# Another want/need query



## chauncey (Aug 19, 2016)

These 100% crops are what my rather dated 1Ds3 with a 300mm f/2.8 lens can cough out.
A 180 macro does as well.

I'm conflicted as to my need for one of the newer models available...would they cough out better images?


----------



## Valvebounce (Aug 19, 2016)

Hi Chauncey. 
Looking at the Swan and Cygnet shot I'd say both you and the camera work incredibly well, not often you see such emotive shots. As for advice on upgrading sorry I can't really help. 

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2016)

Will newer cameras cough out 'better' images? Yes.

Do you need them for your output needs? Only you can tell.

I am a 1DS MkIII user too and have sat on the fence as the 1DS line was abandoned, it seems the 5DSR is putting out noticeably improved files to our aging model.

Personally I am not interested in the 30MP 5D MkIV, though it has some very interesting features I would use 9MP doesn't sound compelling to me. I am more interested in the 5DSR as a 1DS MkIII upgrade, though loath to lose my 1 series familiarity behind.

Having said that your two examples aren't particularly strong examples of pixel level detail from the old 1DS MkIII, they look a bit crunchy, like Lightroom does sharpening when there is a fraction of noise in the initial image.

Here is a 100% crop and the full image from a 1DS MkIII that shows why I keep from buying something newer!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 19, 2016)

As I recall, the 1DS III is about 21 MP. To get enough additional resolution to make it worth your while, you should double the pixel count. That leaves the 5DS series.

The 5D MK IV will be a small boost in resolution, some of the features may also help, we are still awaiting a understanding as to what effect the DP RAW capability in DPP might have. I think it will be minimal, but noticeable at 100%.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 19, 2016)

There's nothing like screwing up the IQ of an image with over sharpening, and the newer, higher mp cameras actually make this easier to do.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> There's nothing like screwing up the IQ of an image with over sharpening, and the newer, higher mp cameras actually make this easier to do.



So true, and the fact that the forum resamples the images doesn't help when trying to demonstrate these things!

Also the amount of sharpening varies depending on what you are going to do with the file, and if that is printing what size that specific print is going to be. Oh and throw in the fact that some people like more, or less, than others just adds to the complication.

I now do all my sharpening in PS having given up on LR even for basic import/AA filter correction settings, I have my import presets set to zero sharpening by default.


----------



## chauncey (Aug 19, 2016)

Not sure what you mean when using the term "crunchy" as they both were shot at ISO 100.

Image size is not a concern as I do quite a bit of photo-merging.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2016)

chauncey said:


> Not sure what you mean when using the term "crunchy" as they both were shot at ISO 100.
> 
> Image size is not a concern as I do quite a bit of photo-merging.



I know you do, and I really like some of your smoke images.

Don't take my comment as a criticism, it was just an observation. 

For instance this screenshot of your first image, that isn't detail, it is sharpened noise, for that kind of thing I use the 'masking' slider while holding the 'option' key.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 19, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > There's nothing like screwing up the IQ of an image with over sharpening, and the newer, higher mp cameras actually make this easier to do.
> ...



Agreed the default sharpening in LR is a disaster if you later reduce the image size. Much better to only sharpen at the actual output size. However if I have to supply an image where I don't know the output size, or its going to be used at different sizes, I lightly sharpen the full size image by changing to LAB color, select the lightness channel, sharpen with UM to taste, normally about 100% of 0.3 pixel, then change back to RGB. This way when it's reduced you don't get as many artifacts and brittleness.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Aug 20, 2016)

The 1Ds Mark-III has moderately strong AA-filter so I get sharper results with my 6D, despite it being slightly lower res than my 1Ds-III. This is most noticeable in low light where the 6D has a finer grain to the noise, while the 1Ds-III noise looks more chunky.

Just for interest... here are some Lightroom screenshots of 5Ds files. They were taken at moderate to high ISO settings at an event a couple of weeks ago. I've included the "navigator" window on the left so you can see location of crop in the frame. The much smaller pixels naturally give a finer grain quality to the noise, which I prefer. Personally, I found the 5Ds is a little bit laggy for my preferences so I'm looking forward to seeing how responsive the 5D-IV will be. I think 30MP could be a useful improvement over the 1Ds-III especially if Canon isn't too heavy handed with the AA-filter.

