Jack_Flesher Posted December 4, 2007 Share #1 Posted December 4, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Having a bit of fun here. If you're interested, I posted a mini review of the 1Ds3 on my workshop site, and included comparative crops of not only two other full frame Canon bodies, but added in an almost comparable M8 crop as well. It was tough to get it exact since I was shooting with a 135mm lens on the full frame DSLR's and was using the 90 Summarit on the M8. Anyway, if you're an M8 shooter you might be interested in seeing how it stacked up. Click the thumb to view: Enjoy, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 4, 2007 Posted December 4, 2007 Hi Jack_Flesher, Take a look here M8 file against 1Ds3 file :). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
johnbuckley Posted December 5, 2007 Share #2 Posted December 5, 2007 Very interesting. Good test, and thanks, Jack. Glad to see how well the M8 did in comparison. JB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted December 5, 2007 Share #3 Posted December 5, 2007 Cant see them on my connection with Safari 3.0.4 (523.12) unless you know if there is something I can tab to keep safari chasing the image rather than timing out and displaying little blue question marks. Hopefully I can see on pc later. Did you ever look at the M8 / older new D1 Mark3 in any tests or only the big brother? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted December 5, 2007 Author Share #4 Posted December 5, 2007 John: Thanks and glad you enjoyed it -- it is pretty remarkable, isn't it? Rob: I have not compared the M8 directly to the 1D3, but in the comparison you're having trouble viewing, I did compare to similar crops from the 1Ds3, 1Ds2 and 5D. As well as the M8 did in this test, I suspect it may actually outperform the 1D3... Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack MacDonough Posted December 5, 2007 Share #5 Posted December 5, 2007 Thanks, you just saved me $8,000. I started digital with a Canon D 30 in 2000 and upgraded that to the first 1Ds. Been waiting for a worthwhile upgrade since as I did not feel the 1DsII was that big a change. Subsequently, the M8 over the last year has been excellent for over 95% of my shots. Only using a DSLR for telephoto or highly wet environments shooting sailing from a jetski, not something I would do with an M8. May go with a 1DIII if I really need the upgrade. Truth is, I had already spent my planned DSLR upgrade money on an M8 and a 30% off WATE. Not looking through a AA filter is important to me now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan States Posted December 5, 2007 Share #6 Posted December 5, 2007 It begs the question...What exactly would the point of greater resolution in any of these cameras be at this stage? Considering that the largest print size 98% of DSLR or M8 users (even pros) will ever create will be about 16x20 I think it's time for manufacturers to start a dynamic range war, and call the megapixel war a wash. I have to say that noise reduction beyond what is now possible in cameras like the D3 seems similarly pointless. We have quickly reached a point where our mediums (print or screen) can no longer do justice to the ability of the cameras we are using. Pretty cool! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dseelig Posted December 5, 2007 Share #7 Posted December 5, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well the canon and leica are for me for very different purposes. I shoot action with the canons and portraits street scenes and landscpaes with the leica. I bought a mk 111 and am equally glad I bought a m8. :) P. S. the mk 111 is just a bit lighter then its predecessor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapp Posted December 5, 2007 Share #8 Posted December 5, 2007 It begs the question...What exactly would the point of greater resolution in any of these cameras be at this stage? Considering that the largest print size 98% of DSLR or M8 users (even pros) will ever create will be about 16x20 I think it's time for manufacturers to start a dynamic range war, and call the megapixel war a wash. I have to say that noise reduction beyond what is now possible in cameras like the D3 seems similarly pointless. We have quickly reached a point where our mediums (print or screen) can no longer do justice to the ability of the cameras we are using. Pretty cool! You could put a decent lens on the Canon to improve results :-) what about wide angle lenses. But you are correct pixel numbers are not everything and we need bigger format to fit more pixels on a sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted December 5, 2007 Author Share #9 Posted December 5, 2007 Not looking through a AA filter is important to me now. Amen to that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted December 5, 2007 Share #10 Posted December 5, 2007 Did you do the same shots at 100 ISO on the Canons? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
