Anti-Alias - yes or no? (Page 2): I was checking out the new 45 megapixel Nikon Z7 (no AA filter) at a Photography Expo not long ago. I was surprised to see moire patterns in some...

CO

I was checking out the new 45 megapixel Nikon Z7 (no AA filter) at a Photography Expo not long ago. I was surprised to see moire patterns in some ceiling tiles that had fine parallel lines. They've eliminated the AA filter in the newer high resolution cameras because moire is less likely to occur. I did happen with the 45 megapixel Z7.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

CO wrote:

I was checking out the new 45 megapixel Nikon Z7 (no AA filter) at a Photography Expo not long ago. I was surprised to see moire patterns in some ceiling tiles that had fine parallel lines. They've eliminated the AA filter in the newer high resolution cameras because moire is less likely to occur. I did happen with the 45 megapixel Z7.

Yes - the moire is often not seen in the viewfinder - and as PP cannot usually correct it, perhaps the fitting of an anti-aliasing filter would have been better, rather than sacrificing other IQ factors.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Delderby wrote:

Yes - the moire is often not seen in the viewfinder - and as PP cannot usually correct it, perhaps the fitting of an anti-aliasing filter would have been better, rather than sacrificing other IQ factors.

I'd guess that filter is like a lot of things, there was a decision that had to be made about the trade offs. Was the occasional moire' problem worth controlling versus a full time reduction in IQ?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Delderby wrote:

Panasonic G9, Nikon 850, latest Canons

Where did you arrive at "latest Canons"? The first specification / feature listed for the EOS 5DS R is "For photographers wanting the ultimate in high resolution capture, the EOS 5DS R camera has a low-pass filter* (LPF) effect cancellation."

But, both the EOS 5DIV and the EOS 90D have spec sheets that clearly list the Low Pass Filter is "Installed in front of the image sensor, non-detachable".

I was pretty sure Canon was not releasing more / new cameras without a low-pass filter. So, if the industry leader is not part of this trend, is it a trend?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

jeep_daddy wrote:

I will say this about the anti aliasing filter on ... (show quote)

Your 5DIV has a low-pass filter as well as the LPF will have nothing to do with the attraction of sensor dust. Spec sheet attached.

Attached file:
(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

lev29 wrote:

CHG_CANON, br br It appears you are employing a ... (show quote)

I have no idea what you're fishing for, but one is a dot, two is a line, and three is a trend…

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

[quote=CHG_CANON]So, if the industry leader is not part of this trend, is it a trend?

Ha! And I thought (based on what I read here) that Canon and Nikon were just playing follow the leader to Sony

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Delderby wrote:

It seems that manufacturers are now leaving anti a... (show quote)

Camera manufactures are trying to deliver the best possible image they can out of there products. They do extensive testing on different models to come up with the best combination.
For example, the D5 (Nikon's current best, does have a low pass filter) the D850 and D500 do not.
One of the most important things that makes a difference in image quality is, THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S KNOWLEDGE.

tcthome Loc: NJ

jeep_daddy wrote:

I will say this about the anti aliasing filter on ... (show quote)

I would call Canon & ask for an engineer or tech who could tell you if could be removed & still take great pics. All they can do is say no if it can't be done &, if it can , great.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

Delderby wrote:

I hadn't even noticed. With suggestive text apps, typos are now so common place it is easy to read what they should have said

Yes you are right.
Only the lonely kid in the last seat will say anything. The only way to be recognized.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

CHG_CANON wrote:

I have no idea what you're fishing for, but one is a dot, two is a line, and three is a trend…

You must be a real joy at parties.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

I guess I won't be buying a 5D IV

jeep_daddy wrote:

I will say this about the anti aliasing filter on ... (show quote)

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

jeep_daddy wrote:

I will say this about the anti aliasing filter on ... (show quote)

That's an interesting story. That camera is way too expensive to have that problem. I'm guessing, that later, Canon knew about this, and kept it a secret from purchasers? I met a wedding photographer who owned 2 each Canon 5D Mark 3s. He told me the camera of choice, for most wedding photographers, was the Canon 5D series. I would be curious to know, what the cost would be to disassemble the camera, to clean it out thoroughly.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

None of my cameras have a low pass filter and all of them give me images so sharp that many times I do not need to sharpen in post. RAW data is not sharpened in camera and instead when I open them in my editor they are super sharp. It could be the editor applying some sharpening but the truth is that little to no sharpening is needed.

If I were in the market for a new camera the lack of a low pass filter would not be my priority. I have to suspect that cameras with low pass filter have thin filters. I seldom see moire in my images but it has happened.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Rich1939 wrote:

I'd guess that filter is like a lot of things, there was a decision that had to be made about the trade offs. Was the occasional moire' problem worth controlling versus a full time reduction in IQ?

I understand that the very slight reduction in detail (seen by pixel peepers) is easy to put right if necessary, but moire is usually not possible to get rid of, and is usually not seen until too late for a re-shoot.