Capture Integration Test

[PeterA]

thanks for your post and links Lance.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

just my little comment on those tests presented here (and elsewhere): I found them to be flawed and unfair. Though I understand the differences and edge of a MFDB, I can tell that one can get much more out of those Canon files by adjusting contrast and adding some sharpening.

I am completely in accordance with Rainer and his comments below.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thierry maybe it is to a certain degree because of the sharpening that you can do . But let's face it real estate is real estate and no AA filters on Phase , leaf and Sinar will beat the stuffing out of anything coming in 35mm, plus the photosites are bigger. I think the point many of us are seeing and saying is the 1dsMKIII is a nice camera but not a big difference from the 1dsMKII to make a leap and also don't come into the MF market and say you can compete like some are saying. It is just not true , hell it is not much better than what i have seen compared to it's little sister the 5d . Yes improvement no question over the 5d and 1dsMKII but just because it has 22 mpx does not mean it is acting like one at least the ones coming from 22 mpx backs.

 

[workingcamera]

Wrote this before Lance posted.

I hear what people are saying about the use of f16 odd choice. To my eye the effects of diffraction are seen in the high frequency details of these particular samples which is disappointing. I’m specifically thinking of the mesh in the tower (top left) and the crane.

But to say the test is unfair … unfair to what?

Every test has it limitations and only tells part of the story.

That said the differences are there to be seen. I think its been demonstrated, not only in this test, that DSLRs have their constraints. (comparatively)

I’m also thinking back to other discussions involving the 1ds

It would be skewed logic to make every test of the Canon with the best performing L optics set at optimum apertures. Real life is not like that. Chances are a lot of work on this machine will be done with less stellar wide to midrange zoom lens. You have to look at it from a systems point of view.

I’m sure the 1ds is a very capable platform capable of producing excellent results under the right conditions.

Does its performance match the hype and marketing?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

We posted the same time and i agree and the performance from my eyes it does not match the hype and marketing. Great camera but the number 22 is not matching what i know a 22mpx back looks like

 

[fotografz]

seeing the same crops than samuel showed closer, let me think that the whole test seems to be - as so often - some marketing thing and little bit more.
the p21 ( and the other p files ) are sharpened and contrast treated, meanwhile the canon is not. sharpen the canon file, bring the crop to a similar size than the p files ( even upsampling does this job ), make some shadows/highlight contrast increasements in PS and the contrast and detail is not far from the p21 anymore,- where this things obviously have been done already.
its not a fair comparision and its not done with the goal to be fair..... or i am wrong herein?

found a nice link also in the net, and this one explains very well why i am not so god friend with the kodak sensors in general.

http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/HasselbladH3D/index.html

since generations they show exactly the kind of flaws which are described and shown here in this test. it doesnt matter if a leica, kodak, p1 or hasselblad is around ,- this behavor is "kodak - sensor design " specific and i personnally dont like it. i prefere dalsa sensors therefor, although the 33mp sensor has lost some of the advantages ´the 22mp sensor yet has had ( but gained others as well so finally its an improvement not just in terms of resolution ).

about the canon 1dsmk3:
i think they made a great job,- although i will not buy one but wait for the 5dmk2 and doing what i already do:
shooting with my sinar backs.

I've seen that diglloyd link before Rainer, and thought it amazing that long review was gleaned from one hour shooting with multiple cameras which he seems proud of instead of apologetic ... which may account for all the inaccuracies in it. Also, comments about "Science Fair" project and other unnecessary derogatory comments are his obvious bias, and taint any credibility in my eyes.

I have the CFV, H3D/31, H3D/39 with Kodak sensors, and an Aptus 75s with a Dalsa sensor. Prior to that I was using 22 meg versions of both the Kodak and Dalsa sensor backs. While the larger photo sites do contribute to a certain look, they also have their shortcomings. I have done thousands of shots with the H3Ds and not once experienced any of the stuff he did. ... Including hand held work without mirror up that he claims is critical or you waste the big meg count ... which is of course ridiculous ... he obviously knew nothing about the mirror delay feature for hand held shooting.

I've found that with all these high performance cameras it takes a bit of time to get all they can do out of them ... at least more than an hour. Which I would say is true for the Capture Integration test also ... which they at least acknowledge.

 

[thsinar]

we absolutely agree, Guy, but the tests as shown and presented, do not give a clue of what are the differences and where the MF has the advantages.
No question for me, obviously, that MF has many advantages.

