1DS3 BLOG - LIFE WITH A CANON 1DS MARK III An ongoing review of the 1Ds Mark III, Canon lenses and software

Coming Up on the Six Month Mark

Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:52:11 -0500

This coming September marks six months with the Canon 1Ds Mark III. I feel like I know the 1Ds Mark III fairly well, but there is still some learning curve left to tackle. About five weeks ago we added two Golden Retriever puppies to our family, and chasing them with the 1Ds3 has been a new experience. The last part of the learning curve will be AI Servo.
The honeymoon period is over and the forth coming entries in the 1Ds3 Blog will focus on how the 1Ds Mark III performed in the real world - no more testing or comparing. DP-Review published their 1Ds Mark III review, and it provides a good feature by feature review.
During the past month a couple topics have been discussed in the photography forums and and review sites which I would like address. I am not an equipment review authority, and the comments presented here are just that - my comments. And the comments posted else on other sites, are just opinions too - but they do get repeated and quoted as if they are established facts. With almost six months hands-on experience, I do feel comfortable enough to offer my view.
ISO PERFORMANCE
DP-Review’s 1Ds Mark III describes ISO performance was about the same as the Canon 1Ds Mark II. DP-Review does well in reporting on features; however, when it comes to their dynamic range tests and ISO performance - I am skeptical. I have owned most of the Canon dSLRs - including the Canon 40D and new XSi Rebel. DP-review states very optimistic numbers for DR and ISO performance for the 40D and XSi. And Luminous-Landscape paints a very rosy picture for the XSi. In my experience, I didn’t see the file quality that those sites led me to expect.
The 1Ds3’s noise is different (than the 1Ds2’s) - it is a finer pitch and blends better. And as explained in earlier entries, the 1Ds Mark III files can pushed further in post processing before the shadows and mid-tones begin to look noisy and showing banding or blocking. I believe the 1Ds3 is a 1-2 stop improvement over the 1Ds2.
ISO 200 is very clean, but I usually use ISO 400 instead for higher shutter speeds. ISO 400 feels about the same as ISO 200 from the 1Ds2 and the ISO 400 really cleans up well in DPP. Most of the images on this page were ISO 400. ISO 800 looks good, but the files are not as stable during post-processing. At ISO 1600 the noise is clearly visible and the files need noise reduction if being presented on line (such as 100% crops). In print noise tends to look 2-3 stops cleaner compared to 100% on-screen crops - this true of all dSLRs. Even ISO 800 from the original Canon 1Ds looks good in print.
At the raw level I use Canon’s DPP software and its built-in noise reduction. On ISO 400 images I like to use 1-2 clicks (on the slider) on the luminance noise and 3-4 clicks on the chrominance noise. For ISO 800 the settings are 1-2 clicks more aggressive and another 1-2 clicks for ISO 1600. I do not use in-camera noise reduction - those options have been turned off in the Custom Functions. Given the choice I would rather shoot ISO 100 because that has the greatest dynamic range. Also higher ISO files react more dramatically to color and saturation changes - this is why I shy away from ISO 800 and prefer to use ISO 400.
1Ds MARK III AUTO-FOCUS
Simply put, 1Ds Mark III auto-focus performance has non-issue. In my experience the 1Ds Mark III’s auto-focus performance is as reliable as the 1Ds Mark II’s. There has been nothing to give me pause or concern. My only gripe is not being able to individually select any of the 45 AF points. And the little thumb-stick is too far away when the camera body is held in portrait orientation.
Now some people are extrapolating from the 1D Mark III to the 1Ds Mark III and intent on spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt). The 1D Mark II’s auto-focus has been glorified as a system that could can do no wrong. Yet the 1D Mark II series had firmware updates for its auto-focus too, and the photography forums are filled with 1000’s upon 1000’s of posts from owners asking how to get better auto-focus performance.
To date I have used the Canon 35L, 100-400L IS, 24-105L IS and 200L F2.8 II with the 1Ds3. Auto-focus has not been perfect on every picture, but auto-focus wasn’t perfect with the 1Ds2 either. A Canon 135L is on its way - mostly for AI-Servo use as I chase puppies to and fro, so I’ll have revisit AI-Servo topic later this year. I realize that a bunch of manual focus images don’t exactly make my point :)

