percent jpg through PS 7.0 save for web and I still see no noise. You tell me, I can easily say, and show that 35mm film could never do so well.

100 percent crop



400%



oringinal framing of shot



--
Stephen Eastwood
http://www.nyphotographics.com

 

[melvin sokolsky]

Why would Fred Miranda cheat us??

Cuz he was payed by Canon, to advertise it.

Isn't he trying to give us the
best possible information?

He is trying to give the best possable advertisement to the 1Ds.

I liked his review.

Not bad but.... unfaithful.

I expect that if the
1Ds were a noisy beast, he'd tell us and Canon right away!

Dont you see it yourself?
BTW, did you look at the 100% crop of the ISO 100 image at all?

Igor,

I'm curious, could you show us some of your images?

--
jrisc