• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

More samples 1DSMK2/1DMK3

P

Paul Bestwick

pro member
iDSMK2 is the first image. Both cameras set to neutral iso 800 F8 @1/80th.
No adjustments other than opening in ACR
Other than a little more contrast in the MK3 I can't pick between the 2 files. Any suggestions for a better test ?

Cheers,

Paul

1DSMK2%232.jpg


MK3%232.jpg
 
Robert Groom

Robert Groom

New member
Paul Bestwick said:
iDSMK2 is the first image. Both cameras set to neutral iso 800 F8 @1/80th.
No adjustments other than opening in ACR
Other than a little more contrast in the MK3 I can't pick between the 2 files.

http://www.studio58.com.au/opm/1DSMK2#2.jpg

http://www.studio58.com.au/opm/MK3#2.jpg
Click to expand...

I can pick between them -- look at the brick wall in the background, different bokeh. I know that's not your point, but I prefer the 1DsMkII image in this particular comparison.

Paul Bestwick said:
Any suggestions for a better test ?
Click to expand...

1) Use a tripod, or a faster shutter speed? It looks as though there might be a bit of camera movement in the MkIII image.

2) Find a shop that can spell "cappuccino" correctly. ;-)

Robert
 
Last edited:
C

Carlo Ottaviano Casana

New member
Window shop

Hi there! I would like to greet everybody beeing this my 1st post!
It looks to me that in MKIII's shot one can see much more detail in the window shop on the left (looking at)!
 
nicolas claris

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Paul
Thanks for posting these samples (as the other ones in another thread), but for me imHo, to be able to compare the 2 bodies in order to know which one is good for you, you should shoot with of course as you did, the same settings, but also the same focal and upsize the 1DMK3 to the 1DSMK2 resolution.
This will permit the comparison of DOF.

No mid downsize/upsize, you need to know if you'll still been able to crop/reframe your pics later.

Or if you never crop your images (I can understand that) and if the 1DMK3 resoultion is enough for you, downsize the 1DSMK2 to the 1DMK3 "lower" resolution...

Sleep well down-unders…!
 
J

Joseph A. Kurkjian

New member
Nicolas Claris said:
Paul
Thanks for posting these samples (as the other ones in another thread), but for me imHo, to be able to compare the 2 bodies in order to know which one is good for you, you should shoot with of course as you did, the same settings, but also the same focal and upsize the 1DMK3 to the 1DSMK2 resolution.
This will permit the comparison of DOF.

No mid downsize/upsize, you need to know if you'll still been able to crop/reframe your pics later.

Or if you never crop your images (I can understand that) and if the 1DMK3 resoultion is enough for you, downsize the 1DSMK2 to the 1DMK3 "lower" resolution...

Sleep well down-unders…!
Click to expand...

Hi Nicolas:

IMO up-sizing A to B's size is not "fair" to A because of the interpolation step and downsizing B down to A's size is not "fair" to B, again because interpolation is applied to only to B. What is fair to both is the up-size/downsize to mean size as both pictures undergo interpolation. Now if both pictures are "significantly" downsized or up-sized then I would consider both were fairly treated (provided the "significant" condition is met). I "think" we agree that identical lenses in conjunction with foot zoom ensures each sensor starts with the same image; am I correct in my thinking?

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian
 
S

Sean Shadbolt

New member
There is some sun in the upper right corner which might affect the test , but its pretty good otherwise showing a good range of tones in both cameras. Shame the Sun wasn't around for the second picture as it might have shown if the extra two bits capture would make a difference in the highlights where the 1ds2 is starting to lose tone. Pretty hard to judge on the net though
 
nicolas claris

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Bonjour Joe
I "think" we agree that identical lenses in conjunction with foot zoom ensures each sensor starts with the same image; am I correct in my thinking?
Click to expand...
Yes!

Technically speaking you're right about up-sizing A to B's size, however I think it does not relate to the real life of photographer. If the test is made in order to choose an equipement, you've better test putting each of them in the situation that you will use 90% of your work, hence my comment
No mid downsize/upsize, you need to know if you'll still been able to crop/reframe your pics later.
Click to expand...
For y own work, I do need A3 at 300 dpi (I'm still waiting for the 22 or more Mpix) because I do a lot of double spread pages in magazines or brochures and huge enlarged prints too (10 x 6 feet is quite usual). Asher is my witness toward the quality of prints… Sorry, I'm OT now. But I am convinced that the better testing is to be done at the optimum (up or down) resolution that fit one's needs…
 
S

Steve Saunders

New member
Well studying the two images on-screen as they are, I can't see any difference worth talking about. It seems to be a case of both cameras beingas good as one another in IQ terms anyway.
 
B

Bart_van_der_Wolf

pro member
Steve Saunders said:
Well studying the two images on-screen as they are, I can't see any difference worth talking about. It seems to be a case of both cameras beingas good as one another in IQ terms anyway.
Click to expand...


Yes, I (almost ;-)) agee with that. However, the IQ differences will be more visible where they matter most, namely when the systems are pushed to they Dynamic range limits. This will show most obviously in cleaner more detailed shadows, especially at higher (800 and up) ISO settings.

Bart
 
B

Bart_van_der_Wolf

pro member
Steve Saunders said:
Well studying the two images on-screen as they are, I can't see any difference worth talking about. It seems to be a case of both cameras beingas good as one another in IQ terms anyway.
Click to expand...


Yes, I (almost ;-)) agree with that. However, the IQ differences will be more visible where they matter most, namely when the systems are pushed to they Dynamic range limits. This will show most obviously in cleaner more detailed shadows, especially at higher (800 and up) ISO settings.

Bart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top