5D Mark III - 890 lines of resolution

The topic was 5D Mark III - 890 lines of resolution.

There's a clear and discernible place where it veered, let's turn it back on the right path from here.
 
Kholi said:
The topic was 5D Mark III - 890 lines of resolution.

There's a clear and discernible place where it veered, let's turn it back on the right path from here.
Click to expand...

I tried, with comparing the 800 lines of the af100 with what I'm seeing visually out of the mk3. Mk3 is winning...
 
Babu said:
Let's remove the AF100 olpf and it should match or exceed the 5D M3 :tongue:

j/k I have no clue
Click to expand...
It probably would, but at what cost. But even with the AA in the mk3, I'm getting more from the mk3 than the af100. And I'm not joking. And the AF100 looks good.
 
At some point, hopefully soon, a recognized source of accurate tests and reviews (perhaps Zacuto?) will test the 5D3 and we'll have a more solid understanding of the actual, accepted resolution.

After looking at more chart regions, 850 lines might be more fair (the middle of my original estimate of 800-900). Regardless of the actual resolution, with post-sharpening it's high enough to produce an acceptably sharp HD image for my needs. I really like the 5D3 look shot with IPB*, post-sharpened, and film-grain added in post. Everything runs in real-time in PPro CS5.5- no need to render to see how it looks in motion.


*IPB is currently better than ALL-I for preserving actual detail vs. noise. ALL-I can display significant macroblock quantization (large blocks with no detail; smeared, etc.). Tuned film-grain can be added in post to IPB footage.
 
Guess who impressed the clients more and who got hired again?
Click to expand...

Why would we need to guess, We knew you were going to post how great you are, and how your work blows away everyone else on set. As If we didn't see that coming. Of course the guys that shoot Canon all suck, Again, No need to guess. It's because they had a rig, and wern't shooting a gh2. Let me guess again, you cut it on I movie, because the guys that cut on adobe don't know how to use it either. I'm sure you got that work to of course. and on and on it goes.
 
This thread is about the 5D MKIII.
If anyone wants to discuss other cameras we have other forums for that.
The only thing this thread is missing is a tape measure.
I suggest everyone take a deep breath and get back to shooting.

Any further off topic posts, combative posts, or 'my camera is better than yours' posts will be deleted and vacations will start being handed out.
Keep it on topic.
 
jcs said:
...
After looking at more chart regions, 850 lines might be more fair (the middle of my original estimate of 800-900)...
Click to expand...

Which chart regions do you mean? There is only 1 trumpet (vertical lines) in the chart that is valid for the horizontal resolution (I have already posted it). Here is another explanation with the exact position of that trumpet: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Digital_Imaging/Resolution_01.htm So, I can still not perceive more than 700 (without sharpening) and 750 (with sharpening) lines for the 5DIII. Maybe I need a eye-doctor...
 
Did I mention how cool this thing is? I can now shoot at whatever f-stop I want to in any kind of light, deep dof no problem, there's no more limitations with this camera. People can debate lines of resolution until the MKIV comes out for all I care.
 
I think JCS is talking about extinction level at 890, not strong detail... ?


squig said:
Did I mention how cool this thing is? I can now shoot at whatever f-stop I want to in any kind of light, deep dof no problem, there's no more limitations with this camera. People can debate lines of resolution until the MKIV comes out for all I care.
Click to expand...


Off-topic. But isn't limitations the cool thing for creativity? I love that Chungking Express looks skitzy off white balance, grainy, and kinetic :D

With regards to high ISO and too much DOF control, I am always more shocked and off put how some scenes look brighter and cleaner and deep DOF than my eyes.
 
As a reminder:


Zacuto 2011 Shootout Part 2

3' wide siemens star chart. Resolution Line Pairs results:

zacutoresolution.jpg



If the 5D3 is indeed 890, then that'd be 445 pairs right, which is roughly the same as the 5D2 in that test. But of course, this 890 figure isn't really accurate to compare because it isn't shot comparatively with the siemens star chart lol. But then, we also got to look at the OTHER tests with color, moire, and compression for sharpness, not just resolution on its own.
 
Lammy said:
3' wide siemens star chart. Resolution Line Pairs results:

...

If the 5D3 is indeed 890, then that'd be 445 pairs right, which is roughly the same as the 5D2 in that test. But of course, this 890 figure isn't really accurate to compare because it isn't shot comparatively with the siemens star chart lol. But then, we also got to look at the OTHER tests with color, moire, and compression for sharpness, not just resolution on its own.
Click to expand...

For 1080p, 540 is the limit (1080/2, Nyquist). They were measuring vertical resolution, we're measuring horizontal (that's what manufacturers put in their spec sheets). The physical limit for horizontal is 1920/2 = 960, where aliasing begins. Good cameras can still show alternating lines past 1000 (thus their "1000+" 'TV Lines' rating). Manufacturers are counting lines past where aliasing starts- we should too in order to match specs.
 
is that so? I haven't read all the thread, but I thought it was 890 horizontal lines (445 horizontal line pairs)
 
Samuel H said:
is that so? I haven't read all the thread, but I thought it was 890 horizontal lines (445 horizontal line pairs)
Click to expand...

890 line pairs for horizontal resolution (1780 pixels resolved). The Zacuto chart reads, "Line Pairs for Sensor Height". We've been measuring line pairs per sensor width. Also note the math- see the chart: 540 is 1080/2. 1920/2 = 960.
 
yes, yes, I know... I just thought the "890 lines" in the thread title was "890 horizontal lines" instead of "890 vertical line-pairs"

it's a lot easier for these cameras to have great horizontal resolution: the line-skipping throws vertical resolution away, but seems to keep all the horizontal resolution alive
 
squig said:
Did I mention how cool this thing is? I can now shoot at whatever f-stop I want to in any kind of light, deep dof no problem, there's no more limitations with this camera. People can debate lines of resolution until the MKIV comes out for all I care.
Click to expand...

Good point. Resolution wise I stick to 800+ and don't care a lot what the "+" means. This camera is really astonishing for the price. But is has one drawback: I already spend too much time with RAW image processing with my MK II ;)
 
Samuel H said:
yes, yes, I know... I just thought the "890 lines" in the thread title was "890 horizontal lines" instead of "890 vertical line-pairs"

it's a lot easier for these cameras to have great horizontal resolution: the line-skipping throws vertical resolution away, but seems to keep all the horizontal resolution alive
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, I should have added "(horizontal resolution)", which I usually add to make it more clear.
 
*bumping a year old thread* - Can anyone do a resolution test with the ML "raw" video now for the 5d3? Pretty please? I don't think I'm smart enough to do one myself or I would. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top