The New Super-Sized Digital Backs

Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:56:07 -0500

THE NEW DIGITAL BACKS AND OUR CHOICES
With Photokina 2008 just around the corner, Hasselblad announced the H3DII-50, Phase One announced the P65+ and Leaf announced the AFi10. Hasselblad increased pixel density, managing 50 MP on a 48x36mm sensor. Phase One set forth custom specifications along with some of their own patents and contracted Dalsa to build a custom 54x40mm sensor with 60 MP. And Leaf threw a curve ball with a 3:2 aspect ratio sensor format (56 MP on a 56x36mm sensor). For me these new sensors are little more than wishful thinking since they come with $35-$40k USD price tags.
Clearly the digital back makers want to separate themselves from Canon, Nikon and Sony by being at least double the number of megapixels compared to the 1Ds Mark III for the moment (and presumably the forth coming Nikon D3X and Sony A900). Product differentiation is critical, so the increased megapixel counts makes sense in that regard. However, the back makers are alienating dSLR users by creating a 4 to 5x price gap - which narrows their target market too. I had hoped they would broaden their market by offering more products at a $10,000 USD price point.
A refurbished back is an alternative in the $7,000 to $15,000 price range depending on sensor size & megapixel count, but these older backs are based on 2004 / 2005 technology. The trade offs include poor LCD’s, limited ISO, more susceptibility to sensor bloom than the current backs, older IR filter designs and presumably older electronics. In contrast there are the latest offerings from Canon and Nikon for much less money. And Photokina promises more dSLR competition too. I realize the back makers do not want to compete with dSLRs, so they raised the bar. But, how do they plan to get new buyers? With each price increase they further reduce the addressable market.
PIXEL QUALITY VS SYSTEM FLEXIBILITY
“Pixel quality vs system flexibility” sums up the medium format vs dSLR argument based upon my needs. Comparing a 22 megapixel P25 file @ ISO 50 to a Canon 1Ds Mark III 21 MP file @ ISO 100, the P25 easily wins the on screen comparison. The sharpness, definition and contrast in the P25 files are intoxicating. I have been using the 1Ds Mark III for almost 6 months, and at this point I think color is more or less on par with medium format when it comes to pushing around files in Photoshop. However, the 1Ds Mark III files do not match the sharpness and definition of a P25 file. At ISO 100 the P25’s advantages begin to lessen. By ISO 200 the P25 is noisy and exhibits color shifting (due to the noise). After ISO 200 the 1Ds Mark III is the winner. A P25+ or P30+ back would probably hold up fairly well at ISO 400 & 800.
While the 1Ds Mark III leaves me wishing for better definition (sharpness), the system works smoothly. The 1Ds Mark III has all the benefits of modern dSLRs - great auto focus, good LCDs, a big and bright viewfinder, great high ISO performance, an endless array of lens options, long battery life, etc., etc., etc.
With the 1Ds Mark III “getting the shot” is never a worry. I know for sure I will come back from any occasion with some keepers. Not every shot is perfect and there are plenty which go into the digital trash can.
In relatively static conditions with plenty of time to frame, compose, focus and set the exposure - the keeper rate with medium format is respectable too. Though, with medium format I was bracketing exposure and focus, so a single scene usually consisted of 6 to 12 attempts and the best was picked during post. Whereas with the 1Ds Mark III maybe 2 or 3 alternative compositions (or settings) are taken. For landscapes medium format was manageable. As for the puppy shots on this page, I cannot imagine the Mamiya 645AFD II’s auto-focus being able to lock anywhere near fast enough.
With these newest 50-60 megapixel digital backs, back makers have upped the sensor sizes and pixel quality to a new level. Supposedly Phase One P65+ can be shot in a 30 MP mode allowing for even greater dynamic range, or improved high ISO performance. And dSLRs are marching forward with new features such as auto ISO, Live View, improved auto focus and so on. Arguably dSLR image quality is getting better. I would like to see more dynamic range and weaker AA filters; I do not feel like Canon has improved in these areas. But Canon’s high ISO just gets better and better. The colors from the 1Ds Mark III can be rich and vibrant.
The Canon 1Ds Mark III produces a very respectable file both in terms of size and detail. It does not surpass a 22 megapixel back, but the odds are - you’ll get the picture with the 1Ds Mark III whereas the odds with a medium format camera are not as high. Perhaps the digital back makers have out-paced the medium format camera makers. The HY6 looks to be a very capable camera, but its auto-focus is primitive compared to Canon’s 49 points and Nikon’s 51 points. A super-sized digital back is worthless if the pictures are all out of focus. My hopes are pinned on Hasselblad for now. I think they are the company most likely to introduce a true multipoint AF system - presumably a H4D.
The new backs are nice, but I would rather see more affordable medium format solutions. A medium format system augmented with a Nikon D700 or Canon 5D Mark II would great duo for me. The dSLRs exist... sigh...

