# Removing the 5D4's AA filter?



## Diko (Sep 6, 2016)

Hi everyone. 

Was wondering about it. Having in mind 5Ds*R* I am very inclined to combine the *Sigma 50s ART* with a sharper 5D4 AA filter-less.

*What do you think*? Any proposal on an alternative answer would be added. Additional opinions and advises would be also highly appreciated. 

*Some additional info*: General primary body mostly for stills. Wild life, sport, Portraits, Events, low light, time-laps. 

_*The main reason to ask*_: In the end of *this video* about 1:23 (5D4 vs 5Ds*R* & 3:50 (5D4 vs Nikon 7200)...


----------



## Coldhands (Sep 6, 2016)

Not sure if this is technically possible. I could be wrong, but the AA filter is usually integrated into the sensor stack along with UV- and IR-cut filters. Therefore you can't remove one without the others, and you definitely don't want to lose the whole stack. Only solution I can think of is if some aftermarket company produces a sensor stack for the 5D4 that doesn't include AA filter. Seems like it would be an awful lot of aggravation for a tiny improvement in sharpness.


----------



## midluk (Sep 6, 2016)

You are missing "No, It's there for a purpose!" as an answer.


----------



## Mancubus (Sep 6, 2016)

midluk said:


> You are missing "No, It's there for a purpose!" as an answer.



Exactly, it's there to make our images softer and makes us get enraged, under the old excuse that the filter is there to prevent a "moire" that only bothers a handful of OCD video people.

I'd take moire over softness any day, wish I had a choice about the damn filter.


----------



## Diko (Sep 6, 2016)

Mancubus said:


> midluk said:
> 
> 
> > You are missing "No, It's there for a purpose!" as an answer.
> ...



Guys, just added your version of the response to the poll. 

As for the opinions expressed from you two:

1 / Here is an *exemplary video* about removing filters from Canon recent bodies... Will further investigate.

2/ I have checked my photos from recent years. I think I can live up with a very very few moire cases.... ;-)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 6, 2016)

Diko said:


> 2/ I have checked my photos from recent years. I think I can live up with a very very few moire cases.... ;-)



Just curious...are you checking from recent years' photos taken using camera(s) with or without an AA filter?


----------



## wockawocka (Sep 6, 2016)

If someone offered this professionally I'd go for it.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 6, 2016)

You're lacking the "why the heck would you decide that before the camera even starts shipping, let alone anyone had a chance to try it out" option


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 6, 2016)

Mancubus said:


> midluk said:
> 
> 
> > You are missing "No, It's there for a purpose!" as an answer.
> ...


Take a look at the attached "videos"


----------



## Act444 (Sep 7, 2016)

Ideally it would be nice if the AA filter were adjustable (turned on/off at will) to give the photographer a choice. In applications where moire isn't a concern, the filter does indeed detract from ultimate IQ and can add extra workflow in post (sharpening). However, when dealing with repeating patterns, the AA filter CAN help save a shot...

If there were a variant of the 5D4 without the AA filter, or if the 5D4 didn't have one, I'd be more inclined to upgrade - otherwise, for those of us after the ultimate detail, it looks like the 5DSR is the way to go.


----------



## fugu82 (Sep 7, 2016)

This is commonly done during infrared conversions. Any of the services that do this can replace the removed filters with an IR-blocking filter if you wish. Example:

https://www.lifepixel.com/gear/anti-aliasing-low-pass-filter-removal


----------



## Mancubus (Sep 7, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> Mancubus said:
> 
> 
> > midluk said:
> ...



A7R and 5DSR have noticeably more detail than the 5d4. The moire shown in these photos is a minor (very minor) issue that I wouldn't event notice if I wasn't looking for it.


----------



## Coldhands (Sep 7, 2016)

Diko said:


> Mancubus said:
> 
> 
> > midluk said:
> ...



Thanks for the video. Informative, if somewhat cringe-worthy. If you're willing to do this to your own brand-new three-and-a-half thousand dollar/pound/euro camera, then you're a braver person than I! 

Best of luck.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 7, 2016)

Mancubus said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > Mancubus said:
> ...


I never said they did not offer more detail. My point was that it is not only relevant to OCD video people, the fact is that it's actually in photos too. 

If you aren't looking close enough to notice the moire then you aren't looking close enough to notice the extra detail either.


----------



## Diko (Sep 8, 2016)

IglooEater said:


> You're lacking the "why the heck would you decide that before the camera even starts shipping, let alone anyone had a chance to try it out" option


 Go check the video from my first post. 



neuroanatomist said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > 2/ I have checked my photos from recent years. I think I can live up with a very very few moire cases.... ;-)
> ...


