These thoughts are based on a comparasion between the 1DS3 and 1DS2.
1) the viewfinder in the 1DS3 is much much better. It is bigger, brighter/clearer and carries better information.
2)The 3" rear LCD is a big bonus - does anybody want to buy a GiGa Vue Pro 40GB? [sold]
3)The dynamic range is clearly better in the darks, it captures better detail. The micro contrast is much better.
4)The noise (or lack of it) in the darks at 1000 iso is outstanding. At 3200, after applying Neat, for paper/editorial work it may be useable (I probably won't).
5)The camera feels a lot lighter. It may not be.
6)The difference between 16.7M and 21.1MP is welcomed especially when deliberately stepping back to compose with a view of cropping later - this will always be so for higher pixel count cameras. For most editorial work the difference is irrelevent.
7)The menu structure is better laid out.
8)5ps, whilst a marginal increase from 4fps, makes me feel more comfortable - I still want 7fps
So on the whole is it worth the upgrade, well that will always be a personal decision, but for me for combination of 4 and 3 make the answer a resounding yes. Number 1 will make a difference if you wear glasses, I sometimes do when I forget the contact lenses.
Hi Tom look like a cool camera to have, I have heard that it only does five frames per second with shutter speeds in excess of 1/500 ? I can't remember what the older 1DS 2 shutter speed was required to reach its maximum frames per second still it should give you plenty of cropping options as the pixel density is up around the same level as the d200/40d, I have downloaded a couple of the raw files from off the net and suspect is going to be a great landscape camera.
We have one arriving next week.... How much better is the micro-contrast (as you know it is very important for the work we do), hopefully we will get the funding to purchase a couple more... (I am actually more interested in what will be the 5D replacement..)
Phil
Posted by Andy Astbury on December 1, 2007 at 11:49 AM
From all the reports I've seen Tom I expect you'll be more than happy with it - wish there was one sat here with a 600 f4 nailed to it
To be honest the better micro-contrast is probably a combination of 14bits, low noise and 21MP covering the same area. Small structures on the 180mm just appear to be very well defined.
T
Posted by Phil Shaw on December 1, 2007 at 1:53 PM
You left out some important information; are the images sharp?
I decided to pass on the one that I had ordered until I can confirm that the new AF system that it has in common with the 1D3 is capable of capturing sharp images.
You say the micro contrast is better; - any images to post to illustrate this? In all the images I've seen up to now from the pre-production units, the detail appears "smeared" as if a heavy dose of AA filter or noise reduction has been applied.
Yes there is obviously an AA and I would expect it is about the same strength as the 1Ds2. (Pity it ain't like a Leica M8)
As to the focus, if it has the same problem as the 1D3 I can't see it as yet, but then I haven't really had the conditions to repeat what RG did.
That said I would hope for Canons sake that there are no problems for they knew about the 1D3 problems before this was shipped; it would be a bit of a kamikazi stunt to ship more defective models. I am resonably sure they will not have released this camera model without some serious pre testing. But that said you are right to ask and I will be checking
To check what RG showed about the 1D3 I need to get out and find a few fast women in warm conditions - failing that, cars in cold conditions .
I will try and do this over the next week. That said I don't beleive that I am the first to have one of these cameras so I would expect to see more positive/'or not' comments soon from others.
If you want to test drive one I can meet you somewhere.
Discussion
8 replies1) the viewfinder in the 1DS3 is much much better. It is bigger, brighter/clearer and carries better information.
2)The 3" rear LCD is a big bonus - does anybody want to buy a GiGa Vue Pro 40GB? [sold]
3)The dynamic range is clearly better in the darks, it captures better detail. The micro contrast is much better.
4)The noise (or lack of it) in the darks at 1000 iso is outstanding. At 3200, after applying Neat, for paper/editorial work it may be useable (I probably won't).
5)The camera feels a lot lighter. It may not be.
6)The difference between 16.7M and 21.1MP is welcomed especially when deliberately stepping back to compose with a view of cropping later - this will always be so for higher pixel count cameras. For most editorial work the difference is irrelevent.
7)The menu structure is better laid out.
8)5ps, whilst a marginal increase from 4fps, makes me feel more comfortable - I still want 7fps
So on the whole is it worth the upgrade, well that will always be a personal decision, but for me for combination of 4 and 3 make the answer a resounding yes. Number 1 will make a difference if you wear glasses, I sometimes do when I forget the contact lenses.
T
Good to hear about a happy Canon customer.
Brian
Phillip.
Frederic
We have one arriving next week.... How much better is the micro-contrast (as you know it is very important for the work we do), hopefully we will get the funding to purchase a couple more... (I am actually more interested in what will be the 5D replacement..)
Phil
To be honest the better micro-contrast is probably a combination of 14bits, low noise and 21MP covering the same area. Small structures on the 180mm just appear to be very well defined.
T
I decided to pass on the one that I had ordered until I can confirm that the new AF system that it has in common with the 1D3 is capable of capturing sharp images.
You say the micro contrast is better; - any images to post to illustrate this? In all the images I've seen up to now from the pre-production units, the detail appears "smeared" as if a heavy dose of AA filter or noise reduction has been applied.
The images to date are sharp after the usual USM.
Yes there is obviously an AA and I would expect it is about the same strength as the 1Ds2. (Pity it ain't like a Leica M8)
As to the focus, if it has the same problem as the 1D3 I can't see it as yet, but then I haven't really had the conditions to repeat what RG did.
That said I would hope for Canons sake that there are no problems for they knew about the 1D3 problems before this was shipped; it would be a bit of a kamikazi stunt to ship more defective models. I am resonably sure they will not have released this camera model without some serious pre testing. But that said you are right to ask and I will be checking
To check what RG showed about the 1D3 I need to get out and find a few fast women in warm conditions
I will try and do this over the next week. That said I don't beleive that I am the first to have one of these cameras so I would expect to see more positive/'or not' comments soon from others.
If you want to test drive one I can meet you somewhere.
T