MKIV woes.

T

ThePitwall

Messages
208
Edit My Images
No
Im on my second MKIV (the first was faulty and needed to be returned) but Im having real difficulty in getting a shake free image on the MKIV. Im meant to be shooting the FIA GT next weekend and Im not looking forward to it.

Has anyone else had any issues? Canon have a statement on line that says the following:
EOS-1D Mark IV – faster shutter speed needs
As the resolution of cameras increases, and pixel sizes decrease, you may find that there is a need to use faster shutter speeds. The smaller pixels in cameras mean that any slight subject movement during the exposure is more likely to show up as subject blur – this is because it doesn’t have to move as far to affect more pixels. To avoid this just use a faster shutter speed than you would previously have done. For example, if you previously used 1/500sec, you could now try using 1/1000sec or faster.
Click to expand...
So how am I supposed to achieve motion blur in the cars wheels?
 
The final statement won't have any effect on the shutter speed
you need when panning. It simply means at 100% you'll have a greater chance of blur.

It won't be any softer than a MKIII when downscaled to MKIII size - it will look identical at panning speeds.

Essentially all it's saying is it's magnifying any movements because the pixels are so much denser. The worst offenders are cameras like the 7D.
 
Do what?

Not heard a similar release from Nikon...sounds like techno-BS to me - I've had no such problems with my D3x...
 
EOS-1D Mark IV – faster shutter speed needs
As the resolution of cameras increases, and pixel sizes decrease, you may find that there is a need to use faster shutter speeds. The smaller pixels in cameras mean that any slight subject movement during the exposure is more likely to show up as subject blur – this is because it doesn’t have to move as far to affect more pixels. To avoid this just use a faster shutter speed than you would previously have done. For example, if you previously used 1/500sec, you could now try using 1/1000sec or faster.
Click to expand...

Unacceptable IMO. For a 4+K high end body there should be no such excuses.

Really feel for you on that mate, I hope a work around or firmware update can help soon.

Arkady said:
Do what?

Not heard a similar release from Nikon...sounds like techno-BS to me - I've had no such problems with my D3x...
Click to expand...

Exactly. Maybe Canon wouldn't have these defects and problems if they stuck with a sensor, learnt how to perfect it's performance instead offering different chips with more megapixels for each release?
 
Hey I havent even got to panning yet. Thats the issue!

Heres one of my shots with the IIn
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4045/4550041053_5403d8e692_b.jpg

And the link to the full size: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4045/4550041053_4ed0d3cafc_o.jpg

And here is one yesterday of a plastic owl from the MKIV (yes plastic!)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4012/4548481227_a2e98d21b3_b.jpg
and the full size: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4012/4548481227_b9b4cd56db_o.jpg

Staff Edit : Images changed to clickable links. Pictures must not exceed current forum limits as per the rules.
Please feel free to replace this with a fresh/resized image and remove this text :)
 
I think this is physics.

100% crop sized so the MKIV has the same resoultion (i.e they are both 'appear' to have the same pixel density.)

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6901/93545640.jpg

They both look as sharp as each other. Canon are basically saying that if you view your shots at 100% native for each camera then the camera with lower resolution will have a sharper shot. It won't. It won't have recorded any more detail. On the higher resoultion body at 100% your magnifiying more detail and any camera shake apparent will be mutlipled at the 100% level. By moving out as I did above to the same resolutionas before we see both shots are very sharp. The higher resoultion camera simply has the potential to record more detail - be it shake or sharpness.


It's hard to explain but I hope you get it. If not I'll have another go with more samples at a later date.
 
IMAGE I
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4957/4548481227b9b4cd56dbo.jpg

MKIV on the left. Downscaled to MKII size.

IMAGE II
4548481227b9b4cd56dbo.jpg


Same again but the MKII upscaled to MKIV size. MKIV on the left.

So the MKIV is (as expected) sharper. It's no firmware/hardware issue it's just because the detail is magnified effectivley on screen.
 
The shot of Lewis with the 1DMK2n is sharper on his right shoulder than it is on his face, which could be a focusing issue or could be head movement. It's impossible to pass comment unless we know what lens, what shutter speed etc, the shot was take at. What possible relevance these shots have to panned shots is a mystery to me!