 With... but actually IMHO not the point. I was checking ONLY for patterns that would cause moire.

I wonder really how strong is this moire of the DsR in real _everyday _situation from the second sample, for which I greatly thank to *StudentOfLight*.

I also added then removed the brave-not enough answer in the poll, cause I am asking for the ideal case. Most people would go with it and leave no impression about their attitude towards AA filters.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 8, 2016)

FWIW, I did a RAW comparison with 5D4 vs 5D3 files that DPReview supplied with their studio scene in Canon's new DPP 4.5...the 5D4 images are noticeably softer AT THE PIXEL LEVEL than the 5D3, but hold a slight edge on detail due to the megapixel difference between the two cameras. It even seems to be slightly softer than the 1DX II files. I'm assuming the AA filter strength has been increased in the new generation of Canon cameras (at least the ones with 4K video)?

Reaffirms my decision to go straight for the 5DS R...


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 8, 2016)

At what aperture?


----------



## Act444 (Sep 8, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> At what aperture?



According to the EXIF. both cameras were shot with the 85 1.8 at f5.6, 1/40s (on tripod I assume). Manual focus.


----------



## Mancubus (Sep 8, 2016)

Act444 said:


> FWIW, I did a RAW comparison with 5D4 vs 5D3 files that DPReview supplied with their studio scene in Canon's new DPP 4.5...the 5D4 images are noticeably softer AT THE PIXEL LEVEL than the 5D3, but hold a slight edge on detail due to the megapixel difference between the two cameras. It even seems to be slightly softer than the 1DX II files. I'm assuming the AA filter strength has been increased in the new generation of Canon cameras (at least the ones with 4K video)?
> 
> Reaffirms my decision to go straight for the 5DS R...



That would be a deal breaker for me. I'm going to wait a little and then look more real application reviews and download raw files.

If the 5d4 isn't at least as sharp as the 5d3, I'll probably give it a pass since the DPRaw is probably not as good as it seems either.

The 5DSR seems awesome, but I take lots of photos and really don't want to deal with 50mp files. 20-30mp and no AA filter would have been just perfect, I'm really afraid that they will f**k this up with soft images (like the 7d2)


----------



## Diko (Sep 8, 2016)

Mancubus said:


> That would be a deal breaker for me. I'm going to wait a little and then look more real application reviews and download raw files.
> 
> If the 5d4 isn't at least as sharp as the 5d3, I'll probably give it a pass since the DPRaw is probably not as good as it seems either.


 Would that mean that you wouldn't risk the scenario, where you buy 5D4 and in 6 month after few success stories of removing the AA filter, you wouldn't do it yourself?



Act444 said:


> ...I'm assuming the AA filter strength has been increased in the new generation of Canon cameras (at least the ones with 4K video)?


 Thanks for the test.


Added: "_*Yes, when the warranty has ended.*_" answer to the poll.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 8, 2016)

I'd still like to withhold final judgment until 5D3 upgraders start getting their 5D4 cameras and post first impressions and tests ...but, from what I see so far, and having been a former owner of the original 7D which had a strong AA filter and needing to apply high levels of sharpening to virtually every image from that camera...can't say I'm super impressed. 

The 5D3 in my opinion is a great balance between AA filter strength and sharpness/resolving power. Even the regular 5DS can put out sharp SOOC pics (with the right lenses). We'll just have to see on this one...but so far, no buyer's remorse on the R!


----------



## Mancubus (Sep 8, 2016)

Diko said:


> Mancubus said:
> 
> 
> > That would be a deal breaker for me. I'm going to wait a little and then look more real application reviews and download raw files.
> ...


[/quote]

I watched the video, seems too risky to do it at home with such an expensive piece of gear (I'm talking about the 5d4, not the rebel).

If the results of a filter removal are outstanding, like getting the sharpness of a D810 or 5DSR, I'll probably get a professional service to do it for me.


----------



## Josh Denver (Sep 12, 2016)

The 5DIV from DP samples seems to have less sharpness than the 5DIII but has more RESOLUTION. 

Resolution is what matters, the amount of information you can see in the image. Canon seems to have lowered their in-camera sharpening or created a stronger AA filter, or the test simply isn't perfect. 

In anyway, lower sharpness to start with is better, we in the video world are shouting for C-LOG because it's the softest profile and all the others apply some. If we can add sharpening in post to H.264 4:2:0 2mp images you can add it to 30mp 14bit raw ones. 


An AA filter is there for a reason. It removes artefacts that can easily completely ruin an image. 

