This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2009Jeff Ascough and 1D4
p.2 #1Jeff Ascough and 1D4
Nick Nishizaka wrote:
Yeah, if I can get same/similar IQ as the 1DMKIII plus a 1 stop noise advantage, all at 16MP, then I'll be a happy camper.
Yep, add to that video, a much better LCD and better AF (then what I always thought was great AF with the 1D3 anyhow) and I'll be in camping heaven.
As far as his report went his words went way beyond his posted samples. I know he's connected with Canon but why would he post such an obviously overzealous report if he really didn't feel that way. He's obviously happy with his 5D2's so if this body wasn't a major improvement over those I doubt he would have gone to those lengths in his description.
Yeah, if I can get same/similar IQ as the 1DMKIII plus a 1 stop noise advantage, all at 16MP, then I'll be a happy camper.
Yep, add to that video, a much better LCD and better AF (then what I always thought was great AF with the 1D3 anyhow) and I'll be in camping heaven.
As far as his report went his words went way beyond his posted samples. I know he's connected with Canon but why would he post such an obviously overzealous report if he really didn't feel that way. He's obviously happy with his 5D2's so if this body wasn't a major improvement over those I doubt he would have gone to those lengths in his description.
Nov 24, 2009 at 03:34 PM
p.2 #2Jeff Ascough and 1D4
Daan B wrote:
But that 1D4 ISO12800 100% crop looks pretty good
Indeed. Best ISO 12800 crop I've ever seen.
But that 1D4 ISO12800 100% crop looks pretty good
Indeed. Best ISO 12800 crop I've ever seen.
Nov 24, 2009 at 03:38 PM
p.2 #3Jeff Ascough and 1D4
eosfun wrote:
Colours. The DIGIC 3 colour rendition always had some magic to me (even in a 450D!). Something that has changed and in some lighting condition I miss that magic 'golden browns' of the 1DmkIII. Not saying the colour rendition of the new one is bad or worse, au contraire. Even though I have not been able to do thorough testing so far my impression is the colour gamut is slightly wider, but I somehow miss that typical colours of the past (yes it's probably nostalgia), just like I mostly had to get used to the new colours of a new...Show more →
Which body are you testing to compare digic4 to the digic3 of the 1D3? I feel the same way about the 1D3 files, they just look different (in a better way) then the 7D which is my only digic4 body to date. Nothing specific, kind of a sum of the parts type thing.
Colours. The DIGIC 3 colour rendition always had some magic to me (even in a 450D!). Something that has changed and in some lighting condition I miss that magic 'golden browns' of the 1DmkIII. Not saying the colour rendition of the new one is bad or worse, au contraire. Even though I have not been able to do thorough testing so far my impression is the colour gamut is slightly wider, but I somehow miss that typical colours of the past (yes it's probably nostalgia), just like I mostly had to get used to the new colours of a new...Show more →
Which body are you testing to compare digic4 to the digic3 of the 1D3? I feel the same way about the 1D3 files, they just look different (in a better way) then the 7D which is my only digic4 body to date. Nothing specific, kind of a sum of the parts type thing.
Nov 24, 2009 at 03:41 PM
p.2 #4Jeff Ascough and 1D4
1d mk IV 
And let me tell you: I am having EOSfun
And let me tell you: I am having EOSfun
Nov 24, 2009 at 04:03 PM
p.2 #5Jeff Ascough and 1D4
Is this guy a goof? I mean, after reading the following statement:
100% crop. The AF has nailed the image even with using one shot and a moving subject.
What... we're to think that the AF on this camera is so unbelievable that even One-Shot can track moving objects? Or are we to think the operator doesn't know when to use the various AF modes?
I've been using Canon long enough to know that getting an in-focus image using One-Shot with a subject that is moving towards you is mostly luck.
100% crop. The AF has nailed the image even with using one shot and a moving subject.
What... we're to think that the AF on this camera is so unbelievable that even One-Shot can track moving objects? Or are we to think the operator doesn't know when to use the various AF modes?
I've been using Canon long enough to know that getting an in-focus image using One-Shot with a subject that is moving towards you is mostly luck.