Upgrades that really are - upgrades

Sat, 5 Jul 2008 02:18:09 -0500

When Canon announced the 1Ds Mark III, they also released a white paper and lengthy press release citing numerous improvements over its predecessor, the 1Ds Mark II. Each Canon 1-series has its own unique learning curve and it can be steep depending on one’s experience, technique, preferences, etc. When a new camera arrives, there are some changes which make an immediate impression - “wow, that’s neat”, or “why the $%^&* did they do that?!?!” This entry highlights several features which I initially dismissed as marketing hype, but after some time I have come to appreciate their value.
LIVE VIEW
When I first heard of Live View my initial thought was Canon has added another “me too” feature to keep up with Olympus. Using Live View reinforced my preconceptions as the camera paused, made various sounds while lifting the mirror and opening the shutter curtain. The execution soundly kludgy and certainly not something befitting to a professional camera such as the 1-series. But that was then and this is now. It has been about four months with the 1Ds Mark III and ~15% of my pictures are taken with Live View. The 1Ds Mark III’s viewfinder is amazingly big and bright - using it is joy. So, I am not using Live View because of a sub-par viewfinder. The truth is - there are times when Live View is just easier.
Last 4th of July I set the lens to manual focus and focused it at infinity. Later that evening when reviewing the images at home on the computer, it was clear all the pictures were slightly out of focus (OOF’d). Infinity focus was too far. The previews looked fine in the 1Ds Mark II LCD, but on a 30” monitor - the focus error was painfully obvious. This year I was ready! Set-up the tripod, mounted the 1Ds Mark III and flipped on Live View. Using the 0% magnification view with the grid lines enabled, I lined up the horizon, zoomed the lens, set the composition and locked down the ball head. Next, picked the focus area and zoomed-in to the max magnification and adjusted focus until perfectly sharp. Even the Mrs. remarked that it was pretty cool. I could have used the viewfinder, but focusing at night in the dark is not easy. I blew it once before, so surely I could do it again.
The picture to the left was taken with an 18mm lens about 12 inches from the ground. The 1Ds Mark III was angled upwards to capture the blowing grass contrasted against the sky and clouds. Getting into that position to look through the viewfinder would have been extremely uncomfortable. I would have needed to lay on the dirt with the fire ants, spiders and allergies in 98F heat. Worse yet, the wind was blowing 30-40 mph, so the shot required waiting for the blowing grass to fall into position. Without Live View I would have passed on the picture. In addition to these examples, just about every product shot taken in the past 3 months has been with Live View - that’s a no-brainer. And many, many other pictures too when shooting with the manual focus lenses.
IMPROVED HIGH ISO
If you have been reading this blog and the 645 Blog, then you probably figured out that I do not like shooting high ISO. In my world high ISO is anything above the based ISO speed! I avoid bumping ISO because higher ISO’s have reduced dynamic range and the inherent noise limits the file in post processing. Once in awhile the 1Ds Mark II would see ISO 200, and maybe ISO 400 if there was no other option. The 1Ds Mark II had very clean files - even up to ISO 800. I knew that, but I still avoided bumping ISO.
Old habits die hard and 1Ds Mark III is more or less stuck on ISO 100; however, I’m loosening up. Yesterday’s fireworks pictures were taken at ISO 400, and they came out of DPP beautifully clean. With the 1Ds Mark III, if I do need to bump ISO then I usually skip ISO 200 and just bump to ISO 400. ISO 400 is probably as clean as the Canon 1Ds Mark II’s ISO 200. In most cases a little added shutter speed never hurts. Compared to the 1Ds Mark II, from ISO 200 on up the 1Ds Mark III noise levels have improved by 1 stop, maybe slightly more. Knowing the 1Ds Mark III can shoot ISO 400 very cleanly opens some new options (for me).
CANON PICTURE STYLE EDITOR
I touched on this already topic in the past two entries, but this is a BIG deal for me. I have no interest in Canon’s stock picture styles and do not use any of them. Although, I will try the new portrait styles when an opportunity presents itself (click here for more info on the portrait color styles). With Canon’s Picture Style Editor I have been able to tame the Canon reds. And by remapping the very low shadow tones I am seeing more detail in the shadows while maintaining very low noise levels. I really like how these edited styles are then loaded back into the 1Ds3 and available on demand. Canon closed the loop very nicely on this one. If you haven’t tried creating and optimizing your own custom Picture Styles with Picture Style Editor software, give it try. It’s not easy, but stick with it and there are benefits.
OTHER HONORABLE MENTIONS
The Canon 1Ds Mark II had a 2.2” LCD screen - which was good for its time. By 2006 2.2” was small and most dSLRs had a 2.5” screen. The new 3” LCD is better in the sense that everything is bigger - fonts are easier to read, histograms are easier to see, settings are easier to read, etc. Higher resolution would be nice, but the new LCD is improvement enough that I won’t worry about Nikon’s ultra-high-def-better-than-Canon’s LCD. The 1Ds Mark III does seem to do a better job rendering magnified image previews. With the 1Ds Mark II it was difficult to tell if the image was focused correctly or not. With the 1Ds Mark III I trust the magnified views a bit more. I need more time to be sure, but so far the previews do seem more reliable.
Next, the thumb stick. It is handy for selecting AF points when the camera is in landscape orientation. In portrait orientation the thumb-stick is too far away and probably impossible for most people to reach. For going through the menus it is handy - and the new menu system is cleaner too. The thumb stick is okay, but needs improvement. I like the 4-way pad on the Nikon D300 and D3 better; it operates smoother and feels more accurate.
There are smaller improvements in the 1Ds Mark III - like a dedicated ISO button, the My Menu option, cleaner system menus, longer battery life and the ultimate viewfinder. Auto focus and metering were improved, but I have not noticed anything different compared to the 1Ds Mark II. The camera is lighter, but it is still heavy - 6 ounces hardly matters. I am not done on this topic, but that’s it for now.

