crop1400.jpg

Photo by Scott Bourne

I charged the battery for my new 1DS MK III and rushed across the street last night to the Giants/Astros game for some quick test shots.

Since these are all larger images than our template allows, you’ll have to download them. This is originally a RAW file converted to hi-res Jpeg. I shot this photo using a Canon 70-200 F/4 IS “L” lens, at 200 mm (since this is a full frame sensor I no longer have to do the conversion for effective focal length (EFL), handheld, at ISO 800, F/5.6, 1/500th of a second. It was dusk and believe it or not, I am shooting at field level through a fence.

I pulled the image off the card an into Aperture where I made minor exposure corrections and added some minor edge sharpening to restore what’s typically lost in the normal digital process. No other corrections were made.

The files start off at full frame and get cropped more aggressively in each photo, all the way down to a very small portion of the original image.

I wasn’t trying to make a Pulitzer Prize winning photo here. Just trying to get a sense of the camera’s ability.

You can download the comparison data here; the original frame here; the 1st crop here; 2nd crop here and final crop here.

For ISO 800 shots in low light, shooting through a fence, I think they look pretty good. You be the judge.

NOTE: Since everyone’s monitor is different, I make no attempt to discuss the color qualities of the image. I’ve looked at it on three different monitors and seen three different sets of colors. Try to judge clarity, sharpness, noise, etc.

Join the conversation! 36 Comments

  1. Boy, those files are huge – I hope you’re not getting swamped on your bandwidth bill…..

    Scott, I’m surprised you didn’t bring the 70-200 F2.8 IS or was it just too heavy together with the 1DS?

    Impressive quality..

  2. Boy, those files are huge – I hope you’re not getting swamped on your bandwidth bill…..

    Scott, I’m surprised you didn’t bring the 70-200 F2.8 IS or was it just too heavy together with the 1DS?

    Impressive quality..

  3. initially looks good, since I am a Canon shooter with multiple bodies, I need the hg low iso to tirckle down into the $1500 bodies

  4. initially looks good, since I am a Canon shooter with multiple bodies, I need the hg low iso to tirckle down into the $1500 bodies

  5. @meckimac – I am actually not a fan of the f/2.8 for several reasons. Number one weight. As I get older weight is a big problem for me. I need lighter gear. Secondly, the 70-200 F/4 IS is the sleeper lens of the Canon line. It has a beautiful bokeh and is sharp as can be. I used to own the 2.8 and found myself grabbing the f/4 more often than not so I sold the heavy SOB and love the F/4.

  6. @meckimac – I am actually not a fan of the f/2.8 for several reasons. Number one weight. As I get older weight is a big problem for me. I need lighter gear. Secondly, the 70-200 F/4 IS is the sleeper lens of the Canon line. It has a beautiful bokeh and is sharp as can be. I used to own the 2.8 and found myself grabbing the f/4 more often than not so I sold the heavy SOB and love the F/4.

  7. How would you say it compares to the D3 you guys are always screaming about?

  8. How would you say it compares to the D3 you guys are always screaming about?

  9. @TheHalfShow – screaming? Really? Well I don’t know about screaming. As for how it stacks up against the D3 I have had the camera for less than 24 hours. I hope to make some comparisons next week. But off the top of my head, I don’t know how fair the comparison can be. These are two very different cameras, designed to do different things.

  10. @TheHalfShow – screaming? Really? Well I don’t know about screaming. As for how it stacks up against the D3 I have had the camera for less than 24 hours. I hope to make some comparisons next week. But off the top of my head, I don’t know how fair the comparison can be. These are two very different cameras, designed to do different things.

  11. I would love to hear more about how the Canon 1DS MKIII and the Nikon D3 compare. I am thinking of getting a pro camera and I don’t know whether to jump over to Nikon for the D3 or wait for Canon to catch up. I’d like to know what makes them different and what they are designed to do.

  12. I would love to hear more about how the Canon 1DS MKIII and the Nikon D3 compare. I am thinking of getting a pro camera and I don’t know whether to jump over to Nikon for the D3 or wait for Canon to catch up. I’d like to know what makes them different and what they are designed to do.

  13. “I charged the battery for my new 1DS MK III and rushed across the street last night to the Giants/Astros game for some quick test shots.”