photoarne Posted December 5, 2007 Share #11 Posted December 5, 2007 Interesting test. There are however some issues that should be addressed. First of all there is the question of contrast and brightness. The 1DsIII file is considerably darker and also appears more contrasty than the 1DsII file. This makes judgement difficult. At first glance the 1DsIII file seems much crisper and more detailed than the 1DsII file, but this could to some extent be caused by the difference in brightness/contrast. Looking at the 1DsIII file, to my eye it appears somewhat oversharpened, it would have been instructive to see the same sharpening applied as for the 1DsII. (My comments are based on viewing the full image in the highest resolution posted.) Regarding the M8 file there appears to be a considerable amount of red colour seams at various places in the image (but not in the crops posted). Resolution is surprisingly good though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted December 5, 2007 Share #12 Posted December 5, 2007 It begs the question...What exactly would the point of greater resolution in any of these cameras be at this stage? To impress art directors! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted December 5, 2007 Share #13 Posted December 5, 2007 Great test, thanks! It proves I was right years ago to sell my C equipment and go for Nikon (D2X), Leica (M8) and FT (E-1 and since 1 week E-3). The M8 is doing surprisingly well. Only thing I would like to get for a digital M is FF and number of Pixels to get same resolution as with Crop M8 :-) Maybe next Photokina 2008 with M9 ??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted December 5, 2007 Share #14 Posted December 5, 2007 Like to get to 16 or 18mpx with the M9 just makes it FF and were there. My believe and not scientific is these lenses could easily handle 22mpx. I would just like that extra step up in resolution Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted December 5, 2007 Author Share #15 Posted December 5, 2007 Re the sharpening. All files were sharpened in the raw converter until they generated obvious pixelated artifacts, then backed down 2 or 3 percent form those values. This was done all in ACR for consistency. I realize this leaves the files looking a bit over-cooked, but it is the only way I could think of to ensure I was applying sharpening to a similar relative value in each file. Moreover, I have significant experience processing 1Ds2 and 5D files, but obviously new to the 1Ds3 files. So for sure a potential variable, but I can say at least the 1Ds3 sharpening "felt" about the same as the other two cameras... Finally, I remind everybody I stated at the beginning of my mini review it was NOT to taken as a comprehensive test, just my initial impressions on file quality. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker Posted December 5, 2007 Share #16 Posted December 5, 2007 Wonder how the M8 will stack up against a hot rodded Canon 5D without AA filter: Canon 5D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted December 5, 2007 Share #17 Posted December 5, 2007 Maybe next Photokina 2008 with M9 ??? The word is that they will not wait for Photokina. It's ready long before then and they need to press the button sooner, which makes a lot of sense. Rolo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitnaros Posted December 5, 2007 Share #18 Posted December 5, 2007 Jack, I shoot M8, Canon-1DII and Hassy503/Aptus-17. I like the M8 mainly for its compactness advantage. Looking at your 100% crops: I can't see that the M8 does any better than the 5D. What's your take on that comparison from the images you took? Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted December 6, 2007 Author Share #19 Posted December 6, 2007 Wonder how the M8 will stack up against a hot rodded Canon 5D without AA filter: Canon 5D I've been considering it since I did this test Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_Flesher Posted December 6, 2007 Author Share #20 Posted December 6, 2007 Jack,I shoot M8, Canon-1DII and Hassy503/Aptus-17. I like the M8 mainly for its compactness advantage. Looking at your 100% crops: I can't see that the M8 does any better than the 5D. What's your take on that comparison from the images you took? Peter Well... First keep in mind the M8 was at a slight focal length disadvantage, 90x1.3 for a net of 120, against the 135 used on the full-frame Canons, so there is roughly a 10% magnification advantage given to the Canons. Looking atthe peeling paint, they look pretty similar, but that is high-contrast edges. Now look at the texture in the roofing shingles, the sand in them is relatively low contrast detail which is much more difficult to render. To my eyes, the "grit" in that first row on the roof directly above the vertical wood pieces shows pretty clearly in the M8 crop and is all but non-existent in the 5D crop. A bit of it shows from the 1Ds2, and the 1Ds3 is the only Canon that renders it clearly. (And more clearly IMO than the M8.) So to answer your question, I'd disagree with you --- to my eyes, the M8 renders low-contrast detail better than the 5D and at least as well as or even slightly better than the 1Ds2. Sorry. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.