Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

EOS R does NOT lack sharpness in 4K - Here's proof

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

At the same time I don't get, why anyone should praise the Canon for things that it's not. This is the reason why canon gets away with a lot of awful decisions 

Any examples if things it is not but still gets praised for?

All I see is hate after cherry picking a couple specs and ignoring things it does have.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Ok, I know Andrew says that the 5D MK IV isn’t the same, but I only have the 5D and I decided out of curiosity to test against a GH5, after all the 5D MK IV has a reputation for softness due to the strong sensor filter, etc.

I shot a number plate at 100mm, on a tripod, manually focused.  These cameras are mainly used for photography so all at default sharpening, Canon 70-200mm f4.0 IS at f4.0.  Pana 12-60mm f2.8-f4.0 at f4.0. UHD for GH5 and 4K for Canon.

Canon set to 100mm, Pana set to 50mm.

To equalise the framing in post, in the nle, I zoomed in on the GH5 clip to best match the Canons crop.  I then captured a jpeg from both clips and compared.  They were close, but the better of the two was the Canon.

This surprised me.

I wonder is it possible that Max Yuryev is using a different methology, i.e. maybe zooming the Canon less on the tripod to better match (because of Canon 4K crop) the other cameras?

Thing is, if the latter method is used then the Canon is at a disadvantage because for a fair comparison the optical combination of Camera and lens should be the same.

Of course if in the real world you were say shooting a fixed distance event, say a play or something, then the GH5 may well produce a better image because the Canon would need to be zoomed out, shot wider, if it was used to shoot the same event in 4K,  and keep the correct framing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing about sharpening though is on humans it is quite different from nature. You can apply much more to trees leaf etc than to a human face. Halos,edge sharpness are much more ugly on a face than on a branch or leaf. So it would be good to see these sharpening test on a human figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Inazuma said:

Once again Andrew you're blinded by your inherent Canon bias. 

Andrew? Are you sure you're a reader of him? Humm... Andrew is an enthusiastic camera observer. The best quality of his work as reviewer IMO is to be as much brand agnostic as me ; ) Reason why I am here BTW : -)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Andrew? Are you sure you're a reader of him? Humm... Andrew is an enthusiastic camera observer. The best quality of his work as reviewer IMO is to be as much brand agnostic as me ; ) Reason why I am here BTW : -)

He is brand agnostic, but like many others here there is still an inherent bias towards Canon because at the end of the day, they put out a nice image and nice bodies even if they fail in many technical areas.

Like a few others here, I don't care for sharpness, so it really doesn't matter to me. BUT if people are on the subject of comparing sharpness - which is not a very subjective issue - then people should talk factually.

If you actually look at the tif images at 100% (not even 400%), the sharpened EOS R image clearly has a lot of sharpening artefacts which the XT3 doesn't have. And it would only be more apparent if we saw the moving image.  So no, the XT3 is not digitally sharpened (or not to a noticeable amount anyway). The Canon 4k image is softer than most others but its sharp enough. However, its a real shame that the image is only just sharp enough, despite the huge crop and low readout speed. 

Ultimately I think it's a shame to discredit Max Yuryev when he's put out footage, which, sharpened or not, you can clearly see the EOS R has less detail. It's not at all disputable. 

4kimagecom.thumb.JPG.308bc02b6310f2a6977d59e32b18a886.JPG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

He is brand agnostic, but like many others here there is still an inherent bias towards Canon because at the end of the day, they put out a nice image and nice bodies even if they fail in many technical areas.

I am biased to Canon LOL. I have heard it all now *mic drop*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed @Andrew Reid that's funny, because it is quite the opposite. Take a shot on this one here as for instance:

"This company should go bankrupt."

"This company is a joke."

Does this make any sense?

I don't even mention wolf33d's comment. I fully disagree with him on that one but he is entitled to have his opinion. You instead @Inazuma you mention that as a fact. It is not : )

I am not Canon's client more than I am Panasonic's or Blackmagic's for example.

I just don't appreciate unfounded attacks though. One of the reasons I've always supported Andrew even before he had made his fame along his blog and forums, from that dvxuser period yet, comes from the fairness of his criticism. He has never flattered Canon or any other brand without a fair basis behind.

He is much more critical than supportive BTW. No idea how long you are his reader and if you are a good reader of his articles. But I am proud to be one of his most frequent followers, so I guess I am entitled to let you know that's not accurate : -)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the kind words.

These are inanimate objects to make art and technology with, it's usually more useful to be critical than to be naive, satisfied and positive... a camera does not need our praise, it does not cry or get hurt. Camera users on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2018 at 2:21 PM, frontfocus said:

even the sharpened Eos R file is missing some detail in comparison. The small branches on the right are easily distinguishable in the Fuji image, but neither in Canons unsharpened nor oversharpened image.

But I agree with the generell idea, that sharpness nowadays is way overrated and there are many things that are more important. 
At the same time I don't get, why anyone should praise the Canon for things that it's not. This is the reason why canon gets away with a lot of awful decisions 

If a sharpened 1:1 pixel readout image can as detail as the super-sampling image,why any brand even bother to make super-sampling 4K?

Even line-skipping will be enough for all camera,including cinema camera

That's ridiculous

Sharpness ≠ detail  is already been proved in max's video,Z7 is a  in-camera sharpened image without any extra detail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2018 at 6:58 AM, gelaxstudio said:

Sharpness ≠ detail  is already been proved in max's video,Z7 is a  in-camera sharpened image without any extra detail

Z7 is oversampling in APS-C mode. I guess they did bother.

Still in the real world, that full frame 4K looks fine, just as it did on the D850, and the A7R III before the Z7 even existed.

2 hours ago, Inazuma said:

You go out of your way to try to disprove/discredit another reviewer for their fair criticism and still deny you're biased?

You must be some kind of Russian fake user or something.

Yes I admit it. I am biased towards Canon! It's all true! The last 7 years calling them out have all been a PR stunt! They are paying me! How do you think I afford all these Sony, Panasonic and Fuji cameras?

It's not fair criticism in Max's video and unlike you, I explain why using something called logic. It's as if you have never heard of a Sharpness setting in a Picture Style, or the Unsharp Mask in Premiere. This is basic digital filmmaker 101. You need to read a book.

Why don't you go back to complaining about the GH5 and not being able to dial sharpness down enough.

Go and do a test of your own, show some images.

Go and adjust the picture style settings and try and re-produce Max's conclusion - yeah good luck with that - your results would be totally different.

He's really only reviewed the picture style settings, and he doesn't even bothering to tell us what they are!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stop making excuses for canon not to involve or even try harder

what if the EOS-R II comes out tomorrow ,and still do 4K with a crop 

Canon just tell everyone that some  pro users  did some tests and proved the IQ as good as the supersampling one,forget the fXXking  supersampling , you don't need it!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The GH5S and Pocket 4K don't do supersampling either. Crisply detailed enough for my liking.

Technically the pocket 4K sensor size is the same as the eos r in 4k mode. I would love to see sharpness comparison with the same lens from your hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...