    @ Scott – Do you have a standing photo pass or just really good seats? I used to love shooting sports when I was in college and I’ve just bought a lens and body that will let me do that again but having been having issues getting access to sports events even at the college level.

    How do you handle getting access to sports events?

  14. “I charged the battery for my new 1DS MK III and rushed across the street last night to the Giants/Astros game for some quick test shots.”

    @ Scott – Do you have a standing photo pass or just really good seats? I used to love shooting sports when I was in college and I’ve just bought a lens and body that will let me do that again but having been having issues getting access to sports events even at the college level.

    How do you handle getting access to sports events?

  15. @Bob

    My guess is Scott wasn’t actually in the stadium when he shot this. The Giants have a spot where you can stand out side the Stadium and watch the game through a fence at field level. I’m assuming this is where Scott was, especially since he mentioned shooting through a fence.

  16. @Bob

    My guess is Scott wasn’t actually in the stadium when he shot this. The Giants have a spot where you can stand out side the Stadium and watch the game through a fence at field level. I’m assuming this is where Scott was, especially since he mentioned shooting through a fence.

  17. @Bob Bill is right. There is a public (free) viewing area behind right field. You have to shoot through a fence. We will do a future show on how to get access.

  18. @Bob Bill is right. There is a public (free) viewing area behind right field. You have to shoot through a fence. We will do a future show on how to get access.

  19. Scott, did you go with the Lexar Pro UDMA 8GB 300x card? I did on my D300 and its super fast.

  20. Scott, did you go with the Lexar Pro UDMA 8GB 300x card? I did on my D300 and its super fast.

  21. These look fantastic, though I’d hate to see how much bandwidth you must be eating through right now. :-) I love how the images seem to have a sort of grain to them. Fantastic quality for ISO 800.

    I also own the 70-200 f/4L and will agree that it’s a terrific lens.

    I look forward to seeing some of the MkIII’s features trickle down into the rumored 5D MkII. That baby may have my name on it.

  22. These look fantastic, though I’d hate to see how much bandwidth you must be eating through right now. :-) I love how the images seem to have a sort of grain to them. Fantastic quality for ISO 800.

    I also own the 70-200 f/4L and will agree that it’s a terrific lens.

    I look forward to seeing some of the MkIII’s features trickle down into the rumored 5D MkII. That baby may have my name on it.

  23. @Dennis I use SanDisk. The Lexar stuff is optimized for Nikon and doesn’t work as well in Canon.

  24. @Dennis I use SanDisk. The Lexar stuff is optimized for Nikon and doesn’t work as well in Canon.

  25. I just checked out the full frame in Photoshop. Wow! Even at ISO 800, the artifacts and noise are, well, unbelieveable for an image shot at this speed. At 60 MB, the files from this beast are gonna cause all kinds of storage issues….in a good way. Thanks for posting this Scott, after listening to the current D3 lovefest, I’m more convinced than ever to hold on to my Canons and L-series glass for a bit longer.

  26. I just checked out the full frame in Photoshop. Wow! Even at ISO 800, the artifacts and noise are, well, unbelieveable for an image shot at this speed. At 60 MB, the files from this beast are gonna cause all kinds of storage issues….in a good way. Thanks for posting this Scott, after listening to the current D3 lovefest, I’m more convinced than ever to hold on to my Canons and L-series glass for a bit longer.

  27. Awesome Scott! It’s a clever use of depth-of-field. It gives you that feeling like he is in total focus, and everything else is just a blur. Going by that interpretation, I would crop out from right above his knees at the bottom. From the top, I would crop out the at&t ad (may be even the first few rows of seats, or mid way between the top and his head). This might make him even more isolated from the rest of the environment. The wider form factor makes your eyes wonder longer in the environment (hence bigger and even more impact). I love pano.

    ISO 800?! And the resolution! You can almost feel the texture of his shirt…

  28. Awesome Scott! It’s a clever use of depth-of-field. It gives you that feeling like he is in total focus, and everything else is just a blur. Going by that interpretation, I would crop out from right above his knees at the bottom. From the top, I would crop out the at&t ad (may be even the first few rows of seats, or mid way between the top and his head). This might make him even more isolated from the rest of the environment. The wider form factor makes your eyes wonder longer in the environment (hence bigger and even more impact). I love pano.

