Go Back   DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking > DSLR in Motion > Canon 5D

Canon 5D DSLR with 1080/30p

Reply
 
Bookmark and Share Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-02-2009, 12:15 AM   #11
ydgmdlu
Senior Member
 
ydgmdlu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,913
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ustein View Post
If you get moire how is your in camera sharpening set?
In-camera sharpening should have nothing to do with moire. Tests have shown that aliasing (and moire is a form of aliasing) doesn't change with sharpening. Moire is an artifact of the image scaling method that Canon's using. In-camera sharpening is still a kind of post-processing that can only enhance or worsen the appearance of the moire that's already there, not change the amount.
__________________
Current cameras: Canon EOS Digital Rebel T2i | Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GH1 | Sony HDR-SR11 (infrared modded)
ydgmdlu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2009, 09:21 AM   #12
ustein
Senior Member
 
ustein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 262
Default

Thanks.

>can only enhance or worsen the appearance of the moire that's already there, not change the amount.

True. But the "only" can also mean that some people have the most issues also may use high contrast and sharpening.

Do we actually know how Canon samples the image? e.g. full image and then downsampled or only a partial readout?
__________________
Uwe Steinmueller

http://www.outbackphoto.com/index_news.html
ustein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2009, 09:22 AM   #13
Barry_Green
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 38,953
Default

Canon says they use a pixel-binning technique, reading out groups of six.
Barry_Green is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2009, 11:33 AM   #14
ustein
Senior Member
 
ustein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 262
Default

>Canon says they use a pixel-binning technique, reading out groups of six.

Would make sense but also reduces the readout resolution.
__________________
Uwe Steinmueller

http://www.outbackphoto.com/index_news.html
ustein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2009, 01:05 PM   #15
Barry_Green
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 38,953
Default

Well, yeah, that's the whole point. They can't possibly read out the entire chip, it's not designed for that. They have to bin it (or skip rows) to reduce the amount of the chip they're reading.
Barry_Green is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 11:41 AM   #16
Isaac_Brody
Moderator
 
Isaac_Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,155
Default

My 2.0 came today. I don't have time right now to out and shoot buildings but just a quick test on this piece of fabric in my room that brings out the worst moire looked promising. It doesn't affect sharpness too much and moire is almost completely gone. The 2.0 doesn't completely kill it but you have to look for it to see it. Average viewer wouldn't notice it and of course a little postwork could get the rest of it. A 2 is the best tradeoff between elimination and sharpness.

EDIT: I tested these filters on a 7D, not a 5D. Your mileage may vary with a 5D.
__________________
http://www.isaacbrody.com
Isaac_Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 06:15 PM   #17
Sttratos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 174
Default

It would be interesting to know just how much sharpness the 2.0 is knocking off.
Sttratos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 08:41 PM   #18
Anthonyb
Senior Member
 
Anthonyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 160
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isaac_Brody View Post
My 2.0 came today. I don't have time right now to out and shoot buildings but just a quick test on this piece of fabric in my room that brings out the worst moire looked promising. It doesn't affect sharpness too much and moire is almost completely gone. The 2.0 doesn't completely kill it but you have to look for it to see it. Average viewer wouldn't notice it and of course a little postwork could get the rest of it. A 2 is the best tradeoff between elimination and sharpness.

EDIT: I tested these filters on a 7D, not a 5D. Your mileage may vary with a 5D.
Thanks I'm going to get one shipped tomorrow.
Anthonyb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 09:01 PM   #19
Anthonyb
Senior Member
 
Anthonyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 160
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthonyb View Post
Thanks I'm going to get one shipped tomorrow.
Oh soo lame, I just read that they don't have 2.0 in the 4x4 filter variety. What gives? 67mm? What does that even fit? My canon lens is 58, and I know several lenses are 72, and 77.. but 67mm??? Bizarre. So I guess the only option is to get the 67mm and adapter.

What are you using Isaac?
Anthonyb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 09:12 PM   #20
Isaac_Brody
Moderator
 
Isaac_Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,155
Default

I'm using 67mm with step up rings. I'm using Contax zeiss so it's not a problem for me.

I wish the filter were larger, 72mm would have been more useful and less of a pain in the ass.
__________________
http://www.isaacbrody.com
Isaac_Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:38 AM.


All Material Copyright 2009. DVXuser and Landmine Media