BTW: When the MKIII came along it didn't have much sharper video so James Miller on Philipbloom removed the AA filter to increase sharpness, just as you intend to do: 

philipbloom.net/blog/a-drastic-solution-to-increasing-sharpness-with-the-5dmkiii/

End the end: it's absolutely NOT worth it. MAYBE you'll get a slightly sharper image when viewed side by side at 100%, at the expense of losing warranty, bricking your new 3500$ camera, Autofocus failure, image plane innaccuracy, back/front focus, losing infinity, etc... 

Will a client or a human being ever see the effect of the removed filter in your delivered file vs applying some sharpness? no. 

Just be happy with the detail the 5DIV gives you and how the files have so little noise that can take lots of sharpening. 

If you specifically find yourself needing (not wanting) more detail in your work and it's demanded, then you have no other choice but to go to the 5Ds R to see an appreciable difference, not remove a filter that removes aliasing from the sensor stack! 

Don't do it.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc (Sep 14, 2016)

Moire, LOL
OK I guess it can happen and with some lens and pixel pitch combo more than others....So 20 years and NO Moire with MF digital backs and 35mm cameras that have ZERO filtering/no AA.
How do I not get any moire? I don't know, ask the video guys that care so much. Maybe they know.

Its hardly an issue in stills, and we are shooting multiple frames of the same image enough times to be able to correct any of it if need be.


If you care about 3D looking images Use a sensore with NO AA filter
If you care about sharpness use a sensor without a AA filter
If you care about IQ use a sensor without a AA filter.

If you care about moire in your video use a sensor on a video camera

Honestly, its not the video guys fault! its Canon's fault for not having the option! 5DsR was released just a year or so ago. This is 12 years of me shooting stills and Canon NOW releases a AA "canceling" filter? WTF?!!(What The Filter?!)....

Canon, I love your hardware, but the marketing person and that 1 tech guy that keep overriding the group of shooters you have in that meeting are KILLING it for us photographers that want IQ!

Get that MILKY soft mesh of a filter off the sensor for crying out loud.
Every new camera release we have to beat this topic up!

Make the 5DMarkIV version without an AA.

One of the reasons it is hard to do after the fact is that the cleaning mech is on the filters, and likely a few other things. Stop making it this way!
Why do you think the A7RII is more comparable to the Medium Format backs vs any other. It doesn't have a AA filter.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 14, 2016)

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Moire, LOL
> OK I guess it can happen and with some lens and pixel pitch combo more than others....So 20 years and NO Moire with MF digital backs and 35mm cameras that have ZERO filtering/no AA.
> How do I not get any moire?



Maybe you aren't shooting the 'right' subjects to get it, some do.........


----------



## d (Sep 14, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Phil Indeblanc said:
> 
> 
> > Moire, LOL
> ...



Indeed. When I used to shoot underwear and swimwear for a clothing retailer's catalogues and website, I was dealing with moire nearly every day. And that was with a 5D3.

So you'd just get the model to do a few more poses and take some extra shots as insurance


----------



## tpatana (Sep 14, 2016)

d said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Phil Indeblanc said:
> ...



Just remember to chimp on the screen often enough. If certain article is causing moire, just ask her to remove that one. Next shot should have less moire then. Repeat until no moire.


----------



## Diko (Sep 17, 2016)

*So far, so good*

So far, so good.

@1200 mm (_the stats are incorrect due to a *Kenko* extender_) with ISO of 20 000 and speed of 1/1000 on a F12 with manual focus.

_First two are screenshots. The third is the Original Jpeg (from RAW exported by FastStone Image Viewer 5.7)_


----------



## Diko (Sep 17, 2016)

And here is a screenshot of the "honest raw" of the ISO 20 000 in the new beta FastRaw Viewer 1.3.4 The above images were actually the embeded JPGs.


----------



## d (Sep 18, 2016)

Not bad for 20,000.


----------



## scottkinfw (Sep 18, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> The 5DIV from DP samples seems to have less sharpness than the 5DIII but has more RESOLUTION.
> 
> Resolution is what matters, the amount of information you can see in the image. Canon seems to have lowered their in-camera sharpening or created a stronger AA filter, or the test simply isn't perfect.
> 
> ...



Excellent argument.
Scott


----------



## Jopa (Sep 18, 2016)

I'm wondering why the survey doesn't have an option "Yes, I'm going to remove it myself with the old grandpa's screwdriver?"


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 18, 2016)

Diko said:


> Hi everyone.
> 
> Was wondering about it. Having in mind 5Ds*R* I am very inclined to combine the *Sigma 50s ART* with a sharper 5D4 AA filter-less.
> 
> ...



Turning on DLO in camera will reduce the effect of the AA filter at the expense of burst rate.


