I'm looking to add a second body (brand variable) to my bag. I'd like it to be with no AA filter, since my 1D MKII has a fairly strong AA filter in it already.
I'm thinking about the Kodak DCS slr/c but probably won't be able to find one, so I'm wondering what other bodies (Sigma, Fuji, Nikon, Leica, Oly, Canon, Sony, etc.) are availabe with no AA filter (or a VERY WEAK one). I'm okay with having different manufacturer than Canon, since I'll likely dedicate them for different tasks anyway.
How about buying a used camera and replacing the AA filter with a clear filter? I believe lifepixel sells clear filters for specific models and even provides DIY tutorials for installation as well. This way you could reinstall the original AA filter if you decide to sell the camera in the future.
I'm assuming the other task that the second body would be dedicated to would be something that wouldn't generate a lot of moire effect--like landscape. If you can't find the Kodak, you may want to look at Maxmax and see what cameras can have the AA filter removed.
I'm not sure that the radial patterning in the feather detail is moire as suffered by low strength AA filters but is just light refraction from the feather micro structure
See the attached test reference page from DPReview and the square moire patterning in the first detail box below the test charts - bottom of the resolution wedge
The early Kodak sensors of the original Canon 1D and Oly E-1 all had very weak AA filters and they could knock out wickedly sharp A3 prints for such low resolution sensors, but they would suffer this square moir patterning under certain conditions
Brambling wrote:
I'm not sure that the radial patterning in the feather detail is moire as suffered by low strength AA filters but is just light refraction from the feather micro structure
It's moiré; there are comparison images in the dpreview thread as direct evidence. However, we can think this through as well. If it had been as you suggest, the interference patterns would have remained visible even as the magnification was increased. I've looked closely at a number of parrots, and have never observed such patterns.
The best examples of aliasing don't normally occur in real world images, though, feathers notwithstanding. If one really goes out to torture a system it can be as in-your-face as you like. With a perfect lens and a perfect target, a bare sensor could be made to see a whole image as either all white, or all black, flipping back and forth with just a small shift in alignment. Needless to say that aliasing doesn't have to be that severe before creative software processing can no longer do anything to hide it.
Thanks, the 1DS is on my radar ... Low ISO work, I didn't know it had a weak AA filter. Probably easier to find than the Kocak SLR/c. That helps to know.
Richard ... so how do you REALLY feel about AA filters
?? How does AA filter vs. no AA filter come in to play with regard to hi-res lenses vs. consumer grade 'good lenses' with lesser resolving power (also how does APO lens affect AA / no AA) ... or does it make no difference to using a Leica / Zeiss vs. ??
The 1Ds does have a very weak AA filter and the images are simply wonderful.
The Kodak SLRn (Nikon mount), Kodak SLRc (Canon mount), and the older Pro 14n did not have AA filters. On the kodak's, there is the added benefit of excellent colors that provide for very good skin tones.
Having shot the Kodak's for some time now, I really don't see Moire being such a big issue for most shooting. I think it has been exaggerated a bit by the web.
I recently sold my Kodak SLRc when I switched to Nikon and have been regretting it since.
How about an unmodified Canon EOS 5D? That camera has a weak anti-aliasing filter, as shown by the significant moiré it produces at the slightest provocation, and its very high pixel-level sharpness. Consequently the 5D is a high-resolution camera even by today's standards (a good bit sharper than a Nikon D700, for example, because the D700 has a much stronger—and more effective—AA filter).
Gaining a little textural detail in exchange for the real risk of severe digital artefacts is not a great trade-off, in my opinion, though if you have a second camera it might work okay.
I wouldn't characterize the 5D's AA filter as weak. In fact, when I bought my 5D, I was so worried that there was something wrong with it (all the shots were so soft when zoomed in) that I entered into a discussion with Canon technical support about it. I eventually sold it and bought an M8, which has no AA filter. I can't compare the 5D to the D700 though, since I have never used one.
