Reading mode: Light Dark

1D samples from impress DIGITAL CAMERA Web MAGAZINE

Go to last post
What do you think is meant by 'Beta' version? Is this the same pre-production version that's been previewed by Phil? I hope so, because the moiré on IMG_1928 is quite bad. And dust is more than an issue than you'd want to :-(

Thanks for posting.

gr. Michel
AVJason said:
Hi all Canon fans !

The following link will give you several sample photos taken by the
Canon EOS 1D (Beta version) from "just released" December edition
of Japanese "impress DIGITAL CAMERA Web MAGAZINE" :-

http://home.impress.co.jp/magazine/digitalcamera/01_12/eos1d/index.htm

What do you think ?

Jason.
Click to expand...
 
Jason,

thank you for the link. If the camera was beta then one should not loose a word about the technical picture quality. The photos on the other hand are well chosen. Someone put real effort into this.
AVJason said:
Hi all Canon fans !

The following link will give you several sample photos taken by the
Canon EOS 1D (Beta version) from "just released" December edition
of Japanese "impress DIGITAL CAMERA Web MAGAZINE" :-

http://home.impress.co.jp/magazine/digitalcamera/01_12/eos1d/index.htm

What do you think ?

Jason.
Click to expand...
 
Michel said:
What do you think is meant by 'Beta' version? Is this the same
pre-production version that's been previewed by Phil? I hope so,
because the moiré on IMG_1928 is quite bad. And dust is more than
an issue than you'd want to :-(

Thanks for posting.

gr. Michel
Click to expand...
I agree with your disappointment with the moire on 1928. Moire is appearing even in places where normally doesn't occur.
The production version photos also have moire, but not this bad.

Still early though. Let's see some more reviews and also some examples of images of production cameras run through Quantum Mechanic. Shouldn't need to pay another 200 or $300 bucks for additional software to help the camera out. Not on a professional camera.

I still like the camera. My opinion may change if this moire issue turns out to be a major problem.
 
Same here Rob.

This is a bit disappointing. I hope it will not be an issue on the production camera.

The noise pattern (banding) in all ISO sensitivities was already a lot to deal with. Now the horrible moiré patterns... :(((

Here is a crop that clearly shows the problem. (From IMG_1928) - There is a lot of moiré on the model's hair as well.



Fred Miranda
Rob Patterson said:
Michel said:
What do you think is meant by 'Beta' version? Is this the same
pre-production version that's been previewed by Phil? I hope so,
because the moiré on IMG_1928 is quite bad. And dust is more than
an issue than you'd want to :-(

Thanks for posting.

gr. Michel
Click to expand...
I agree with your disappointment with the moire on 1928. Moire is
appearing even in places where normally doesn't occur.
The production version photos also have moire, but not this bad.
Still early though. Let's see some more reviews and also some
examples of images of production cameras run through Quantum
Mechanic. Shouldn't need to pay another 200 or $300 bucks for
additional software to help the camera out. Not on a professional
camera.
I still like the camera. My opinion may change if this moire issue
turns out to be a major problem.
Click to expand...
 
FRED said:
Same here Rob.
This is a bit disappointing. I hope it will not be an issue on the
production camera.
The noise pattern (banding) in all ISO sensitivities was already a
lot to deal with. Now the horrible moiré patterns... :(((

Here is a crop that clearly shows the problem. (From IMG_1928) -
There is a lot of moiré on the model's hair as well.



Fred Miranda
Click to expand...
Yes, that's the image that really blew my mind. Moire doesn't usually appear on a spot such as this. Usually on highly reflective metal such as tin roofs or cyclone fences. Seeing it here raises some serious questions about this camera.