The Texas Kalahari

Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:22:48 -0500

THE VIBRANCE FACTOR - PART II
Continuing with last week’s theme of “vibrance”, the pictures in today’s entry are intended to demonstrate “vibrance”. But first, if you are looking for Canon DPP Color Styles, Canon has a whole website full of them - CANON DPP COLOR STYLES. I have not used any of the styles available from Canon site, but I will be trying some of their portrait profiles. Some of their examples have a cooler, less pinkish-red look - which has been Canon achilles heel.
This past week the sun and sky cooperated, resulting in some deep orange and red sunsets full of gradients and saturated colors. This week’s images were taken at the same spot as many other sunset images from the Canon 1Ds Mark II during the past couple years. In the “Texas Photo Gallery” there are many images from this same field, though slightly different viewing locations. The time of year and time of day are also consistent, so comparing the 1Ds Mark III pictures to those in the gallery is relatively fair comparison and should provide a loose benchmark for how the Canon 1Ds Mark II would render the colors.
All the pictures on this page were taken with the Canon 100-400mm L IS and Canon 1Ds Mark III (of course). Canon has a $100 instant rebate on the 100-400mm lens, so I decided to buy one again. My favorite Canon tele-zoom is the Canon 70-200mm F4 L IS; however, 200mm usually does not have as much reach as I expected, so I decided to try a longer zoom for awhile.
Some of the pictures in the Texas Photo Gallery were taken with much better lenses - such as the Canon 300mm F2.8 L IS. When viewing the pictures on this page, I think it is important to keep in mind they were taken with a super-tele-zoom, and not a $4000 to $6000 telephoto such as the Canon 500mm F4 L IS. The goal of the pictures on this page was to capture the colors (and associated gradients), strong contrasts and some type of subject or focal point. What you are not seeing in these images are the 100s and 100s of roof tops to the right and left of the sun, the five cell phone towers, two water towers and some other non-photogenic junk. By shooting in the 200-400mm range I can isolate a small slice of the scene and try to make it look more interesting than reality. Living in the middle of suburbia, that’s no small feat.
In last week’s entry I mentioned how the 1Ds Mark III highlights may have a sparkle or twinkle. The picture of the telephone poles has some specular highlights along the cable and connects on the near pole. The way the 1Ds3 holds the last little bit color before blowing the highlight is subtly different than the 1Ds Mark II. It is a minor nuance, but it is something the 1Ds Mark III does very well. Overall the images on this page have deeper, richer colors than the 1Ds Mark II files. The added richness is probably the biggest difference in the files from the 1Ds Mark III compared to the 1Ds Mark II.
PUSHING THE SHADOWS
All the images on this page had their levels pushed to extremes. I am amazed at how many times levels can be repeatedly boosted on the same area without incurring an appreciable increase in noise. The Phase One P25 amazed me in the same way; its shadows at ISO 50 were essentially noise-free. The shadows could be boosted by 3 or 4 stops with little or no visible noise. The Canon 1Ds Mark III files have more noise than the P25, but like the P25, the 1Ds Mark III noise levels do not magnify as levels are boosted. What noise there is in the shadows, remains somewhat constant. The Canon 1Ds Mark II behaved in a similar manner, but only to a point.
To illustrate how far the shadows can be pushed, the image to the left (taken with the Contax 18mm F4 Distagon) had the lower region below the horizon boosted three times in Photoshop by pushing the upper levels from 255 down to 180. This edit was performed THREE TIMES and added ~3 stops of exposure to the lower region of the picture - which was almost completely black. Instead of Photoshopping the image, it would have been better to shoot with 4X grad and maybe some off-shoe fill flash. However, I did not have that equipment on hand, so at least the image could salvaged with some aggressive editing.
The primary goal of today’s entry was to show some pictures with moderately pushed levels. Compared to the Canon 1Ds Mark II, most of the Mark III improvement are incremental at best. Canon 5D owners will be dazzled be the improvements in image and file quality, but for the 1Ds Mark II owners, the differences are more subtle.
While the shadows on the Canon 1Ds Mark III can be pushed and detailed lifted, the Canon 1Ds Mark II had about 2/3 of a stop more dynamic range. The 1Ds2 handles a wider range without clipping the highlights as quickly. With the 1Ds3 to hold the highlights requires more negative EC adjustment, thus pushing more information down into the shadows. The 1Ds3 can handle shadow recovery nicely, but it becomes part of the normal editing procedure for high contrast scenes. Canon’s Chuck Westfall said, “We haven't made any claims about increasing dynamic range with our current image sensors. Instead, we've said that dynamic range remains about the same or similar to previous generations despite higher resolution and smaller photosites.” About is the key word.

