Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I'm not convinced by this radical hack. The only before/after frame grabs are not comparable at all as the lighting conditions are so radically different. The shots taken with the OLPF removed are in sunshine with shadows & good contrast while the 'before' shots are under a flat grey sky with markedly reduced contrast. Who is to say that the same scene shot with an unhacked camera wouldn't look exactly the same?

The sight of people on other forums uncritically falling over themselves to "oooh" & "aaaah" over the awesome quality of this video with the OLPF removed reminds me of the GH2 fan boys who make wild claims for the various hacks without comparing them to the unhacked camera.

There are so many variables involved in shooting digital video that without proper comparison we cannot say that one is better than the other. These are all representations of reality fooling the brain that it is reality. Until we see some charts shot with & without the OLPF we can't say whether resolution is better. Until we see a proper double blind comparison of real life video shot with & without the OLPF we cannot say whether it produces a more pleasing image.

Canon engineers know a lot more about digital sensors than we videographers so I am sure that they didn't put that OLPF there just for the hell of it or to degrade the video quality. OK I know that some conspiracy theorists do think that is exactly what they did so as not to cannibalise C300 sales but seriously it's there for a reason & removing it is going to screw up something.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Nigel, it is probably wise to wait until after today to see if the image clears... The 1st has never been a good day for being serious. :)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

To remove the OLPF or...not? Here is a nice article on the older body with OLPF plus sharpening versus a 'hack' job:

Frontal Lobbings: To Anti-Alias or not Anti-Alias

Rather than rip one out of a Mk3 it would be easier to just buy an 800E... :)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

A prime requirement for a valid April Fools joke is that it's not published until the 1st April. This first appeared yesterday evening 31st March so unless they really aren't playing by the rules I think we must assume that it is not a joke

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

The same James Miller has shot a lot of C300 footage... coincidence?

"Warning: this is breaking news – please wait for the final results." - sounds like a tip off to me that a leg or two may be in the process of being pulled.

I guess, technically they could claim at least in some parts on the online world (ie: where I am) it was already April 1 at the time the story went live.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Interesting lens resolution tests on different camera bodies - Canon 5D Mk2 & Mk3, Nikon D700 and D800:

LensRentals.com - “D” resolution tests

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Philip has now given his views about James Miller's "hack-job" to his new Canon Mark III:

A drastic solution to increasing sharpness with the 5DmkIII… | Philip Bloom

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

+1 for Josh's assessment. I too think this is an April Fool's joke, and the footage in question is from the C300.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

He's added yet another video... seems like it must be authentic. Harder to discern a detail improvement in this one given the subject matter, but it is a very nice image.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

But PB is offline for 8 days, according to his tweet 31/3, so this blogpost most have been written a few days ago, and put online on the 1/4... Judge for yourself what that mean.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

James is still answering recent questions with no hint of it being April fool, so I don't think he would continue if it were a joke.

Considering the amazing sharpness and detail that the D800 and D800(E) provides, it should be obvious that the 5D Mark III would provide improved sharpness with one of the OLP filters removed (the Mark III has two seperate OLPFs). You then of course have to deal with other minor added problems such a no self-cleaning option, loss of warranty and a few other issues.

I am now beginning to wonder if the stills and video performance of the older Canon Mark II would be improved by removing the OLPF? It would also be safer (cheaper) doing a home-hack job on a Mk2.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I'm no tech-guy, so I don't know... Its sounds just weird that is ok to remove the AA filter, when that was what everyone sad about the D800E, “don't buy the E, 'cause it's no god for video, without the AA filter”. If that's right or not I don't know...

That, combined with PB is offline and then he public this at 1st if April AND doing updates of the bloggpost when he is out at sea.

It doesn’t matter for me, I would NOT do this to any camera anyway...

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I wonder if this directly translates from stills to video? I will be interested to see a head to head video resolution test.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I thought I'd post this here in this few months old thread as it seemed the best place.

James Miller has recently posted this film on Vimeo. It is a comparison of the 1DX and 5DMkIII, both with sharpening applied in post - some lovely images!

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Gentlemen. I have too much shooting to do to worry about 890 lines resolved vs 1000. I have the mkIII and so far it has performed beautifully up to 8000 ISO. I had a mkII and I notice that it takes a good bit more crunching in post than the II. Works for me These are silly things to argue about. Go out and shoot.
Bill