Unless they get this squared away with the ones that they send out on the street for us to buy, I won't bother with it. What a shame. Canon's excellent lens battery. A fully sealed combat ready camera that you don't have to baby and it does this.
I really hope they hold off releasing it and fix this problem if possible.
Otherwise, it's D1X or D30.
Member said:
Rob Patterson said:
Michel said:
What do you think is meant by 'Beta' version? Is this the same
pre-production version that's been previewed by Phil? I hope so,
because the moiré on IMG_1928 is quite bad. And dust is more than
an issue than you'd want to :-(

Thanks for posting.

gr. Michel
Click to expand...
I agree with your disappointment with the moire on 1928. Moire is
appearing even in places where normally doesn't occur.
The production version photos also have moire, but not this bad.
Still early though. Let's see some more reviews and also some
examples of images of production cameras run through Quantum
Mechanic. Shouldn't need to pay another 200 or $300 bucks for
additional software to help the camera out. Not on a professional
camera.
I still like the camera. My opinion may change if this moire issue
turns out to be a major problem.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Stefan Klocke said:
Jason,

thank you for the link. If the camera was beta then one should not
loose a word about the technical picture quality. The photos on the
other hand are well chosen. Someone put real effort into this.
Click to expand...
I agree on the work and skill of the photographer. However, because Canon does read forum responses such as this, I feel it's very important to voice disfavor. The production shots posted earlier had some minor, although unexceptable moire. Canon needs to be made aware of this.

The problem could be in the filter. It could be algorithams. Whatever it is, it needs to be addressed. Even if it means a delay in their release date.
 
Moiré not withstanding has anyone noticed the distinct banding in ALL the full size 1D pictures?

Understand, I'm not here to start a flame war or any of the other foolishness I've seen here before here. I'm not here to argue about what Canon is or ins't upto, or if they have dropped anything or let anyone down, just the technical merits (or lack of) of the equipment.

So far regardless of where, or who has taken the pictures, I've noticed very distinct horizontal banding, especially in the darker areas of the full sized images that appears to be an artifact of the interline CCD they are using. For video the tolerances are not quite as tight as for stills and so the noise wouldn't show. In the 1D however you are asking it capture an instant in time and when you take into account the pure physics involved, light travels some serious distance in a second, break it down into nano seconds that the interline CCD uses and suddenly you are taking in effect two different pictures and lacing them together. You can see this especially evident in the darker spaces as lines that go clear across the frame, and I can not see how they can possibly get rid of that kind of noise, especially since it is fairly subtle and the sheer processing power AND time would make it impossible to do in camera.
FRED said:
Here is a crop that clearly shows the problem. (From IMG_1928) -
There is a lot of moiré on the model's hair as well.



Fred Miranda
Rob Patterson said:
Michel said:
What do you think is meant by 'Beta' version? Is this the same
pre-production version that's been previewed by Phil? I hope so,
because the moiré on IMG_1928 is quite bad. And dust is more than
an issue than you'd want to :-(

Thanks for posting.

gr. Michel
Click to expand...
I agree with your disappointment with the moire on 1928. Moire is
appearing even in places where normally doesn't occur.
The production version photos also have moire, but not this bad.
Still early though. Let's see some more reviews and also some
examples of images of production cameras run through Quantum
Mechanic. Shouldn't need to pay another 200 or $300 bucks for
additional software to help the camera out. Not on a professional
camera.
I still like the camera. My opinion may change if this moire issue
turns out to be a major problem.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I have the magazine in which these photos were published and it states the the
camera is NOT the production model but the beta version.

M
Stefan Klocke said:
thank you for the link. If the camera was beta then one should not
loose a word about the technical picture quality. The photos on the
other hand are well chosen. Someone put real effort into this.
Member said:
What do you think ?

Jason.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
There is a new sequence of ISO sensitivities posted on the following page: (at the bottom)
http://myalbum.ne.jp/cgi-bin/a_menu?id=fa756822

There you will see ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200 comparisons of the same picture (this is also a production camera).

The ISO 100 is VERY clean but dynamic range suffers. (Check out the blown out highlights).
The noise-banding pattern is still there, but surprisingly not as bad as before.

IMO, 1D pictures won't be as "pushable" as the D30's. That means 1D users will need to get a "close to perfect" exposure right out the camera.

Fred
Rob Patterson said:
FRED said:
Same here Rob.
This is a bit disappointing. I hope it will not be an issue on the
production camera.
The noise pattern (banding) in all ISO sensitivities was already a
lot to deal with. Now the horrible moiré patterns... :(((

Here is a crop that clearly shows the problem. (From IMG_1928) -
There is a lot of moiré on the model's hair as well.