The Canon 1Ds Mark III Vibrance Factor

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 23:42:05 -0500

It was quickly evident the 1Ds Mark III files could be pushed further than the 1Ds Mark II files. Pushing means (to me) editing in Photoshop and altering levels, increasing and or shifting saturation, shifting color balance and changing contrast. This can be highly destructive editing because the RGB values may be pushed outside of the color space. The main objective in “pushing” a file is to redistribute its dynamic range more towards the edges of the histogram. Reallocating dynamic range results in the upper mid-tones turning into intense highlights. Lower mid-tone become bolder deeper shadows. The relative contrast between the high and lows makes the image pop.
Before the editing starts there is data above and below the central dynamic range content, so pushing mid-range content possibly results in the upper highlights blowing out and the lower tones blocking up. Like squishing a tube of toothpaste in the middle, some toothpaste is going to spill out at the ends. Also, the mid-tones are shifted, compressed and stretched in every direction - so their gradients are compromised. The raised levels make noise more apparent and transitions can look abrupt if the editing is too severe. So, this is delicate balancing act to add “pop” without turning the file into digital garbage.
With the original Canon 1Ds raws such editing was limited because the files quickly deteriorated - they could not withstand extreme shifting of the RGB values. Granted, the 1Ds files had a great look in their default state, but pushing past those values was risky. With the 1Ds Mark II files could be pushed much further, thus opening up new frontier in post processing. The 1Ds Mark II files were cleaner, so there was less noise bubbling to the surface. The 16 MP sensor had more dynamic range, so there was appreciably more flexibility in the highlights. After the 1Ds Mark II, I used the Phase One P25 - and again - those files could be pushed to a whole new level beyond what the 1Ds Mark II offered, especially in the shadows and lower mid-tones.
I can confidently say the Canon 1Ds Mark III files can be pushed to a new level. It may not be P25 territory, but it is close. The 1Ds Mark III shadows are not cleaner than the 1Ds Mark II’s at ISO 100; however, the 1Ds Mark III shadows lighten up cleaner when their levels are boosted. The 1Ds Mark III sensor has ~2/3 of a stop less dynamic range than the 1Ds Mark II’s sensor, so highlights are tricky. But the highlights that the 1Ds Mark III does capture, those highlights handle post processing nicely due to their gentle roll-offs. Also, somehow Canon added a “twinkle” to the very high tones. It is hard to explain in words, but the highlights have a sparkle or vibrancy. The above picture attempts to illustrate that “sparkle”. Also the sunflower image in the Contax 18mm F4 Distagon Review (click here to see the review) has that trait too.
THE 1Ds MARK III COLOR PALETTE
The Canon 1Ds Mark II colors were slightly bolder - strong in the primary colors (red, green blue). The in between tones seemed reduced somehow. In contrast the 1Ds Mark III colors have more nuance. The colors are not as polarized as the 1Ds Mark II’s colors. The pictures in the Banff and San Francisco galleries are good representations of what I would say is stereotypical of 1Ds Mark II colors.
The 1Ds Mark III colors feel expanded - reds have added pinkish hues in the transitions; greens have more yellow undertones; blues (especially skies) pick up a baby blue transition; yellows have more golds; blacks have more color information; blown highlights tend to be only partially blown with one or two channels still holding data. Overall it is still a Canon look, but different. The picture of the oncoming train is good example of what the stereotypical 1Ds Mark III color looks like. The Canon 200mm L F2.8 II review has some more 1Ds Mark III images - and they have similar colors. Also the Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro-Planar review has some examples of those “sparkly golds” along with the green grass image above.
BUT, I’M CHEATING
You can build your own custom ICC profile, upload into the 1Ds Mark III and select it just like any other Picture Style. It’s a very cool function. If you don’t like “Canon reds”, open up the PIcture Style in Canon’s Picture Style Editor utility, edit the reds, save the newly edit style with a new name, and upload the new style into your 1Ds Mark III. Result? REDS FIXED! This is a powerful, but difficult to do. And that style goes with the 1Ds Mark III anywhere - just like any other Canon Picture Style. C1 Pro users have this same ability via color preset editor.
I purchased the X-Rite Colorchecker SG and took pictures in the studio with Phase One P25 on white background under 5500 Kelvin lights. Then did the same with the 1Ds Mark III. By comparing those images and using the Canon Picture Style editor, I developed a studio profile to mimic the Phase One P25. Then I had my wife pose with the color chart indoors, outdoors, here, there, etc... Long story short - I have 3 profiles which mimic the P25 in a variety of lighting conditions. It is not perfect, but it gives me some extra “personalities” to load into the 1Ds Mark III and/or DPP. Previously people joked about color styles being consumer rubbish; if they took a second look at Canon’s new Color Style Editor utility - I think they would change their minds.
After two months I mostly use one of the custom profiles. The profile rolls off the reds, opens the deep shadows, tones down the yellowish-greens and puts some color in the deep shadows. It has proven to be a good “generic” profile. The custom profile does not produce a finished product; it produces a balanced CR2 file which yields a neutral file ready for abuse in Photoshop. The image to the right was taken with the 1Ds Mark III. The same spot was shot earlier this year with the P25 - click here. Overall they look consistent which is no small feat considering one camera is a Phase One P25 processed via C1 and the other is a 1Ds Mark III processed through DPP.
As preview Canon 1Ds and Canon 1Ds Mark II owner, I do feel the Mark III’s color has improved. There is certainly more character. And pushing the files around in Photoshop can be rewarding. That’s it for now.