Nov 24, 2009 at 04:14 PM
p.2 #6Jeff Ascough and 1D4
eosfun wrote:
1d mk IV
And let me tell you: I am having EOSfun
Cmon and share!! post up . . . don't hog all the EOSfun along with the name!
1d mk IV
And let me tell you: I am having EOSfun
Cmon and share!! post up . . . don't hog all the EOSfun along with the name!
Nov 24, 2009 at 04:23 PM
p.2 #7Jeff Ascough and 1D4
ISO 12800 looks about the same as ISO 3200 on the 1D II and ISO 1600 is like ISO 400. Looks good to me.
Nov 24, 2009 at 04:24 PM
p.2 #8Jeff Ascough and 1D4
eosfun wrote:
I have to admit I had the same idea. Video really wasn't something for me. But my clients think differently. Wait until you have done some HD-video Daan. You'll know what I mean. HD video is the new EOSfun
Maybe I will give HDVideo a go... Still haven't com around to play with it on my 5D2. Meanwhile, where are you situated? I am sure you want to share your 1D4 experience with me
Earlier quote
which to me isn't as much as a hype as the video thingy )Maybe I will give HDVideo a go... Still haven't com around to play with it on my 5D2. Meanwhile, where are you situated? I am sure you want to share your 1D4 experience with me
Nov 24, 2009 at 06:06 PM
p.2 #9Jeff Ascough and 1D4
I won't make any crazy statements, but that 12,800 looks very clean. Cleaner than 12800 on my 5D2, and perhaps comparable to 6400 on the 5. Obviously hard to tell from just one shot in a completely different situation though.
Nov 24, 2009 at 06:16 PM
p.2 #10Jeff Ascough and 1D4
eosfun wrote:
Colours. The DIGIC 3 colour rendition always had some magic to me (even in a 450D!). Something that has changed and in some lighting condition I miss that magic 'golden browns' of the 1DmkIII. Not saying the colour rendition of the new one is bad or worse, au contraire. Even though I have not been able to do thorough testing so far my impression is the colour gamut is slightly wider, but I somehow miss that typical colours of the past (yes it's probably nostalgia), just like I mostly had to get used to the new colours of a new...Show more →
Uh oh. I just love those warm tones from the Mk3, which I have not been able to replicate with newer bodies. I'm not looking forward to that at all.
Colours. The DIGIC 3 colour rendition always had some magic to me (even in a 450D!). Something that has changed and in some lighting condition I miss that magic 'golden browns' of the 1DmkIII. Not saying the colour rendition of the new one is bad or worse, au contraire. Even though I have not been able to do thorough testing so far my impression is the colour gamut is slightly wider, but I somehow miss that typical colours of the past (yes it's probably nostalgia), just like I mostly had to get used to the new colours of a new...Show more →
Uh oh. I just love those warm tones from the Mk3, which I have not been able to replicate with newer bodies. I'm not looking forward to that at all.
Nov 24, 2009 at 06:51 PM
p.2 #11Jeff Ascough and 1D4
Nick Nishizaka wrote:
Why would anyone expect to see a big difference in IQ?
It's never been that way, instead we get more features, marginal "IQ" improvement, mainly in the high ISO noise department, and that's about it.
My interest in the MKIV is about getting more resolution, hopefully 1 stop improvement in high ISO noise, nice LCD (LCD on the 1DMKIII is crap by any standard), possibly video...and of course all the other things that typically comes with a 1 series body...build, seal, battery life, form factor, speed, etc.
I agree. I'm particularly interested in whether his claim of very responsive AF in low light conditions holds true. How many people remember the complaints about the 1DII hesitating slightly in very low light, particularly tungsten light? Such as at wedding receptions, etc. I know I experienced it from time to time. I definitely found the III better, especially for low light sports, but there was still room for improvement. If the 1DIV can AF track a bride walking down the aisle when shooting with the 85L at an exposure around ISO 3200 1/200 f/1.2 with most frames dead on sharp, I'll be very happy.
John--G wrote:
Is this guy a goof? I mean, after reading the following statement:
100% crop. The AF has nailed the image even with using one shot and a moving subject.