Fred Miranda
Click to expand...
Yes, that's the image that really blew my mind. Moire doesn't
usually appear on a spot such as this. Usually on highly reflective
metal such as tin roofs or cyclone fences. Seeing it here raises
some serious questions about this camera.
Unless they get this squared away with the ones that they send out
on the street for us to buy, I won't bother with it. What a shame.
Canon's excellent lens battery. A fully sealed combat ready camera
that you don't have to baby and it does this.
I really hope they hold off releasing it and fix this problem if
possible.
Otherwise, it's D1X or D30.
Member said:
Rob Patterson said:
Michel said:
What do you think is meant by 'Beta' version? Is this the same
pre-production version that's been previewed by Phil? I hope so,
because the moiré on IMG_1928 is quite bad. And dust is more than
an issue than you'd want to :-(

Thanks for posting.

gr. Michel
Click to expand...
I agree with your disappointment with the moire on 1928. Moire is
appearing even in places where normally doesn't occur.
The production version photos also have moire, but not this bad.
Still early though. Let's see some more reviews and also some
examples of images of production cameras run through Quantum
Mechanic. Shouldn't need to pay another 200 or $300 bucks for
additional software to help the camera out. Not on a professional
camera.
I still like the camera. My opinion may change if this moire issue
turns out to be a major problem.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
FRED said:
There is a new sequence of ISO sensitivities posted on the
following page: (at the bottom)
http://myalbum.ne.jp/cgi-bin/a_menu?id=fa756822

There you will see ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200
comparisons of the same picture (this is also a production camera).
The ISO 100 is VERY clean but dynamic range suffers. (Check out the
blown out highlights).
The noise-banding pattern is still there, but surprisingly not as
bad as before.
IMO, 1D pictures won't be as "pushable" as the D30's. That means 1D
users will need to get a "close to perfect" exposure right out the
camera.

Fred
Click to expand...
Damn that page is slow!!! I have DSL and its freakin slow. I gave up after a 1/4 of the 1600 and 3200 pictures. I still have not seen enough good samples to form any opinion. The samples I seen at a demonstration with a production model look better then anything I've seen off the web so far! If I went by what I seen on the web I would be just as horrified, but honestly I think the production cameras will be a lot better. The canon rep had a laptop I we shot a number of ISO 800 and 1600 shots. I took the ones I shot home with me on my card. We looked at the pics very carfully at 100%, and even examained each channel. I can say I was happy up to ISO 800, but have not seen enough 1600 or 3200 to say anything! I'm pretty sure the 1D will be able to andle pretty well up to ISO 1600, but the moiré is a concern. I have not seen any this obvious before. I'm also wondering what settings were used. If they used extra sharping wouldn't that contribute to more moiré? I'm thinking perhaps they used extra sharpening to impress us with the sharpness but were not aware of the counter effect by it. Either that, or there is a serious problem that needs to be fixed. Time will tell.

Jim K
 
SRS said:
Moiré not withstanding has anyone noticed the distinct banding in
ALL the full size 1D pictures?

Understand, I'm not here to start a flame war or any of the other
foolishness I've seen here before here. I'm not here to argue
about what Canon is or ins't upto, or if they have dropped anything
or let anyone down, just the technical merits (or lack of) of the
equipment.

So far regardless of where, or who has taken the pictures, I've
noticed very distinct horizontal banding, especially in the darker
areas of the full sized images that appears to be an artifact of
the interline CCD they are using. For video the tolerances are not
quite as tight as for stills and so the noise wouldn't show. In
the 1D however you are asking it capture an instant in time and
when you take into account the pure physics involved, light travels
some serious distance in a second, break it down into nano seconds
that the interline CCD uses and suddenly you are taking in effect
two different pictures and lacing them together. You can see this
especially evident in the darker spaces as lines that go clear
across the frame, and I can not see how they can possibly get rid
of that kind of noise, especially since it is fairly subtle and the
sheer processing power AND time would make it impossible to do in
camera.
Click to expand...
I have 2 samples that I shot at ISO 1600 last week with a production model ver 1.01, take a look at them and tell me if you see any banding.
http://www.jimsphotopage.com/digital/1d/index.html

I see noise of course, but it seems acceptable to me and I'm not sure I would call it banding. Still, I would like to see other samples and more opinions. Understand I am not taking a position one way or the other just yet. I have not been impressed with any of the samples I've seen on the web, but actually handling the camera and exaiming the images with the canon rep, I'd have to say at least I'm pleased up to ISO 800.

