1Ds mMarkk III sample from Canon

[coldrain]

The resolving power of the 1Ds Mark III is very impressive for a 135 format DSLR...

This sample from Canon's website with the EF 50mm f1.2 L USM is very detailed.
ISO 100, f8
It makes me want that camera (the price and bulk do not)...

[coldrain]

Here is the link to the photo. It is a standard RAW conversion with no sharpening applied.

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos1dsm3/html/eos1dsm3_sample3-e.html

And here are the 100% crops:

[michaelb]

Looks good, but for me the ulitmate dSLR would be the 5D.

Its up there with the best of them in terms of IQ, but at a much more usable size, at least for me.

I love my 40D, but you can see in this test that the FF of the 5D outresolves my poor 40D, even at ISO 100. How much this would be noticable in most prints is debatable, however.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_40D/noise.shtml

[fractalgfx]

Wow, but I would be more impressed by a high dynamic range sensor with lower resolution.

[adam75south]

holy shit that's awesome!

[D Thompson]

holy shit that's awesome!

Exactly my first thought! But for 8 grand it should be. Come on lottery, Daddy needs a new Canon :rolleyes:.

[24Peter]

I'm not that impressed. All the images I've seen from the new Canon 1DsMKIII seem flat and not very sharp. Yes there are certain advantages to a 35mm camera system, but if you need 22MP, I think you're better off with a MF digital back. Even the ZD has more impressive output than the Canon to my eye. No, you can't shoot above ISO 400 with the Mamiya, and the ZD's AF/frame rate are much slower and the software interface is clunky. But in terms of sheer image quality, IMO the Canon doesn't come close to any of the MF backs I've seen.

[coldrain]

I'm not that impressed. All the images I've seen from the new Canon 1DsMKIII seem flat and not very sharp. Yes there are certain advantages to a 35mm camera system, but if you need 22MP, I think you're better off with a MF digital back. Even the ZD has more impressive output than the Canon to my eye. No, you can't shoot above ISO 400 with the Mamiya, and the ZD's AF/frame rate are much slower and the software interface is clunky. But in terms of sheer image quality, IMO the Canon doesn't come close to any of the MF backs I've seen.
Well I don't know, Peter... this shot was totally un-processed, and the light was overcast dull.
I just now saw a comparison photo (photo itself nothing special) between the 1Dsmk III, MamiyaZD and a Phase1 back, and the 1Ds mkIII did really well (having less "flat" colours than the Mamiya for instance).

So... may it be that the shots you have seen from the 1Ds MK III are just out of camera test shots, as where the shots of the full frame backs you have seen are real pro and processed shots?

And the softness is normal, Canon and Nikon both try to keep moire at bay with quite strong antialiasing filters in their pro bodies. They do sharpen up very well in post processing.
The Mamiya ZD in the test shots shows severe moire colour patterns due to its lesser antialiasing... and that is something you can't easily post process away?

After all, I have seen VERY impressive results from the 1D mk III, and the 1Ds Mk III is supposed to be the same sensor tech. wise.

Here a link to the comparison (as long as they are up there):
http://www.tpedersen.com/1DsMKIII_P21_ZD/