What... we're to think that the AF on this camera is so unbelievable that even One-Shot can track moving objects? Or are we to think the operator doesn't know when to use the various AF modes?
I've been using Canon long enough to know that getting an in-focus image using One-Shot with a subject that is moving towards you is mostly luck.
Your taking it out of context. He didn't claim it tracked in One-Shot. He never claimed to have shot a sequence in One-Shot where all images were sharp. My take on it is his first and possibly only frame was sharp because the camera was fast enough to make the exposure at the moment the focus was locked. Remember that Canon is touting this camera as needing zero time to calculate AI-Servo tracking, so that probably spills over into very fast and accurate One-Shot acquisition. If one was to make the exposure the instant One-Shot AF locked focus, then even a moving subject could be in focus (and it's not like someone walking is the same as tracking a BIF or a moving car, etc.). I have definitely done this with the Mark III, having accidentally shot sequences at the start of a sports event in One-Shot, and the first frame of each sequence was sharp.
Ron
Why would anyone expect to see a big difference in IQ?
It's never been that way, instead we get more features, marginal "IQ" improvement, mainly in the high ISO noise department, and that's about it.
My interest in the MKIV is about getting more resolution, hopefully 1 stop improvement in high ISO noise, nice LCD (LCD on the 1DMKIII is crap by any standard), possibly video...and of course all the other things that typically comes with a 1 series body...build, seal, battery life, form factor, speed, etc.
I agree. I'm particularly interested in whether his claim of very responsive AF in low light conditions holds true. How many people remember the complaints about the 1DII hesitating slightly in very low light, particularly tungsten light? Such as at wedding receptions, etc. I know I experienced it from time to time. I definitely found the III better, especially for low light sports, but there was still room for improvement. If the 1DIV can AF track a bride walking down the aisle when shooting with the 85L at an exposure around ISO 3200 1/200 f/1.2 with most frames dead on sharp, I'll be very happy.
John--G wrote:
Is this guy a goof? I mean, after reading the following statement:
100% crop. The AF has nailed the image even with using one shot and a moving subject.
What... we're to think that the AF on this camera is so unbelievable that even One-Shot can track moving objects? Or are we to think the operator doesn't know when to use the various AF modes?
I've been using Canon long enough to know that getting an in-focus image using One-Shot with a subject that is moving towards you is mostly luck.
Your taking it out of context. He didn't claim it tracked in One-Shot. He never claimed to have shot a sequence in One-Shot where all images were sharp. My take on it is his first and possibly only frame was sharp because the camera was fast enough to make the exposure at the moment the focus was locked. Remember that Canon is touting this camera as needing zero time to calculate AI-Servo tracking, so that probably spills over into very fast and accurate One-Shot acquisition. If one was to make the exposure the instant One-Shot AF locked focus, then even a moving subject could be in focus (and it's not like someone walking is the same as tracking a BIF or a moving car, etc.). I have definitely done this with the Mark III, having accidentally shot sequences at the start of a sports event in One-Shot, and the first frame of each sequence was sharp.
Ron
Nov 24, 2009 at 08:41 PM
p.2 #12Jeff Ascough and 1D4
FretNoMore wrote:
It's pre-production, and it's only one person's samples...
...I'd wait for some more tests, from a production camera, before judging.
wait for charts? 500 percent crops? you cant tell me those high ISO shot werent impressive..
It's pre-production, and it's only one person's samples...
...I'd wait for some more tests, from a production camera, before judging.
wait for charts? 500 percent crops? you cant tell me those high ISO shot werent impressive..
Nov 24, 2009 at 08:50 PM
p.2 #13Jeff Ascough and 1D4
willis wrote:
Nothing earth shattering there. The 1600 ISO crop looks a bit 7D-like in terms of IQ albeit pretty noise free.
isnt that part of better IQ is lower noise
Nothing earth shattering there. The 1600 ISO crop looks a bit 7D-like in terms of IQ albeit pretty noise free.
isnt that part of better IQ is lower noise
Nov 24, 2009 at 08:51 PM
p.2 #14Jeff Ascough and 1D4
Adam L wrote:
Lol.. a few people have no PERSPECTIVE.