Thanks,
Jim K
 
SRS said:
Moiré not withstanding has anyone noticed the distinct banding in
ALL the full size 1D pictures?

Understand, I'm not here to start a flame war or any of the other
foolishness I've seen here before here. I'm not here to argue
about what Canon is or ins't upto, or if they have dropped anything
or let anyone down, just the technical merits (or lack of) of the
equipment.
Click to expand...
Yes.. this banding is very disappointing for me. Even at 100ISO it's quite evident. Has anyone printed these to see if it's still visible?

As far as the moire is concerned, it doesn't surprise me with those shorts, corduroy would certainly produce moire on the D30, too. It does, however, seem very pronounced on the 1D.
 
The oscillation circuit replacement on the Nikon D1 seemed to take care of any noise banding.

I wonder if the oscillation circuit is the cause of the patterns on the 1D image.
Anyone?

Fred
Jim K said:
FRED said:
There is a new sequence of ISO sensitivities posted on the
following page: (at the bottom)
http://myalbum.ne.jp/cgi-bin/a_menu?id=fa756822

There you will see ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200
comparisons of the same picture (this is also a production camera).
The ISO 100 is VERY clean but dynamic range suffers. (Check out the
blown out highlights).
The noise-banding pattern is still there, but surprisingly not as
bad as before.
IMO, 1D pictures won't be as "pushable" as the D30's. That means 1D
users will need to get a "close to perfect" exposure right out the
camera.

Fred
Click to expand...
Damn that page is slow!!! I have DSL and its freakin slow. I gave
up after a 1/4 of the 1600 and 3200 pictures. I still have not seen
enough good samples to form any opinion. The samples I seen at a
demonstration with a production model look better then anything
I've seen off the web so far! If I went by what I seen on the web I
would be just as horrified, but honestly I think the production
cameras will be a lot better. The canon rep had a laptop I we shot
a number of ISO 800 and 1600 shots. I took the ones I shot home
with me on my card. We looked at the pics very carfully at 100%,
and even examained each channel. I can say I was happy up to ISO
800, but have not seen enough 1600 or 3200 to say anything! I'm
pretty sure the 1D will be able to andle pretty well up to ISO
1600, but the moiré is a concern. I have not seen any this obvious
before. I'm also wondering what settings were used. If they used
extra sharping wouldn't that contribute to more moiré? I'm thinking
perhaps they used extra sharpening to impress us with the sharpness
but were not aware of the counter effect by it. Either that, or
there is a serious problem that needs to be fixed. Time will tell.

Jim K
Click to expand...
 
Jim K said:
SRS said:
Moiré not withstanding has anyone noticed the distinct banding in
ALL the full size 1D pictures?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
-------------------------clipped
Jim K53618 said:
I have 2 samples that I shot at ISO 1600 last week with a
production model ver 1.01, take a look at them and tell me if you
see any banding.
http://www.jimsphotopage.com/digital/1d/index.html
I see noise of course, but it seems acceptable to me and I'm not
sure I would call it banding. Still, I would like to see other
samples and more opinions. Understand I am not taking a position
one way or the other just yet. I have not been impressed with any
of the samples I've seen on the web, but actually handling the
camera and exaiming the images with the canon rep, I'd have to say
at least I'm pleased up to ISO 800.

Thanks,
Jim K
Click to expand...
Hello Jim,

Sorry to say but yes, each of your shots has the same distinct banding I've seen in every 1D shot to date. Lost in the fray about noise, and quite possibly confused as same, is some very clear, very consistent and linear horizontal noise (banding) that is easier to see on darker shots, but still there on all of them. Look to any of the full size images and you'll find it most noticable on darker subjects ut if you look close (zoom in) you'll be able to run Photoshop's eyedropper tool up and down and side to side and see clear banding.

Sorry about that! I know it is easy to get excited about the new toy, but I believe in getting value for that kind of expense, and it simply isn't there with images like that.

SRS.
 
SRS said:
Hello Jim,

Sorry to say but yes, each of your shots has the same distinct
banding I've seen in every 1D shot to date. Lost in the fray about
noise, and quite possibly confused as same, is some very clear,
very consistent and linear horizontal noise (banding) that is
easier to see on darker shots, but still there on all of them.
Look to any of the full size images and you'll find it most
noticable on darker subjects ut if you look close (zoom in) you'll
be able to run Photoshop's eyedropper tool up and down and side to
side and see clear banding.