Did you know:
30MP is the geometric mean of 18MP (1D-X) and 50MP (5Ds/R)


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 20, 2016)

I'm listening/observing - keep the info and ideas coming.

Jack


----------



## chauncey (Aug 20, 2016)

Those ISO settings interest me as I avoid going above ISO 400.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Aug 20, 2016)

chauncey said:


> Those ISO settings interest me as I avoid going above ISO 400.


I personally shoot my 1Ds-III up to ISO 800. If I think I need higher ISO capability I prefer my 6D. By contrast I prefer to keep my 6D below ISO 2500, i.e. I'll do ETTR exposures at 3200 and in post I'll recover highlights, pull down shadows as needed and use some noise reduction to taste.

The 5Ds seemed pretty good up to ISO 1600 when paired with a good lens. I also kept f-stop to between f2-f/4 to avoid diffraction limitations. I started to see some loss of detail by ISO 2000 with darker subjects, but it is still extremely usable with good sharpening and noise reduction, and will be perfectly fine with brighter subjects. I think to maximize on the resolving power of the sensor one still needs to shoot at ISO 400 or lower.

The more I think about it the more I'm liking the idea of 30MP. We'll have to wait to see what the ISO performance is like, but I'm pretty optimistic based on how the 5Ds and 6D perform. If the 5D-IV sits nicely between those then I'll be a very happy camper.


----------



## chauncey (Aug 20, 2016)

FWIW, I always shoot manual by first setting my SS, then f/stop and ISO.

BTW are you doing sharpening in LR or PS CC


----------



## StudentOfLight (Aug 20, 2016)

chauncey said:


> FWIW, I always shoot manual by first setting my SS, then f/stop and ISO.
> 
> BTW are you doing sharpening in LR or PS CC


I do all my 16-bit editing in Lightroom including sharpening. If I want to post things to the web I export to sRGB and work in GIMP, which only supports 8-bit color at the moment. I grew up using GIMP so I still need to familiarize myself with Photoshop's shortcuts, icons, menus etc...


----------



## StudentOfLight (Aug 22, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> *The 1Ds Mark-III has moderately strong AA-filter so I get sharper results with my 6D, despite it being slightly lower res than my 1Ds-III. *This is most noticeable in low light where the 6D has a finer grain to the noise, while the 1Ds-III noise looks more chunky.


FYI... The highlighted text above was just based on my personal impression, and looking back I realized it is quite a bold claim as I hadn't personally done a solid test of this. Anyway, I had some good weather today so decided to put my gut feeling to the test.

Methodology:
Set up 70-200mm on a tripod
Same settings on both 1Ds-III and 6D. (1/100s at f/6.3 ISO 100)
used 10x magnification in live view focused on same branch
Opened RAWs in DPP, removed all sharpening and noise reduction
Exported to TIF
Imported to Lightroom
Took screenshots of comparison view...

Attached are the screenshots:


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 22, 2016)

That's an interesting endeavor, thanks - seems my 6D first choice moving to Canon was a wise one. At the time I told my wife that between the 6D and 5D3 I'd take the least expensive since it seemed to have good IQ and I anticipated upgrading once I gained more experience. And here we are with my upgrade very near with the choice being 5D4 or 1DX II and I just don't know - harder choice than the first one.

Refreshing to hear, "bold claim, better check it out". I wish others would follow your example! 

Jack


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 22, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > *The 1Ds Mark-III has moderately strong AA-filter so I get sharper results with my 6D, despite it being slightly lower res than my 1Ds-III. *This is most noticeable in low light where the 6D has a finer grain to the noise, while the 1Ds-III noise looks more chunky.
> ...



Looks like you were right, but the thing is anyone post processing their images, and especially those who shoot in raw, can very quickly deal with the sharpening in such a way as to make those two images identical as far as sharpness goes. The 1DsIII has recorded the information. This is why if I do get the 50 mp 5D it will be the 's', not the 'sr'.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Aug 22, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> That's an interesting endeavor, thanks - seems my 6D first choice moving to Canon was a wise one. At the time I told my wife that between the 6D and 5D3 I'd take the least expensive since it seemed to have good IQ and I anticipated upgrading once I gained more experience. And here we are with my upgrade very near with the choice being 5D4 or 1DX II and I just don't know - harder choice than the first one.
> 
> Refreshing to hear, "bold claim, better check it out". I wish others would follow your example!
> 
> Jack


Thanks Jack. Enjoy your 6D


----------

