Topics

Canon Ivy Rec -- Don't Bother... #capturing #review #twinrig

 

So the Canon Ivy Rec arrived and I tried some test photos along with my W3 for comparison. Bottom line, you could put together a fairly compact 3D camera, potentially with a tight and/or variable interocular, but even the button sync would be hit or miss and the image quality is only so-so.

To see for yourself, download this zip file which contains sample photos and possible camera configurations. You can also read my Amazon review along with others.

As for the button sync. For stills the shutter has an annoying feature to support burst shots. If you press and release the button, the shutter is released when the button is released, not when it bottoms out. This is to support burst mode where you press and hold the button to fire a burst. I also had the button mechanically click, but not release the shutter a few times.

...BC

URLS in this message:

https://wildcatsunh-my.sharepoint.com/:u:/g/personal/wfc_wildcats_unh_edu/EdK6ebTHnSJIu9Xe55baYswBs9LfGdFuf3b67j66pRqztQ?e=GyKpmB

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07YFFZWZ2

depthcam
 

Thanks for your report, Bill.  It's amazing that Canon managed to convince people that US$130 is a low price given that just a few years back one could get a Canon A480 at a local pharmacy which produced pretty decent pictures for sixty bucks new and two of them could be synched with SDM thanks to the USB port on each.

True that the Ivy is smaller, but finger sync seriously limits what one can do with it.  And given the unimpressive IQ, one wonders how much worse those mini novelty cameras found on eBay for a couple of bucks could be to accomplish the same thing ?

Francois

 

True that the Ivy is smaller, but finger sync seriously limits
what one can do with it.
When I got it I was pleased to see that the camera is screwed
together which would make opening it up very easy. This could
make it easier to wire the cameras together. Given the fixed
focus lens, and thus a single action shutter button, the
potential for excellent sync is there. But I did not open up the
camera since I was going to send it back and I did not want to
take the chance I might cause hidden damage.

Too bad about the so-so image quality, I still think this camera
had potential as a unique twin rig. Not a first tier 3D camera,
but one with interesting possibilities.

...BC

Rob Ellis
 

Bill, thanks for the image samples. I have to say, the comparisons with the Fuji W3 images surprised me. I have three Canon cameras, and though two of them have image sensors roughly the same size as the W3 sensors, when I am working with images from either of them along with images from the W3, I never need to look at the file names to know which image came from which camera; the Canon images *always* have far better image quality than those from the W3. But in your comparisons, that was reversed; the Canon images are much worse!

By the way, at least in the images you posted, your W3 seems to have unusually good focus in both left and right views. That's also surprising, because every W1 or W3 I've ever tried has had some blurring in either left or right frames, and sometimes both.

Rob Ellis

John Clement
 

It is possible to use a good refocusing program to tweak the focus and get superb resolution on a normal HD monitor.  I have used Focus Magic which is adequate for most purposes, but SmartDeblur gives better resolution.  Both produce artifacts but SmartDebur creates wide bands at boundaries with high contrast, and can bring out huge amounts of noise.  Focus Magic creates thin lines next to contrasting boundaries.  It can be used in multiple stages to achieve very good resolution.  SmartDeblur can detect and fix non linear camera shake, but Focus Magic only corrects linear shake.  Using both can be better than just either one.

 

I generally have to correct my W3 images except for those in bright daylight.  I do have a very slight difference in focus between R&L that is nothing to write home to mother about.  Sometimes it glitches and I get a huge difference in focus.

 

I recommend a good refocusing plug-in  such as Focus Magic.  SmartDeblur only works with files, so one should use non-lossy compression such as TIF for the editing.

 

John M. Clement

 

From: main@Photo-3d.groups.io <main@Photo-3d.groups.io> On Behalf Of Rob Ellis via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2019 1:08 PM
To: main@Photo-3d.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Photo-3d] Canon Ivy Rec -- Don't Bother...

 

Bill, thanks for the image samples. I have to say, the comparisons with the Fuji W3 images surprised me. I have three Canon cameras, and though two of them have image sensors roughly the same size as the W3 sensors, when I am working with images from either of them along with images from the W3, I never need to look at the file names to know which image came from which camera; the Canon images *always* have far better image quality than those from the W3. But in your comparisons, that was reversed; the Canon images are much worse!

By the way, at least in the images you posted, your W3 seems to have unusually good focus in both left and right views. That's also surprising, because every W1 or W3 I've ever tried has had some blurring in either left or right frames, and sometimes both.

Rob Ellis

 

I have to say, the comparisons with the Fuji W3 images
surprised me.
Me too. The Fuji was set to program mode so it was pretty much
all automatic to be a somewhat fair comparison to the Canon Ivy
Rec which has no user settings. (Although I do run the W3 with
the 'chrome' saturated color feature which is a bit of a cheat I
suppose.) But given that the W3 is a 10 year old camera
(reviewed by DPREVIEW Aug 17, 2010), you would think the Canon
would have been, at the very least, as good IQ.

By the way, at least in the images you posted, your W3 seems to
have unusually good focus in both left and right views.
This is my daily carry (rides on my belt all the time) so it has
not been pampered. Just good luck I guess.

...BC

depthcam
 

Rob Wrote: "I have three Canon cameras, and though two of them have image sensors roughly the same size as the W3 sensors, when I am working with images from either of them along with images from the W3, I never need to look at the file names to know which image came from which camera; the Canon images *always* have far better image quality than those from the W3. But in your comparisons, that was reversed; the Canon images are much worse!"


I fully agree.  When the W3 came out, I was surprised to find its IQ to be lower that that of the Canon SD1000 that I was using in an SDM rig.  The SD1100 that came out in 2009 surpassed the W3 substantially.

But the poor IQ of the Ivy may be explained simply by the likelihood that this camera has nothing Canon about it other than the brand name printed on it.

But I understand Bill's interest in the Ivy in regards the very compact size.  That's what makes the W3 remain attractive in spite of not having the best IQ.  It's more likely to be the camera you always carry around with you.  And besides, when reduced to 1080p, W3 images can look pretty good.

Francois

Rob Ellis
 

Francois wrote: "That's what makes the W3 remain attractive in spite of not having the best IQ.  It's more likely to be the camera you always carry around with you.  And besides, when reduced to 1080p, W3 images can look pretty good."

I completely agree, on both counts. As long as the shots were taken with a reasonable ISO and the images don't need to be cropped too extremely, they can look very good at 1080p.

Rob Ellis

robert mcafee
 

I think a large part of the W3 image quality problems relates to the amount of jpeg compression. Pity they didn't add raw option.  

On Friday, November 15, 2019, 05:15:31 PM EST, Rob Ellis via Groups.Io <dreamerboyblue@...> wrote:


Francois wrote: "That's what makes the W3 remain attractive in spite of not having the best IQ.  It's more likely to be the camera you always carry around with you.  And besides, when reduced to 1080p, W3 images can look pretty good."

I completely agree, on both counts. As long as the shots were taken with a reasonable ISO and the images don't need to be cropped too extremely, they can look very good at 1080p.

Rob Ellis