Reading mode: Light Dark

Surprisingly bad mkIII images - direct comparison to D60

Go to last post
Even if the 1D MKIII was focusing incorrectly you'd expect a focus plain on the pics but as far as I can see there is none. The shutter speeds are too low and I think this is a clear case of camera shake.

Even when My 1D MKIII focuses erratically there is still a focus plain on the image even if the main subject is OOF.

Best wishes
sue @ http://www.suesbirdphotos.co.uk
 
Not sure if you actually read the text on how I did it and you're still insisting there is shake - or you didn't read it at all. In any case all shots were taken mounted on a surdy tripod, no wind, and timer was used for all the shots. The only way shake would exist is because I did not use mirror lockup (how often is this function used out in the field?).

Anyway - to all those saying about they're not good tests, why should I try to favour the camera when real-world conditions might not allow for f8... Wether or not the aperture was "incorrect" the two cameras produced very different images. I WILL do some more tests (have a shoot tomorrow and will use the 16-35L II and see how it goes).

I'm going to ring the supplier now to ask their advice.
 
Hi,

Sorry! but no I didn't read all the posts but I'm sure the mirror could be enough to cause the camera shake. I've never done aything at the shutter speed you used but I would use the mirror lockup function to be 100% sure there is no camera shake at all. You should be getting a better image quality than this IMO. I've owned the S2, D2H, D2X, D300, 30D and the 1D MKIII and in my oppinion even with the focusing flaws the 1D MKIII produces the best image quality straight from the camera.

Best wishes
Sue @ http://www.suesbirdphotos.co.uk
Horrgakx said:
Not sure if you actually read the text on how I did it and you're
still insisting there is shake - or you didn't read it at all. In
any case all shots were taken mounted on a surdy tripod, no wind, and
timer was used for all the shots. The only way shake would exist is
because I did not use mirror lockup (how often is this function used
out in the field?).

Anyway - to all those saying about they're not good tests, why should
I try to favour the camera when real-world conditions might not allow
for f8... Wether or not the aperture was "incorrect" the two cameras
produced very different images. I WILL do some more tests (have a
shoot tomorrow and will use the 16-35L II and see how it goes).

I'm going to ring the supplier now to ask their advice.
Click to expand...
 
Horrgakx said:
The only way shake would exist is
because I did not use mirror lockup (how often is this function used
out in the field?).
Click to expand...
...Even in my own bench, in my house, with ABSOLUTELY no external variables, and loaded on the Manfrotto tripos, I have screwed-up some images because I did not bother with MLU. A resulting difference of 10%-20% increase in image SIZE could be immediately experienced by simply activating MLU, thus transferring even more sharpness and detail.
Horrgakx said:
Wether or not the aperture was "incorrect" the two cameras
produced very different images.
Click to expand...
No doubts. You do seem to have a f'd-up setup, over there.

Good luck!

--

TIP: If you do not like this post, simply press the 'COMPLAINT' button. Mommy/Daddy are just one click away.
 
I use MLU on about 30% of my shots.

Steven
Horrgakx said:
Not sure if you actually read the text on how I did it and you're
still insisting there is shake - or you didn't read it at all. In
any case all shots were taken mounted on a surdy tripod, no wind, and
timer was used for all the shots. The only way shake would exist is
because I did not use mirror lockup (how often is this function used
out in the field?).

Anyway - to all those saying about they're not good tests, why should
I try to favour the camera when real-world conditions might not allow
for f8... Wether or not the aperture was "incorrect" the two cameras
produced very different images. I WILL do some more tests (have a
shoot tomorrow and will use the 16-35L II and see how it goes).

I'm going to ring the supplier now to ask their advice.
Click to expand...
--
---
Fall 2007:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_fall_2007_downtown_chicago

2006 White Sands and Bisti Workshop
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/white_sands_and_bisti

 
This is the same image with a small amount of sharpening applied:



Also, I tried to match the contrast. What you are seeing is that a MP is a MP. The level of detail difference in any DLSR almost comes down to MP. Since this shot with the same lesn at the same f/stop, the detail per unit area is about the same.

Likewise, the base sharpness of the D60 and 1D Mk III are about the same as well.

NOTE: The pixel density of the D60 and 1D Mk III is similar.

Steven

--
---
Fall 2007:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_fall_2007_downtown_chicago

2006 White Sands and Bisti Workshop
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/white_sands_and_bisti

 
Horrgakx said:
Not sure if you actually read the text on how I did it and you're
still insisting there is shake - or you didn't read it at all. In
any case all shots were taken mounted on a surdy tripod, no wind, and
timer was used for all the shots. The only way shake would exist is
because I did not use mirror lockup (how often is this function used
out in the field?).

Anyway - to all those saying about they're not good tests, why should
I try to favour the camera when real-world conditions might not allow
for f8... Wether or not the aperture was "incorrect" the two cameras
produced very different images. I WILL do some more tests (have a
shoot tomorrow and will use the 16-35L II and see how it goes).

I'm going to ring the supplier now to ask their advice.
Click to expand...
because your test was flawed for all the reasons that people have nicely attempted to point out to you.

the biggest difference was that you used all points AF and assumed that the D60 / DIII would select the same point of contrast to lock onto.

as suggested / recommended which you don't want to listen to for some reason:

do the following:

with MLU enabled (since you are working with extraordinaryly long exposures and NO IS enabled,

1) take an image at all f-stops, in RAW from both cameras. using single point AF locked on the same point (I recommended the window in nearly the center view if you are simply going to repeat).

2) account for FOV difference between 1.3 crop and 1.6 crop.

then at least when you come back, we'll all have some resemblance of normal sensor testing to review.

and btw, there is no reason on the planet for using f/22 - use ND filters and stay around the sweet spot, or even use ISO 50 if you have to.
 
Very interesting.

So with the mkIII where you can adjust the picture style, the sharpening info (etc) will be recorded alongside RAW files and displayed as such when brought up in the likes of Lightroom?
 
I notice that MLU can be activated using the SET button - but so is Live View.

I'll need to experiment to see what happens when MLU and LiveView are activated together and which takes priority.

I did a lot of extremely low light indoor shooting over the weekend (like 30-120s exposures) and liveview was essential to get the focus right (ie. shine a torch on the spot to focus and use 5x or 10x to acheive focus).

Took peoples' advice and used a mid aperture (f7.1 of f8) though I would have normally have shot a bit wider under those circumstances.
 
Horrgakx said:
I notice that MLU can be activated using the SET button - but so is
Live View.
I'll need to experiment to see what happens when MLU and LiveView are
activated together and which takes priority.
Click to expand...
Mirror comes up in live view, so it is also MLU.
 
Of course it does, thanks.
 
f22 - didn't realise it would be detrimental. You'd use a high f-number to get a big DOF but I know now to not get close to that.
 
What a forum this is!

A guy posts some tests, which are not particularly scientific and he was not aware that stopping down to f22 causes diffraction, but these tests are perfectly adequate to show that there is clearly a problem.

And you get people who ridicule him thinking that, in doing so, it makes them look somehow fabulously clever and superior - the "I'm an expert, therefore you are stupid" sort of attitude. One poster even descibed the tests as insanity!

All it shows is what a set of di* heads they are.
 
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