What Can Brown Do For You?

Sun, 18 May 2008 19:18:26 -0500

WHY NO UPDATES?
Well, that is how things may look since the last blog entry almost three weeks ago, but hundreds of things have changed since the end of April. In regards to the 1Ds Mark III blog there have not been any direct updates; however, there have been other updates across the site which are related to the 1Ds Mark III. If you are following this blog strictly for the 1Ds Mark III information, check out the following updates:
Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro-Planar Review: Several weeks ago the Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro-Planar ZF review was added (click here). Thus far there has not been a sub 100mm lens that has impressed me on the 1Ds Mark III. The Canon 50mm F1.4 was sold and a Contax 24-85N has been sitting on the desk. At the end of April I sold a Hasselblad 50mm F2.8 CF to pay for the new Zeiss 50mm Macro-ZF. I must say, the Zeiss 50mm is delivering some very sharp images. The Zeiss 50mm review also some images from the 1Ds Mark III which have been pushed, pulled and stretched in Photoshop. While the subject is pretty dull, the image quality is pretty good and worth a look.
Canon 200mm F2.8 L II Review: The Canon 200mm L F2.8 II review (click here) was also uploaded and has more images from the Canon 1Ds Mark III. Many of those pictures are in the Canon 1Ds Mark III gallery in the Photographs section (click here). Looking at the pictures from the Zeiss 50mm review, the Canon 200mm review and the pictures in the gallery, I think those give a pretty good idea of the 1Ds Mark III’s coloring and over “look”.
645 Blog “Re-Issue”: As you have probably noticed, PebblePlace.com has two layouts - the white pages like this one, and the dark brown color scheme. Eventually all the pages will be “white”, but the process is going much slower than expected - mainly because I have tendency to edit or completely re-write pages as they are updated to the new format. The last six entries of the 645 Blog have been updated. In those are entries there is alot of 1Ds Mark III information, so you might want to skim through the last six entries - starting here.
CANON UPDATES DPP (Version 3.4) AND EOS UTILITIES
Last week Canon U.S. released the latest version of DPP which adds support for 14 more lenses. The lens correction tools can fix chromatic aberration (CA), light fall-off and distortion. I have Canon’s corrects to be very good - and they are performed at the raw level. Canon also updated the Style Editor and EOS Utility. Rob Galbraith’s site the fully story, click here.