Thierry

Thierry maybe it is to a certain degree because of the sharpening that you can do . But let's face it real estate is real estate and no AA filters on Phase , leaf and Sinar will beat the stuffing out of anything coming in 35mm, plus the photosites are bigger. I think the point many of us are seeing and saying is the 1dsMKIII is a nice camera but not a big difference from the 1dsMKII to make a leap and also don't come into the MF market and say you can compete like some are saying. It is just not true , hell it is not much better than what i have seen compared to it's little sister the 5d . Yes improvement no question over the 5d and 1dsMKII but just because it has 22 mpx does not mean it is acting like one at least the ones coming from 22 mpx backs.

 

[thsinar]

Absolutely true and that's the main reason I've written "unfair": it needs much more to test a back or a DSLR and then even more to make such a side by side comparison.

Thierry

I've found that with all these high performance cameras it takes a bit of time to get all they can do out of them ... at least more than an hour. Which I would say is true for the Capture Integration test also ... which they at least acknowledge.

 

[Jim Stone]

Lance,

Happy you could join us here in the "neighborhood" !! It really is a friendly group :ROTFL: My only comment after seeing these shots is that I'm very glad I didn't decide to upgrade from the Mark 11! I'll save my $$$ for one of those big backs of yours !! Hope you'll keep us informed on anything new and will talk to you soon.

Regards,

Jim

 

[Guy Mancuso]

we absolutely agree, Guy, but the tests as shown and presented, do not give a clue of what are the differences and where the MF has the advantages.
No question for me, obviously, that MF has many advantages.

Thierry

I know and agree testing is a nightmare and between systems almost crazy to even try. I did the DMR and the 1dsMKII and that took months of some serious testing and trying all the variables and still sometimes you scratched your head. In this all i looked at were the images and even given this or that either way i can see inside the files pretty good in my eyes and know what things are supposed to be for some it may confuse more than it helps. I actually seen focus movement between the images too. But it is another clue and my theory is just a small piece of the real puzzle and until you get all the data you can don't make a call with your money

 

[fotografz]

Wrote this before Lance posted.

I hear what people are saying about the use of f16 odd choice. To my eye the effects of diffraction are seen in the high frequency details of these particular samples which is disappointing. I’m specifically thinking of the mesh in the tower (top left) and the crane.

But to say the test is unfair … unfair to what?

Every test has it limitations and only tells part of the story.

That said the differences are there to be seen. I think its been demonstrated, not only in this test, that DSLRs have their constraints. (comparatively)

I’m also thinking back to other discussions involving the 1ds

It would be skewed logic to make every test of the Canon with the best performing L optics set at optimum apertures. Real life is not like that. Chances are a lot of work on this machine will be done with less stellar wide to midrange zoom lens. You have to look at it from a systems point of view.

I’m sure the 1ds is a very capable platform capable of producing excellent results under the right conditions.

Does its performance match the hype and marketing?

Again, horses for courses. Hype is one thing, needs are another. I totally agree that "Real Life Is Not Like That" ... which carries far more weight for me than any carefully plotted out test.

My experiences have been real life ... shooting wedding stuff side-by-side with my second shooter ... me using a H3D/31 to his Canon 1DsMKII ... no contest no matter what sized prints we made ... PRINTS not web uploads. Shooting a Jewelry catalog, trying the 1DsMKII which made a mess of the specular highlights where the MFDB did not ... and so on.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Marc that is a area that many miss the boat is the specular highlights and the control on them. But I will say prints of course but still nice to see things on the web and talk about the issues. Honestly if not for the web it would be much harder to communicate like we are , so having good people here is what it is all about. I sit here as a Pro and need to make a decision at some point, this stuff helps me a great deal and in the end it should make my decision a good one.

 

[workingcamera]

Couldn’t agree more marc we are on the same page.

To borrow from what someone else said on another forum, photographic equipment isn’t a pissing competition.

The gear either performs the task required or it doesn’t. Especially so in the high-end commercial world there is little room for compromise.

I believe it is also, if not more important, to know the weaknesses of a system. A test which shows premium performance under optimum conditions doesn’t actually tell you much.