----------



## Diko (Sep 18, 2016)

Jopa said:


> I'm wondering why the survey doesn't have an option "Yes, I'm going to remove it myself with the old grandpa's screwdriver?"


 Yeah, why not!


----------



## Act444 (Sep 18, 2016)

raptor3x said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > Hi everyone.
> ...



Alternatively, you can shoot normal Raw and turn DLO on in DPP during post...but it takes a LOOOONNNGGGG time if you attempt to do it in a batch (say, >30). It helps, but it does add another (time-consuming!) step in PP. I've found setting it to 20 works nicely for 5D4 files. The default setting (50) I find to be too strong and begins to add artifacts, etc. (EXCEPT AT/NEAR BASE ISO)


----------



## danski0224 (Sep 18, 2016)

tpatana said:


> Just remember to chimp on the screen often enough. If certain article is causing moire, just ask her to remove that one. Next shot should have less moire then. Repeat until no moire.



I would follow the exact same process


----------



## danski0224 (Sep 18, 2016)

Act444 said:


> FWIW, I did a RAW comparison with 5D4 vs 5D3 files that DPReview supplied with their studio scene in Canon's new DPP 4.5...the 5D4 images are noticeably softer AT THE PIXEL LEVEL than the 5D3, but hold a slight edge on detail due to the megapixel difference between the two cameras. It even seems to be slightly softer than the 1DX II files. I'm assuming the AA filter strength has been increased in the new generation of Canon cameras (at least the ones with 4K video)?
> 
> Reaffirms my decision to go straight for the 5DS R...



I have a Canon 1D (2002) and the images need a *lot* of sharpening in DPP. Crank the slider to the right, and the images clear right up. I do not understand why this is, and I recall reading other similar anecdotes about using lots of sharpening in processing images from some of the other Canon 1D series cameras from the time period. 

Maybe something similar is happening with the 5DIV... I don't have one of those to check and see.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Mar 31, 2017)

scottkinfw said:


> Josh Denver said:
> 
> 
> > The 5DIV from DP samples seems to have less sharpness than the 5DIII but has more RESOLUTION.
> ...



That doesnt make logical sense. Not having an AA filter is more natural than adding sharpness in post artificially. The videos on the c100 and 5dsr seem more high res than the 5d3 and I can even crop the 1080p and still get a better image than a 5d3 or maybe even a 5d mark 4


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 13, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > Mancubus said:
> ...


They also have higher resolution from their sensors. For any serious video shooter the AA is still a must have.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 13, 2017)

Last week I viewed on a large cinema screen footage shot on the Panavision Millennium DXL 8K camera and Primo 70 lenses. This camera has a AA filter and you can see razor sharp every detail within the depth of field and zero moire (more of an issue on moving images and larger magnification). 

Ive shot with the Canon 5DS for over a year and enlarged shots well beyond the average person and found them again to be razor sharp within the DOF, and this camera has an AA filter. Would the 5DSr been marginally sharper, properly but not enough to live on the difference. 

The effects of cancelling the AA filter are greatly exaggerated in modern high megapixel cameras and modern well designed AA filters.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 13, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> Ive shot with the Canon 5DS for over a year and enlarged shots well beyond the average person and found them again to be razor sharp within the DOF, and this camera has an AA filter. Would the 5DSr been marginally sharper, properly but not enough to live on the difference.
> 
> The effects of cancelling the AA filter are greatly exaggerated in modern high megapixel cameras and modern well designed AA filters.



As I understand it, the occurrence of moire is linked to the resolution of the sensor and the resolution of the 5DS(R) avoids moire in situations where it was previously visible. I don't know how true this is on a technical level but I thought it was an interesting counterpoint.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 22, 2017)

jeffa4444 said:


> Last week I viewed on a large cinema screen footage shot on the Panavision Millennium DXL 8K camera and Primo 70 lenses. This camera has a AA filter and you can see razor sharp every detail within the depth of field and zero moire (more of an issue on moving images and larger magnification).
> 
> Ive shot with the Canon 5DS for over a year and enlarged shots well beyond the average person and found them again to be razor sharp within the DOF, and this camera has an AA filter. Would the 5DSr been marginally sharper, properly but not enough to live on the difference.
> 
> The effects of cancelling the AA filter are greatly exaggerated in modern high megapixel cameras and modern well designed AA filters.


 the camera is 8k...uh it should be sharp. maybe you should compare the same 8k camera with and without an AA filter on a very good monitor.


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 22, 2017)

Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has helped untold millions. In terms of cost efficiency, it is probably the most effective rehabilitation program ever devised.

Why mess with success? 

The crusades some people waste their time with are as silly as ice cream with mustard and sawdust on it.


----------

