Sharpness of images of 5D3 compared to 5D...

canon person

Senior Member
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
119
Location
US
When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.



Any c/c are appreciated. Thank you.



Canon Person
 
Did you try to play with the Sharpness in the "Picture Style" option? I had the same feeling when moving from my 40D (where sharpness was not a parameter) to the 5D3. Then I increased the Sharpness in the "Picture Style" up to level 5 (from 0 to 7), and since my pictures are sharp enough.
 
canon person wrote:

When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.

Any c/c are appreciated. Thank you.

Canon Person
How are you viewing these exactly? Are you uprezzing the 5D file to match the size of the 5D3? If you are working towards a final goal....a print....the 5D3 will have more rez and better sharpness.
 
canon person wrote:

When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.

Any c/c are appreciated. Thank you.

Canon Person
This seems like a classic acutance vs resolution discussion. The 5D samples far less frequently than the 5D3, so gradients will appear smoother with the 5D3. I'm not sure of how the AA filters compare, honestly, but you have a few choices here and comparisons left to do.

1. Up res the 5D file to 23 mp and compare.

2. Down res the 5D3 file to 12 mp and compare using bicubic sharper or even nearest neighbor if you wanna throw away information for "sharpness".

3. Print from both the same size and compare, which is really the sensible thing to do.

I think you'll find that the 5D3's files are superior.
 
In DPR 5D II review that it compared to 5D1, DPR review said,

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/33

On a pixel level, the original 5D is still slightly better than the Mark II, but this is to be expected as the original 5D had a very weak anti aliasing filter. In real world use the 5D Mark II will more than make up for any difference in pixel level sharpness with all those extra pixels, so if you need it, the 5D Mark II represents a significant resolution hike over its predecessor.

They compared at per-pixel level at respective 100% cropped. If you compare at the same size output 5D III (that is sharper than 5D II, average 15% sharper according to DXO) should be sharper with more details. Because 5D III has stronger AA filter and has more pixels, you might need to apply sharpening more.
 
Joe Kovalsky wrote:

Did you try to play with the Sharpness in the "Picture Style" option? I had the same feeling when moving from my 40D (where sharpness was not a parameter) to the 5D3. Then I increased the Sharpness in the "Picture Style" up to level 5 (from 0 to 7), and since my pictures are sharp enough.
If you use DPP, make sure to apply sharpening in both RAW (I sill prefer old method not Unsharp Mask) and JPEG tabs. I usually apply +4 in RAW level and +200-300 in JPEG tab. That is equivalent to Sharpening bar in LR (RAW level) and Output (screen) sharpening (JPEG level) when you Export photos to generate JPEG files in LR.
 
I don't know what to tell you, but I've noticed the same thing when comparing 5D images to those from my 7D and EOS M. The 5D images always look crisper even if not as much detail was captured. I have noted that 5D images start to soften up sooner in larger prints than those from the 18MP sensor. However, I still find the look of images from the 5D to be unique.
 
ovlov wrote:

I don't know what to tell you, but I've noticed the same thing when comparing 5D images to those from my 7D and EOS M.
5D1 is a FF camera after of all, so no surprise it produces sharper photos than APS-C cameras with most lenses.
The 5D images always look crisper even if not as much detail was captured. I have noted that 5D images start to soften up sooner in larger prints than those from the 18MP sensor. However, I still find the look of images from the 5D to be unique.
When you print photos from less MP cameras, you should enlarge photos thru software such as Photoshop to match to the same size of cameras with more MP first before printing that will make difference. I don't see 5D1 prints softer than my 60D with the lenses I own to 20x30" prints but I did enlarge photos first before prints.

No intention to start a new debate on weary old topic but just share my own experiences as I do own both 5D1 and 60D.
 
ovlov wrote:

I don't know what to tell you, but I've noticed the same thing when comparing 5D images to those from my 7D and EOS M. The 5D images always look crisper even if not as much detail was captured. I have noted that 5D images start to soften up sooner in larger prints than those from the 18MP sensor. However, I still find the look of images from the 5D to be unique.
I agree. The 5D will be softer and less detailed than an 18mp camera in a large print. In 20x30 tests I did, you can see more detail in the 18mp shot. A sharp, yet lower detailed shot, will not look as pleasing.
 
canon person wrote:

When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.
5D3 out of camera JPGs are horrible. Try Raw, it is stunning.
 
Press Correspondent wrote:
canon person wrote:

When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.
5D3 out of camera JPGs are horrible. Try Raw, it is stunning.

I AM referring to RAW images and then tiffs....NOT jpgs.





Canon Person
 
the images to match one another i.e. first by upsizing the 5D images to match the 5D3 dimensions, and then downsizing the 5D3 images to match the 5D dimensions? Or re-sized both to one particular size?

