-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
EOS-1Ds samples from Steve
- Thread starter Igor R.
- Start date
H
harry
Guest
Of all the digicam reviews, I found Steve's provided the most consistent "real-world" samples, and I particularly like the one image showing the back site of some kind of a commercial property. I finally could see the numbers on the dumpster with the 1Ds sample, and the street name is very clear and sharp. When I went back to see some of the 2 mp samples taken some time ago at the same spot, the progress has been trememdous.
Harry
Harry
Harry
--
Harry
Michael Long
Senior Member
While I kind of like it when Phil takes different photo's, it would be nice if he'd do four or five the same each and every time. It would make comparing different cameras a lot easier.
aaront
Senior Member
The red brick building is a school. I have long used Steve's "standard" school shot to compare resolutions of different cameras. I DL them and open them in an image editor (eg: PS) and look at it at full rez (100%). If I am really interested in the camera I then resize the pic to 12x18 keeping the same file size and crop a 8x10" section that includes the street sign and part of the building. I then print it out to examine the detail.
This is the first first camera I have been able to clearly see the #400 on the street sign. It is also the first I have been able to count the individual bricks in the soldier course (the upright bricks) under the windows on the building. Also, you can clearly see the chain link fence around the transformer at the back of the building. Being able to take advantage of the full area of the lens (and also 11 megapixels) seems to have definitely set a new standard.
--
Aaron Thomson
and some of my pics
http://www.groupfirst.com/portfolio1.html
(Wannabe, Gonnabe) Pro Photog
This is the first first camera I have been able to clearly see the #400 on the street sign. It is also the first I have been able to count the individual bricks in the soldier course (the upright bricks) under the windows on the building. Also, you can clearly see the chain link fence around the transformer at the back of the building. Being able to take advantage of the full area of the lens (and also 11 megapixels) seems to have definitely set a new standard.
--
Aaron Thomson
and some of my pics
http://www.groupfirst.com/portfolio1.html
(Wannabe, Gonnabe) Pro Photog
hoang nguyen
Leading Member
We need a sample of the Kodak 14 mp sample of the school.
I still see a very noticeable amount of noise in the background in some of theose pics. I wonder what the ISO was. I would think they'd have been around ISO 100. Surprising amount of noise.
aaront
Senior Member
--
Aaron Thomson
and some of my pics
http://www.groupfirst.com/portfolio1.html
(Wannabe, Gonnabe) Pro Photog
Jan Boeijink
Well-known member
There IS much detail, because it's BIG. But nothing is really sharp. Thanks to Mike Chaney, I can recognize this now as a typical Bayer image.
hoang nguyen
Leading Member
Amen!, spoken like a true believer(of foveon I think). I hope you are right, or I just might have to settle with 14MPS.
What if we can just print the pictures the way the bayers sensor sees it. You know, RGBG , print the raw image, then the eyes will just resolve it like it does in real life. This does not make sense does it?
Hoang (confused)
What if we can just print the pictures the way the bayers sensor sees it. You know, RGBG , print the raw image, then the eyes will just resolve it like it does in real life. This does not make sense does it?
Hoang (confused)
rick decker
Forum Pro
Good point Jan - I noticed that right away on two pictures I looked at. It is inherent in Bayer cameras (maybe they should sell them with a jar of Bayer Asperin), although on small to mid-sized prints it may not show or be obvious that much.
Thomas Karlmann
Senior Member
Whaaaat? A "surprising amount of noise"? Compared to what exactly?
Really, what are your standards? I'm sure some of you out there, if given a 10000G pixel camera would just keep blowing it up & up & up until you found something you didn't like, then complain that the image was full of noise!
Maybe you guys need that (sic)whopping 3.5 Mpixel Foveon chip to make you happy. Then you can put those "ultra high qua;lity" Sigma lenses (10-1000mm at f 0.5 for $50) on it, and probably won't be able to see the sign post!
Oh yeah -- that image is just FULL of 'BAYER interpolation" anomolies! Yeah, right. Get real!
I'll take the Canon.
Thom
Really, what are your standards? I'm sure some of you out there, if given a 10000G pixel camera would just keep blowing it up & up & up until you found something you didn't like, then complain that the image was full of noise!
Maybe you guys need that (sic)whopping 3.5 Mpixel Foveon chip to make you happy. Then you can put those "ultra high qua;lity" Sigma lenses (10-1000mm at f 0.5 for $50) on it, and probably won't be able to see the sign post!
Oh yeah -- that image is just FULL of 'BAYER interpolation" anomolies! Yeah, right. Get real!
I'll take the Canon.
Thom
rick decker
Forum Pro
Yes...you definitely need a Bayer!!
Oh, yeah lots of noise, LOL! Seriously dude, what are you talking about?
Jan Boeijink
Well-known member
Thomas,
For the last 2 years, I have been looking at numerous shots by Steve of that building, and every time I was disappointed about the sharpness, the details were always sort-of blurred. This image looks the same, it's only bigger.
Jan
M
misha
Guest
Jan, given that experience, why would you expect samples from the 1Ds to be radically different? Its major difference from earlier models is resolution, not some totally new technlogy, like Foveon. You find the image not sharp, but I understand that's from vieweing part of the full-size image on your monitor (unless you have a 11mp monitor). I expect it will look very sharp and detailed resampled to any screen resolution, say, 1600x1200, or printed in a large format. Samples from Foveon (SD9) look very sharp, but that's at 3 mp. When upsampled to 6mp, let alone 11mp, they start to look comparably to Bayer output.
--
Misha
Wangler56634
Forum Enthusiast
The tree leaves in the 1ds samples are still ugly!!! The same for all bayer sensor, no matter how many pixels they have. Even size the files down to 3MP, the tree leaves are still ugly.
The only time I saw beautiful leaves was when the Foven samples first came out.The nature's beauty lies in things like tree leaves, rather than wall bricks. A "wall bricks" recording camera is not a great camera in my heart, at least not for nature photography!!!
Wangler
Darkness is made up of dark particles.
The only time I saw beautiful leaves was when the Foven samples first came out.The nature's beauty lies in things like tree leaves, rather than wall bricks. A "wall bricks" recording camera is not a great camera in my heart, at least not for nature photography!!!
Wangler
--
Darkness is made up of dark particles.
Igor R.
Senior Member
Igor R.
Senior Member
Bayer cannot look any better, because of its construction. 1Ds is the same D30 with more pixels, and more noise.
Igor R.
Senior Member
Who needs it? Bayer is just a cheap solution!
Thomas Karlmann
Senior Member
Compared to what? Film? Hah! What is your 'fabulous' standard by which this 1DS looks so bad?
Unless your equipment exists only in cyber-space, what do you use that is so fantastic? Give us the 'standard' by which you think this 1Ds is soo awful.
For me, I need to sell images to clients. I can do this --- easily --- with those 1Ds images -- that to apparently so many here are "filled with surprising amounts or noise" and chock full of "bayer interpolation anomolies".
Who is going to come to your resucue then? Sigma? To each his/her own.
I think there have also been many who keep saying that the 1Ds images are merely 'bigger'. Let's try some 1Ds word exercises and try to use the right words: m-m-m-m (stop stuttering) m-more re-re res rez res (that's it -- say it now) o lu lu tion(there -- that wasn't so bad). Now put it together -- more resolution.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum