EOS 1Ds image quality (1 Viewer)

In response to a few questions regarding the EOS 1Ds DSLR compared to 35mm film SLRs, I have to say that I now hardly ever use film for anything unless its a comission that specifically is wanted on film.
The image quality of the 1Ds is astonishing to say the least, images taken as RAW format files and converted to tiffs can be interpolated to at least 400% ('Genuine Fractals', software) with no obvious loss of quality, the images are also so much 'cleaner' in that they are grainless compared to 35mm film enlargements.

The attached image has been resized down and quite highly compressed to suit Bird forum parameters so is about 1:2 full size but you should still be able to judge the image quality from it.

Very nice Nigel. I recall Andy Rouse's review at the web site of "the well-known retailer in Norwich" stating he reckoned it was the equal of Velvia (in a pro quality film setup of course).

For those with fast connections, there's a 32MB bitmap image of a night time picture of a lit civic building (presumably to illustrate the low noise levels in a difficult subject) at :

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/eos_1ds-review/index.html

Perhaps you know of links to other pictures of more relevant subjects Nigel.

I think we can safely say top quality digital has arrived; if not quite for the masses yet...

Amazing image Nigel, I must remember to do the lottery tonight. ;-)

Rich

One more generation (more fps) and everyone should be there. Even my 'old' Kodak 560 (D6000 is Canon's name for it) with 6 megapixels and pro features easily displays the differences in lens quality. I think the limiting factors are again going to become things other than the electronics.

Nigel,
Your images on this forum have convinced me that digital quality is no longer an issue (at least on higher spec equipment).
thanks,

Nigel,

Really hard to argue with that image quality. Have you had a chance to compare it with the image quality of the 10D? I know that is like comparing apples to bananas, but still wondering if you have had the chance and formed an opinion. I know the 1Ds will be superior, but being the perfectionist I think you are (meant in a nice way), I believe you would be able to point out where the two cameras differ significantly on subtle issues, not just MP issues.

Going on from Brian's question, would a 6Mp crop from the centre of a 1DS image be noticeably better than a full-frame shot from the 10D?

Adey

Yes the image quality of the 1Ds is noticeably better than that of a 10D, but only when you get up to making prints larger than A4.

At the time I bought the 1Ds I was in two-minds as to whether to buy two EOS 10D s or the 1Ds, as I do prefer to work with two camera bodies, however after looking at the results from the 1Ds, particularly when cropped to the same size as the 6mp output of the 10D, there really was no comparison, the 1Ds won hands down.

This is interesting in some ways as the 10D has a slightly larger pixel count per square millimetre of sensor area than the 1Ds, however there are some complex technical explanations as to why the greater density of pixels does not necessarily give better resolution.

The downside of such incredible image quality is that the optical quality of your glass on certain lenses will show, I have a wide angle that suffers badly in this respect as chromatic aberrations are resolved, this downfall of the lens is never noticeable on film or with D60 or 10D.

The most important criteria for me was that I shoot images to sell for publication, and the output of the 1Ds will give me an image that will go to Double page spread at 300dpi straight from the camera, i.e. with no upsizing (interpolation)

The other strengths of the camera are manifold, but the most important for me when shooting is the astonishing speed and accuracy of the auto focus system on it, plus the EV range of the A/F system also maintains A/F with both 1.4X and 2X converters fitted.

Appreciate your response Nigel.