The shot of the plastic owl doesn't look like it's had the normal amount of sharpening you'd routinely apply to any image after reducing it in size - like so...


4551049708_583ee324cf_o.jpg




I don't see a great deal wrong with either of these shots - they're not quite critically sharp at 1:1, but as I said, we know zippo about how these shots were taken and until we do, comment is pointless, but the board is awash recently with similar dubious posts casting doubt on the abilities of Canon kit with the Nikon faithful jumping on the bandwagon. It would be laughable if it wasn't so downright misleading to people looking for genuine guidance in choosing a camera.
 
ThePitwall said:
Im on my second MKIV (the first was faulty and needed to be returned) but Im having real difficulty in getting a shake free image on the MKIV. Im meant to be shooting the FIA GT next weekend and Im not looking forward to it.

Has anyone else had any issues? Canon have a statement on line that says the following:

So how am I supposed to achieve motion blur in the cars wheels?
Click to expand...

Hi I recently bought a 7D and was so pleased with it tht I ordered a 1D Mk IV

When I got it home I was dissapointed with the results - I appeared to be getting a double image with the mark4 so I returned it and am sticking with the 7D for now.

Regards

Mike
 
fastworldimages said:
are you needing a second body for the GT kev as so unhappy with the mkiv atm?

Ryan off PGT here
Click to expand...

Hey Ryan,

No Ill be ok with just the one. However having seen the results below (god I am amazed at this mans results) I think I need to stop pixel peeping.
 
JEmerson said:
IMAGE I
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4957/4548481227b9b4cd56dbo.jpg

MKIV on the left. Downscaled to MKII size.

IMAGE II
4548481227b9b4cd56dbo.jpg


Same again but the MKII upscaled to MKIV size. MKIV on the left.

So the MKIV is (as expected) sharper. It's no firmware/hardware issue it's just because the detail is magnified effectivley on screen.
Click to expand...
Dude! I bow to your skills. Thanks for showing me the light. As said above, I need to stop pixel peeping.
Thank you thank you thank you.
:thumbs:
 
CT said:
The shot of Lewis with the 1DMK2n is sharper on his right shoulder than it is on his face, which could be a focusing issue or could be head movement. It's impossible to pass comment unless we know what lens, what shutter speed etc, the shot was take at. What possible relevance these shots have to panned shots is a mystery to me!

The shot of the plastic owl doesn't look like it's had the normal amount of sharpening you'd routinely apply to any image after reducing it in size - like so...


4551049708_583ee324cf_o.jpg




I don't see a great deal wrong with either of these shots - they're not quite critically sharp at 1:1, but as I said, we know zippo about how these shots were taken and until we do, comment is pointless, but the board is awash recently with similar dubious posts casting doubt on the abilities of Canon kit with the Nikon faithful jumping on the bandwagon. It would be laughable if it wasn't so downright misleading to people looking for genuine guidance in choosing a camera.
Click to expand...


You are right this has nothing to do with panning. As I have not had subjects to pan at my worry was if it was so shaky with static subjects what would it be like panning....

And again no sharpness have been applied to these shots at all. Oh and for the record, Im not blaming the camera. I was blaming me and my (evidently more shakey than I thought) hands
 
Well following JEmerson's analysis of my pics (Im still ever so grateful for his efforts). I went to number 10 today to take some shots. I dont know why everyone says its hard to get access because I just walked up to the door...........








4553976323_906e8c7710.jpg
 
Good to see a bit happyer now then kev.

I pixel peep my own stuff to, over analysing is a double edged sword, it strives to make us better but other times can just cause more grief lol
 
Your plastic owl looks spot on to me - as said above, if you haven't unsharp mask'ed it then we might as well be not bothering to look at it. Its not an optional step in your photos, its a technical requirement.
 
Youre probably right Im just used to the IIn providing (what looked like) tack sharp pics with little PP. A lot of my work gets FTP'd without any. I looks like this will have to change.

Anyway. Tell all the nay sayers (********s looking to live off someone elses concerns) that I'm educated in the (obvious) differences and have now been re-assured.

Thanks everyone for your help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top