CANON 1Ds MARK III FIRST IMPRESSIONS

Today’s pictures are some of the first ones from the Canon 1Ds Mark III to go through Photoshop and see some heavy duty editing such as pushing levels, saturation, etc. Like the files from the Phase One P25, the 1Ds3 files can be edited until your heart is content. This generally holds true for the mid-tones; the upper highlights are odd and can clip / color shift into unexpected color hues. Shadows can be noisy (compared to the Phase One P25), so they cannot be pushed as quite hard as the P25.

The Canon 1Ds Mark III’s dynamic range is noticeably less than the 1Ds2’s. In the 1Ds3 white paper Canon stated the 1Ds3 had “similar” dynamic range (compared to the 1Ds2). If it had been better, Canon’s marketing department would have eagerly advertised any such improvements. I knew “similar” really meant less, but how much less was an unknown. My unscientific guess is a ~1/2 stop less based upon highlights clipping faster and more often. The 1Ds Mark III’s noise and tonality in the shadows looks the same as the 1Ds Mark II’s, so I doubt there is any added dynamic range in the shadows.

Less dynamic range and 14-bits is an odd couple. Since the 1Ds3 is more prone to clipping highlights, but has more bits (than the 1Ds2), how it clips is different than the 1Ds2. When the 1Ds2 clipped a highlight, the entire highlight tended to go to white. The 1Ds3 tends to clip a channel or two channels, so highlights tend to have a cast or hue. In some cases that is good, others times that is not so good. In real life this translates into baby blue pastel skies, where as the 1Ds2 held the highlights better and its skies tended towards a deeper blue. I would rather have the 1Ds2’s dynamic range AND 14-bits. At this point I do not know if the 1Ds2’s added dynamic range is better, or if having the 1Ds3’s 14-bits is better. The 1Ds3’s colors are certainly richer.

ONLY THE BEST LENSES WILL DO

In 2002 people said the Canon 1Ds needed the best lenses and most of Canon’s lenses were not up to task. Then in 2004 people said the 1Ds2 needed best lenses, and many of the Canon lenses. True, good lenses did do better at generating more detail, but top lenses were not an absolute “must have”. One could shoot with Canon L zooms and primes and be fine. With the 1Ds3 I think the line has been crossed and the Canon 1Ds Mark III will need the best lenses. The 1Ds3’s AA filter seems stronger, so it takes a super sharp lens to product a decently sharp image after the AA filter done its business.

The Phase One P25 has redefined my idea of what sharp is and the 1Ds3 is lacking in terms of sharpness and detail. The P25 does not have an AA filter, so naturally its images are much crisper. AA filters have their benefits - they reduce moire, reduce aliasing and the slightly softer images response better to in-camera noise scrubbing algorithms. On the other hand, this is a relative discussion. Canon 5D owners will be dazzled with 12 to 22 MP jump. Canon 40D owners will be blown away too. As for digital back owners, I doubt many will be impressed.

The 1Ds3 raw files need aggressive sharpening to pop. I am applying 50% more sharpening in Photoshop CS3 (mostly USM) compared to Canon 1Ds2 files. Using ultra-sharp lenses capable of counter-acting Canon’s AA filter is a must for people who expect the utmost in sharpness. For years I have using Contax and Leica lenses with Canon 1Ds and Canon 1Ds Mark II, so doing so with the Canon 1Ds Mark III is nothing new. The next logical question is - what if the 1Ds3 image is downsized to the size of 1Ds2 image? I suspect the 1Ds2 and 1Ds3 sharpness would be comparable under those circumstances. Thus, I wonder what benefit(s) we are getting with the 1Ds3’s added mega-pixels. If Canon lessened the 1Ds Mark III’s AA filter, I think the 1Ds would challenge the 22 MP digital backs.

KISS AND MAKE-UP

Enough with the ranting. There are good points to the 1Ds3 - most of which were noted in earlier entries such as “Live View”, the larger viewfinder, the 3” LCD, etc. The 1Ds3 also deserves credit for its high ISO image quality. The 1Ds3’s ISO is easily a 1-stop, maybe 2-stop improvement over the Canon 1Ds Mark II. ISO 1600 looks really good. And the color from the 1Ds Mark III deeper, richer, maybe more saturated. It is a step forward. And the file can withstand alot of editing in Photoshop and still hold up well. There are plenty of things to like about the 1Ds Mark III. But for those of you with 22 MP digital back thinking about a 1Ds3 as a replacement for the back - rent a 1Ds3 first.