 

[fotografz]

Marc that is a area that many miss the boat is the specular highlights and the control on them. But I will say prints of course but still nice to see things on the web and talk about the issues. Honestly if not for the web it would be much harder to communicate like we are , so having good people here is what it is all about. I sit here as a Pro and need to make a decision at some point, this stuff helps me a great deal and in the end it should make my decision a good one.

No disagreement at all Guy. However, so much is decided via the web without digging deeper that a word of caution is not a bad thing. I had some 1DsMKIII files sent to me for the specific purpose of printing them ... and they looked a lot better than on the web, or even full up on my screen. I suspected this because MFD doesn't show as well on the web either. I've seen images in PS that read poorly on screen because a fractional % of size is used that conflicts with screen resolution.

While I sell some work for web applications, it's usually a down-size from display work or magazine ads. If it was just web, I sure the heck wouldn't need a 39 meg Hasselbald.

Most clients these days are after files that can span the range from trade show display, to magazine ads including spreads, to catalog, to web. Just the different print ad spec's from glossy tabloid to digest size is challenging.

Each use can increase revenue from the same shoot, or you can get the cash up front with an all application buy out. Frankly, that's where the money is.

 

[PeterA]

I've seen that diglloyd link before Rainer, and thought it amazing that long review was gleaned from one hour shooting with multiple cameras which he seems proud of instead of apologetic ... which may account for all the inaccuracies in it. Also, comments about "Science Fair" project and other unnecessary derogatory comments are his obvious bias, and taint any credibility in my eyes.

I read this 'review' and just cracked up laughing - (which is why I posted my question in the Canon thread) The Hasselblad 39 can be half as good as my Leaf and still eat any Canon file for breakfast...

What needs to be understood is the brilliance and dimensionality that these DB files can deliver - and yes in order to get the most out of any system of course you have to nail the exposure and post processing...DUH!

In the new year my next project is to check out Broncolour for some studio lighting.

 

[fotografz]

In the new year my next project is to check out Broncolour for some studio lighting.

Warm up your wallet Peter. That is some seriously expensive studio gear.

 

[tom in mpls]

P21 RAW Scene 1 -1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFDII

P30+ RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

P45 RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

Canon 1DsMarkIII 1/100 f16, ISO 100 85mm

Lance, which 85mm lens? I'm assuming the 1.2/L but would like to be certain.

 

[rainer-v]

I have the CFV, H3D/31, H3D/39 with Kodak sensors, and an Aptus 75s with a Dalsa sensor. Prior to that I was using 22 meg versions of both the Kodak and Dalsa sensor backs. While the larger photo sites do contribute to a certain look, they also have their shortcomings. I have done thousands of shots with the H3Ds and not once experienced any of the stuff he did. ... Including hand held work without mirror up that he claims is critical or you waste the big meg count ... which is of course ridiculous ... he obviously knew nothing about the mirror delay feature for hand held shooting.

I've found that with all these high performance cameras it takes a bit of time to get all they can do out of them ... at least more than an hour. Which I would say is true for the Capture Integration test also ... which they at least acknowledge.

yes i know and i certainly do not want to offend anyone which is using h or p backs, i know and see many great work done with this tools so its BS from my side to suggest this sensors are in any way "bad" or inferior .... they are not. they deliver great results if a great photographer is behind the camera and later in front of the computer .... (!). treated well the files ofcourse not any difference will be visible in the final result,- is you ( or me ) will use the one or the other back. maybe it means a little bit more or less working time to go there, but thats another story.
( i dont get tired to claim how much worth is a intelligent workflow, not to shoot more images but to do nicer things at night in the hotel than spending every day 2 hours to convert files just that they will be neutral over the sensors-size.

in 1 point it seems as i think completely different, although i allways used the best gear i could find ( and even leicas aside my 4x5" ... ) , so e.g. in the older days this have been "real" drumscannersno faked ones as the imacons and now i use "real" mf backs ,- why ? because they are better for my style of working. but ............ !!!


ln general my opinion is more in the direction that the person who use this stuff is THE big factor what comes out. compared to that all the other differences we are disputing here are very small.

back to the test:
sharpen the canon file, darken it somehow and it will beat or equal the p21 file in my eyes.
this sharpeneing is done for the other files in the raw software or at another point, not for the canon.
the colors wont be any problem using some profile with the 1ds3... i am sorry. want to say it again: i will not buy a 1ds3 .... and i prefer ofcourse the quality i get from my mf backs. although has much to do with this fabulous rodenstock HR lenses as well ,which are not existing retrofocal.
but this images are not treated in a similar way and i think this is easy to see. so whats up here?
which sens it has to bash canons in this way? it seems to me similar style than you might find in the dpreview forum if you post there in the canon forum something bad about their tools ... they will kill you.

photography is not football. fortunately.