How far have we come in 10 years. For Jebus' sake, he's shooting at ISO 12,800, and he's got so much detail!
C'mon folks, get with it.
I am with you..just think how clean 1600,3200,6400 are should be a boon to wedding fotogs...
Lol.. a few people have no PERSPECTIVE.
How far have we come in 10 years. For Jebus' sake, he's shooting at ISO 12,800, and he's got so much detail!
C'mon folks, get with it.
I am with you..just think how clean 1600,3200,6400 are should be a boon to wedding fotogs...
Nov 24, 2009 at 08:53 PM
p.2 #15Jeff Ascough and 1D4
digitalbug30d wrote:
...I'd wait for some more tests, from a production camera, before judging.wait for charts? 500 percent crops? you cant tell me those high ISO shot werent impressive..
I have not said they aren't good, on the contrary.
FretNoMore wrote
It's pre-production, and it's only one person's samples......I'd wait for some more tests, from a production camera, before judging.
I have not said they aren't good, on the contrary.
Nov 24, 2009 at 09:01 PM
p.2 #16Jeff Ascough and 1D4
I will wait and see after substantial tests of the production cameras but I see nothing that justifies the size price jump Canon put in place over the 1D3. The fact that I just picked up 2 1D3's for an average price of $2150 each after Canon finally fixed the focus issues makes me think I will own them a long time, long time. I finally am over being totally p---sed off over the trouble they caused me with my original copies. It took a long time.
Dave
Dave
Nov 24, 2009 at 09:08 PM
p.2 #17Jeff Ascough and 1D4
I note that in his article he says that he didn't try the expanded ISO settings, which go three stops above 12,800. That means this camera can capture at ISO 102,400, the same as Nikon's newest.
I look forward to some in-depth testing of these ultra-low-light capabilities.
I look forward to some in-depth testing of these ultra-low-light capabilities.
Nov 24, 2009 at 09:13 PM
p.2 #18Jeff Ascough and 1D4
"If the 1DIV can AF track a bride walking down the aisle when shooting with the 85L at an exposure around ISO 3200 1/200 f/1.2 with most frames dead on sharp, I'll be very happy."
Sigh, this is also my dream, but is probably fantasy... if I could get anywhere near 66% of my shots at f1.2 of a moving subject with the 85L or 50L in focus (at eyes) in low light at 5-10 feet, I'd be elated. ELATED. My technique and shooting style, not the camera I'm using, is probably a much greater determinant of my hit ratio. There are so many ways to introduce focus error at f1.2 it is silly.
Can't we just get an "eye detection" AF mode already? The camera (in this mode) focuses on the eyes *always* and I do my thing. I'd switch brands for that.
Sigh, this is also my dream, but is probably fantasy... if I could get anywhere near 66% of my shots at f1.2 of a moving subject with the 85L or 50L in focus (at eyes) in low light at 5-10 feet, I'd be elated. ELATED. My technique and shooting style, not the camera I'm using, is probably a much greater determinant of my hit ratio. There are so many ways to introduce focus error at f1.2 it is silly.
Can't we just get an "eye detection" AF mode already? The camera (in this mode) focuses on the eyes *always* and I do my thing. I'd switch brands for that.
Nov 24, 2009 at 09:14 PM
p.2 #19Jeff Ascough and 1D4
alundeb wrote:
Indeed. Best ISO 12800 crop I've ever seen.
Did you click on the picture? That's the 100% crop (image in new window) and it looks ugly
Indeed. Best ISO 12800 crop I've ever seen.
Did you click on the picture? That's the 100% crop (image in new window) and it looks ugly
Nov 24, 2009 at 10:03 PM
p.2 #20Jeff Ascough and 1D4
My eyebrow went up on that statement, too. One shot just focuses one time. He must have done a quick press to shutter release and had other things going for him for DOF (wide angle, fairly long distance from subject, or fairly small ap, or some combination). It's all the more interesting since, generally, he used the center AF point to focus, then recomposed. How do you do that and not lose focus when the subject is moving toward you? Not criticizing, just wondering.
Nov 24, 2009 at 10:33 PM