    ISO 800?! And the resolution! You can almost feel the texture of his shirt…

  29. @Hoi thanks for the suggestions but as I said in the piece, I wasn’t the least bit interested in this image other than to show off the resolution. Not looking for critiques of the photo. Just comments on the noise (or lack thereof.) Let’s keep this on topic please.

  30. @Hoi thanks for the suggestions but as I said in the piece, I wasn’t the least bit interested in this image other than to show off the resolution. Not looking for critiques of the photo. Just comments on the noise (or lack thereof.) Let’s keep this on topic please.

  31. I was hoping the colour noise would have been less at iso800 in that pro camera. If you look at the original frame just under the ATT sign the darkest areas are highly speckled. I was hoping it would be the miracle Canon camera and not display noise in the darkest areas until iso 3200. We can dream can’t we?

  32. I was hoping the colour noise would have been less at iso800 in that pro camera. If you look at the original frame just under the ATT sign the darkest areas are highly speckled. I was hoping it would be the miracle Canon camera and not display noise in the darkest areas until iso 3200. We can dream can’t we?

  33. Nice to see a pro giving props to the 70-200 f4. Everyone knows the beast that is the 2.8, but the f4 is, like you said the sleeper! Nice shots and looking forward to seeing more from the new toy.

    Maybe for a future podcast we could get a screencast of you opening the box for something big like this? Could be interesting!

  34. Nice to see a pro giving props to the 70-200 f4. Everyone knows the beast that is the 2.8, but the f4 is, like you said the sleeper! Nice shots and looking forward to seeing more from the new toy.

    Maybe for a future podcast we could get a screencast of you opening the box for something big like this? Could be interesting!

  35. The difference in the on-screen colors that you see certainly have a lot to do with the fact that the images were uploaded in Adobe RGB, which is not the web standard.

    The way it renders is anyone’s guess, depending on browser, browser version and browser configuration, for example Safari is color managed as far as I know, Internet Explorer (80% of all web surfers) is not and neither is FireFox, except version 3 *if* the user turned the feature on manually.

    Also, many Windows image viewers are not color-managed so the downloaded pictures may not render correctly either, depending on what software is used and how it’s configured. For consistent color results it’s always better to upload to the web in sRGB. That said the colors looks fine in a color-managed viewer, more vibrant and natural, regarding the other aspects of the image, I find the out-of-focus area to be a little too distracting for my taste, one stop more open perhaps? ;-)

    Besides that, I stumbled upon a *really* frightening sharp 1DsMkIII image: http://ftp.robgalbraith.com/public_files/EOS-1Ds_Mark_III_Coach.jpg but don’t get too excited, the average samples on pbase (http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/eos_1ds_mark_iii) are of much “normal” quality. This picture is probable a combination of great skills, great glass (probably on a good monopod) and – of course – a great camera but the body itself is only part of the story.

    Cheers,
    Axel

  36. The difference in the on-screen colors that you see certainly have a lot to do with the fact that the images were uploaded in Adobe RGB, which is not the web standard.

    The way it renders is anyone’s guess, depending on browser, browser version and browser configuration, for example Safari is color managed as far as I know, Internet Explorer (80% of all web surfers) is not and neither is FireFox, except version 3 *if* the user turned the feature on manually.

    Also, many Windows image viewers are not color-managed so the downloaded pictures may not render correctly either, depending on what software is used and how it’s configured. For consistent color results it’s always better to upload to the web in sRGB. That said the colors looks fine in a color-managed viewer, more vibrant and natural, regarding the other aspects of the image, I find the out-of-focus area to be a little too distracting for my taste, one stop more open perhaps? ;-)

    Besides that, I stumbled upon a *really* frightening sharp 1DsMkIII image: http://ftp.robgalbraith.com/public_files/EOS-1Ds_Mark_III_Coach.jpg but don’t get too excited, the average samples on pbase (http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/eos_1ds_mark_iii) are of much “normal” quality. This picture is probable a combination of great skills, great glass (probably on a good monopod) and – of course – a great camera but the body itself is only part of the story.

    Cheers,
    Axel

Comments are closed.

About scottbourne

Founder of Photofocus.com. Retired traveling and unhooking from the Internet.

Category

Reviews, Technique & Tutorials

Tags