Canon Price Increase Coming in May?

Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:48:08 -0500

CANON RAISING PRICES - NOT A RUMOR ANYMORE
The forums have had a couple posts here and there noting dealers’ comments about pending price increases this spring for the United States [and Canada]. The U.S. dollar has been the butt of many jokes lately, but it looks like we’ll be taking this one in the... Rob Galbrath’s site posted the story last week (original link) -
Canon USA is in the process of informing U.S. dealers about upcoming price increases on a broad range of its camera gear. Starting May 1, 2008, dealers will pay 3-5% more to Canon for most Canon EF lenses and all Canon EOS and PowerShot accessories (plus all Canon binoculars too). The dealer net on Canon digital SLRs is unchanged.
The price jump is attributed to "rising fuel prices" and "unfavorable exchange rates," says an April 24, 2008 letter from Canon USA to its network of retailers. Canon Canada is also raising the dealer net on a similar range of camera products, starting May 5, 2008.
These price changes may or may not be occurring in other world regions; each Canon sales company makes these types of price adjustments independently.
I don’t mean to steal Rob’s thunder here, but this story has some interesting implications for those of using manual lenses on our Canon dSLRs. And to show some love for Mr. Galbraith, he has updated the Compact Flash Performance Database and has new speed ratings for the Canon 1Ds Mark III and the Sandisk Extreme IV cards - click here for more info.
HOW WILL THESE PRICE CHANGES IMPACT US?
After looking at some pictures taken with the Contax N 100mm F2.8 Makro-Sonnar on a Canon 1Ds Mark II compared to those taken on a Mamiya 645AFD II & Phase One P25, I was pretty impressed with the Contax N. Yes, the P25 beat the snot out of the 1Ds Mark II, but the pictures from the Contax N 100mm Makro-Sonnar have a nice look.
Last summer (2007) the Contax N 100mm cost ~$900 + shipping, then shipping up to Vancouver Canada, $400’ish for conversion, and then shipping back. It was an expensive process - about $1400 in total. Looking at the pictures, the thought of another Contax N 100mm with the 1Ds Mark III could be good pairing. Ten seconds later I dismissed the thought due to the cost.
The Canon 135L had always done a fine job with product shots too - and is much cheaper, or so I thought. Tonight the Canon 135L is $939 at B&H. Two years ago the 135L was $770’ish lens after rebate(s), so the notion of paying $940 plus shipping is a bit unsettling. Meanwhile a Contax N 100mm F2.8 Makro-Sonnar just sold on Ebay for $749, so for about $1200 I could have another Contax Makro-Sonnar. Hmmm...
Canon is not alone in their price increases. Zeiss raised their prices on the ZF (and others) a couple months. Leica raises prices just for the fun of it. Mamiya increased prices too. Sadly, raising prices is par for the course right now. As the prices of new lenses go up, used prices on alternative manual focus lenses look better and better. So, are the alternative lenses going to have a nice summertime market rally?
FIRMWARE UPDATED 1.1.2 FOR THE CANON 1Ds MARK III
On April 29, 2008 Canon released a firmware update (version 1.1.2) for the 1Ds Mark III. This update enables the joystick to select any of the 19 selectable auto focus points. The option is available under Custom Function 9 in the auto focus custom functions. There are also a couple other options to swap buttons for other functions. The firmware updated can be downloaded from Canon’s website - click here. Canon also published a PDF file explaining the updates - click here.
I have already downloaded v1.1.2 and it appears to work fine. Being able to select the any of the 19 AF points at any time with a simple push on the joystick is a big, big improvement. This how Canon should have released the 1Ds Mark III in the first place. Now, if they were just add a custom function to turn off the AA filter ;)
Update May 19, 2008 - I have been using the new firmware since it was released and thus far have experience no problems. Being able to select the auto-focus points via the joy stick is so much better. It is intuitive and quick.
BACK TO WORK
I guess if your not a manual lens user, well, B&H is open again - so stock up!!! As for me? Thirty more pages to update and website overhaul is done, so back to the coffee and HTML. A “real” blog entry will be posted in a week or two after the website updates are finished - I promise.