You also have to make sure that all settings are equalized. Shooting RAW and setting everything to zero in your editing software except sharpening, set sharpening to 25% in ACR/LR or level 3 in DPP as capture sharpening, picking exactly the same WB e.g. Daylight if landscape, set the camera profile in ACR/LR/DPP to neutral or faithful.

You've got a unique opportunity here to show yourself (and maybe others) how the increase in MPs of the 5D3 over the 5D not only captures more detail, but how much detail is retained when downsizing to X dimensions (there's always a point of diminishing return where there is no perceptual return).

1.) Pick a scene with a huge amount of detail, a landscape comes to mind. Shoot with the sun at your back. This is a test. You'll want even lighting. A huge light source coming in from one side will complicate your analysis. However, shadows can be a good thing to have to analyze i.e early morning or late evening shadows. Choose a day with mainly cloudless skies and light or no wind. You do not want your lighting to change dramatically or your detail smeared with wind motion.

2.) Set up using tripod, MLU, cable release (or timer). Level the cameras on both axis. Use center point of the AF system and the same focus point in the scene. Do not disturb the tripod or ballhead when removing the first camera. Use the same lens for both cameras.

3.) For the best results in analysis, having the same aperture, shutter speed and ISO is suggested. Setting ISO is easy: ISO 100. Using ISO 100 is for obtaining the max IQ of the system, you can change this later for a high ISO test. Setting aperture is easy too. I suggest running through all of the full stops of the given lens (btw, use your sharpest lens) e.g. f2.8, f4, f5.6, f8, f11, f16, f22. Testing all apertures will show the effects of encroaching diffraction and can be very instructive in determining the sharpest f-stop for a given camera/lens combo. This leaves shutter speed which will be affected by the other parameters. To ensure that you get matching shutter speeds, bracket every shot. You'll only get 3 images with the 5D but I suggest a 7 image bracket spread with 1/3 stop increments. I suggest a 2/3 stop increment for the 5D.

3a.) You'll have to run through the sequences fairly fast because the light changes quickly in early morning or late evening. It may behoove you to practice the sequences before actually getting out there.

4.) Use RAW. Refer back to paragraph 2 for equalizing the files. In comparing the files, be sure to re-size them as mentioned at the outset.

5,) Find the small but important details and see what happens to them in these various re-sizings.
canon person wrote:

When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.

Any c/c are appreciated. Thank you.

Canon Person
--
Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. TJ said, "Every generation needs a new revolution".
 
Last edited:
qianp2k wrote:

When you print photos from less MP cameras, you should enlarge photos thru software such as Photoshop to match to the same size of cameras with more MP first before printing that will make difference. I don't see 5D1 prints softer than my 60D with the lenses I own to 20x30" prints but I did enlarge photos first before prints.

No intention to start a new debate on weary old topic but just share my own experiences as I do own both 5D1 and 60D.
 
Keith Z Leonard wrote:
canon person wrote:

When I look at images taken with my 5D in comparison to those with my 5D3, many of the 5D images look markedly sharper. I sent in the 5D3 and all lenses to Canon and was told that "no micro focus was needed with them. While the 5D3 images are much larger, they seem to lack the crisp look as gotten from the 5D.

Any c/c are appreciated. Thank you.

Canon Person
This seems like a classic acutance vs resolution discussion. The 5D samples far less frequently than the 5D3, so gradients will appear smoother with the 5D3. I'm not sure of how the AA filters compare, honestly, but you have a few choices here and comparisons left to do.

1. Up res the 5D file to 23 mp and compare.

2. Down res the 5D3 file to 12 mp and compare using bicubic sharper or even nearest neighbor if you wanna throw away information for "sharpness".

3. Print from both the same size and compare, which is really the sensible thing to do.

I think you'll find that the 5D3's files are superior.

exactly (I've heard the 5D also uses one of their weakest AA filters ever, if so, that would just add to the effect you mention, 5D3 true comparative sharpness is much better though in any case)
 
I jumped from the original 5D to the 5D3 as well and was initially quite disappointed when i looked at some grass in a field of cows... the cows were ok but the grass was kind of mushy, i was worried until i looked at the RAW file.

I've also found that the lens does matter considerably, my 24-70mk2 gives me results that are often almost too sharp on the 5D3 - i haven't used it much on my original 5D

I tend to keep the 50L on the original 5D these days, the focusing in no where near as good as the 5D3 (for the 50L) but the 5D3 doesn't capture any more detail or anything at f1.2 than the original

I didn't upgrade for the resolution though - i needed better AF and dual card slots - i had a deposit down for a 1DX before the 5D3 was announced.

anyway - try shooting RAW and use lightroom


 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top