 

[lance_schad]

Lance, which 85mm lens? I'm assuming the 1.2/L but would like to be certain.

Tom,
It was the 85mm 1.2/L .

Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-534-5701 office
305-394-3196 cell
www.captureintegration.com
[email protected]

 

[woodyspedden]

I've seen that diglloyd link before Rainer, and thought it amazing that long review was gleaned from one hour shooting with multiple cameras which he seems proud of instead of apologetic ... which may account for all the inaccuracies in it. Also, comments about "Science Fair" project and other unnecessary derogatory comments are his obvious bias, and taint any credibility in my eyes.

I have the CFV, H3D/31, H3D/39 with Kodak sensors, and an Aptus 75s with a Dalsa sensor. Prior to that I was using 22 meg versions of both the Kodak and Dalsa sensor backs. While the larger photo sites do contribute to a certain look, they also have their shortcomings. I have done thousands of shots with the H3Ds and not once experienced any of the stuff he did. ... Including hand held work without mirror up that he claims is critical or you waste the big meg count ... which is of course ridiculous ... he obviously knew nothing about the mirror delay feature for hand held shooting.

I've found that with all these high performance cameras it takes a bit of time to get all they can do out of them ... at least more than an hour. Which I would say is true for the Capture Integration test also ... which they at least acknowledge.

Marc

I think I posted in another thread about the article by Mark Dubovoy in this month's Photo Techniques magazine. He compares the 1DsMkIII to a Hassy H39D using the HC lenses; to a Hassy H2D with a PhaseOne P45+ back and the same HC lenses, and a Linhof Monorail 5x4 with the P45+ back and Rodenstock lenses. The Linhof wins by a rather significant margin over the H2D but the most surprising thing is how much better the H2D/P45+ showed compared to the H3D with the Hassy back! Mark appears to be a very knowledgeable scientist who prepared himself well for this review. And clearly he spent a lot more than an hour or two on it.

Woody

 

[Chuck Jones]

I just wanted to jump in and give some information from us (Capture Integration) on how we did the test. Due to time constraints because of Holidays and End of Year(and of course lack of product,we only had it in our hands for a short time) we were not able to perform as comprehensive of a test as we wanted to. Please stay tuned for additional tests on the 1DSMK3 and others that will be available on our website.
Also there is a lot of good information that is being passed back and forth on this forum(thank you members).
It is quite difficult to do one type of test for everyone since everyone I am sure you will all agree, but we will take the comments under advisement for future ones.
PM or post if you have any special requests.
The tests were done with the following equipment:
P21 RAW Scene 1 -1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFDII

P30+ RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

P45 RAW Scene 1 1/100 f16 ISO 100 120mm lens Mamiya 645 AFD II

Canon 1DsMarkIII 1/100 f16, ISO 100 85mm

The images are available for download as tiff files linked from our current newsletter that can be accessed with the link below:
http://tinyurl.com/2kpsr7

The Canon has some nice features and will fit certain market segments and have a place in some photographers arsenal besides a medium format system. As far as image quality goes we will leave it up to you to decide decide.

And yes Doug the P45+ deal with Mamiya 645 AFDII,80mm and 28mm is a killer deal until the end of the year(all of that gear is thrown in-$9k value)! Also if you have Hassy V-Series lenses I just got an adapter in for the Mamiya645AFDII and it seems to work (just tried it briefly, but I am going to put it through its paces, and will post , but so far, so good). So go ahead and use all of your old V-series glass! If you do not want the Mamiya in the promotion contact me for additional info. One more things we have two refurbished P21's that can be had for a few dollars more than the Canon.

Have a great Holiday!

Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
305-534-5701 office
305-394-3196 cell
www.captureintegration.com
[email protected]

Lance,
ABOUT TIME someone from your organization showed up here <Grin>.
Please tell Dave I wish him and the "girls" a Very Merry Christmas. Oh, and I PROMISE not to post any of the images I shot of you sitting in that certain location in Atlanta as long as you are real nice to the folks in here .. ROFLMAO!

Merry Christmas,
Chuck Jones