Catching Up on the 1Ds Mark III

Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:40:10 -0500

The Canon 1Ds Mark III has been here since early March and made its debut in the 645 BLOG entry. Since then it has racked ~1500 clicks and traveled to various places in the Dallas. Most of the better pictures have been grouped in the 1Ds Mark III Gallery. In the 645 BLOG the 1Ds Mark III discussion concentrated on comparing the 1Ds3 to the Phase One P25 digital back. At this point I want focus on just the 1Ds Mark III and steer away from digital back comparisons.
WHERE TO START?
The Canon 1Ds Mark III is a very broad topic ranging from the camera itself, to lenses, to technique, to software, to processing, etc., etc. Whole forums are dedicated to Canon dSLRs, so the likelihood that these entries will address every aspect of the 1Ds Mark III is very unlikely. Furthermore, what is written here is colored with MY opinions, experiences and expectations. If you are looking for objectivity, this bog is not a scientific study. Nor am I going go recite all the specs and features.
FIRST IMPRESSIONS
The 1Ds3 is not a piece of alien technology with cryptic GUI and hieroglyphics. It is a camera you can pick up and begin to shoot with immediately - especially if you used a Canon dSLR before. The double button press interface is gone, so many functions are a single button push coupled with a dial movement. 40D and 5D owners will be able to make the transition very easily.
The 1Ds3 feels every bit as good as any other 1-series. It is very solid and feels like it can take a beating. The viewfinder is amazing. It is the largest viewfinder on 35mm SLR I have seen, and it might even be larger than the viewfinder on the Mamiya 645AFD II after accounting for the P25’s crop. The viewfinder is big, bright and has no apparent distortion. It is noticeably larger than the 1Ds Mark II’s viewfinder.
The new 3-inch LCD is a nice upgrade. It does not dominate the rear of the camera, but it is large. Zooming in to check focus is okay thus far, but the LCD does not compare the new LCD found on the Nikon D300 and D3. The Nikon LCD is very nice and considering the 1Ds3’s price point, the 1Ds3 should have a similar LCD.
After using Live View for awhile, it is indeed a useful feature. Zooming in 5X or 10X while hand-holding can be awkward due to camera shake, so I tend to use it only in conjunction with a tripod. Plus, when zoomed-in I lose sense of the composition. When the 1Ds3 is mounted on the tripod, I frame the composition first, enable Live View, position the focus square over the target area, zoom to 10X and focus. Working with manual focus lenses is much easier now.
22 MEGAPIXELS AND 14-BITS
For most people the burning question is - is pixel increase noticeable? Does 14-bits improve file quality? We will see many on-line discussions about these topics for the next year or two. 14-bits is an easier question since I used the 16-bit Phase One P25. The picture to the left has fairly extreme gradients (click on the image for a higher quality file). In certain cases the 1Ds3 raw files do feel more like a P25 file than a 1Ds2 file. The colors and levels in the 1Ds3 files can be pushed very hard - if exposure is good. An under-exposed file with exposure correction plus strong levels editing is a bad move (and pretty much a bad idea with any file). It is hard to quantify the color improvement (or gradients) from the 1Ds2 to the 1Ds3. I will say there is an improvement, but how much will depend on the type of scene.
The other hot topic is the 22 megapixels. I borrowed a friend’s 1Ds2 for awhile and shot similar scenes with both cameras. It did not feel like the 1Ds3 was resolving any additional detail. The files are soft and require more sharpening and processing than a comparable 1Ds2 file. When a 1Ds3 file is downsized to the same size as a 1Ds2 file, the 1Ds3 looks as detailed as the 1Ds2 file, so the 1Ds3 isn’t resolving less. In terms of resolution, I would say the 1Ds3 is the same or very, very slightly better than the 1Ds2. Long story short, don’t expect the 100% crops to blow away the 1Ds2.
UPCOMING BLOG ENTRIES
Some of the upcoming entries will include Canon’s pictures styles and how to incorporate your own color mapping. There are other positive highlights - such as improved high ISO shooting. In the meantime if you’re hungry for more reading material and haven’t read 645 BLOG before, check out the last 6 to 8 entries. There is some cross-over material between that blog and this blog. Also, there is a fairly decent collection of 1Ds3 images in the 1Ds3 Mark III Gallery and quite a few images in the Medium Format Gallery (taken with a Mamiya 645AFD II and Phase One P25 22-megapixel digital back.