Sorry about that! I know it is easy to get excited about the new
toy, but I believe in getting value for that kind of expense, and
it simply isn't there with images like that.

SRS.
Click to expand...
Wow, I honestly don't see any banding, at least none like I seen on the old D1. I wonder if you could possibly crop a section where its most noticable and either email it to me or post it here.

Thanks,
Jim K
 
Rob,

interesting was also the choice of lenses. They had two excellent lenses. The 85 1.2 and 70-200. The third lens the 17-35 is much weaker optically. When viewing MTF curves, then the 17-35 has quite diverging plots for radial vs sagital lines ( I am not sure about the exact word or spelling). If these lines coincide, then the lens will give for example a nice blur.
See http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/detail/CaEF17-35_28LUSM-51.shtml

I wonder if this is the first time that one sees the problem of Bayer pattern vs interpolation vs artifacts vs lens quality, so clearly. The fact that the editors included this lens shows their skill as well.

I have little hopes that this will be solved, maybe that is the other reason they produced a new wide angle zoom. Since the moire is all an interpolation product, one can always rely on the raw files and improved software to get it sorted out. I seem to remember having read an article on the web that showed how moire can be eliminated/reduced if one feeds into the interpolation lens distortion parameters. Sounded promising for the future. Raises questions about full frame Bayer sensors with poor lenses.

Also remember the DC760 without AA filter will give bad moire. Maybe Canon is using a weaker AA filter to preserve more detail. 4 MB is not that much and the Kodak, lost a lot of detail when using an AA filter. (the example on Robs review was a 14mm Nikon lens, for sure full of problems for Bayer interpolation)

The major problem that I have with this camera is the banding in deep shadows. I do hate it. But when looking at the sunset image, the bad banding is in RGBs less than 10,10,10. What will it be in ISO800 or 1600? This Rob Galbraith, when asked about the D1 banding at the time said that a properly exposed farme would not show it. That was a professional, that seems to have the ear of Nikon/Canon. Same maybe here.

I wonder if this banding is not the price you have to pay for 8fps. Maybe the CCD rows can not be normalized quickly enough in this speed?

It might after all be that the D1 is a truely professional piece of kit. Only usefull to those that need it in a specific context. Like the "silly money" fast lenses that cost a fortune and are only really needed sometimes.

And if Canon reads this: If the D1 is as good as it gets then please provide a roadmap for those that do want 4 or 5 MP without 8fps and banding.
Member said:
I agree on the work and skill of the photographer. However, because
Canon does read forum responses such as this, I feel it's very
important to voice disfavor. The production shots posted earlier
had some minor, although unexceptable moire. Canon needs to be made
aware of this.
The problem could be in the filter. It could be algorithams.
Whatever it is, it needs to be addressed. Even if it means a delay
in their release date
Click to expand...
 
Jim K said:
1600, but the moiré is a concern. I have not seen any this obvious
before. I'm also wondering what settings were used. If they used
extra sharping wouldn't that contribute to more moiré? I'm thinking
perhaps they used extra sharpening to impress us with the sharpness
but were not aware of the counter effect by it. Either that, or
there is a serious problem that needs to be fixed. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
It's not extra sharpening, it has to do with the strength of the anti-aliasing filter. All the AA filter really does is blur the image enough to smear details across multiple pixels. It's a trade-off between sharpness and alias prevention.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the moire. I'd rather have a little sharper image and hit any occasional localized moire with the Moire Eraser filter. I guess that's easy for me to say now, but if the AA filter isn't strong enough and there's moire in every image I'll be singing a different tune. :-)
 
Actually, the bad oscillator had no effect on the banding of the type we're seeing with the 1D. It fixed a problem that looked like a herring bone pattern (diagonal). The horizontal banding on the original D1 was never fixed. I see it constantly on wire service images. With the D1H and D1X, Nikon completely eliminated horizontal banding. I'm hoping Canon does the same.
FRED said:
The oscillation circuit replacement on the Nikon D1 seemed to take
care of any noise banding.
I wonder if the oscillation circuit is the cause of the patterns on
the 1D image.
Anyone?

Fred
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top