canon rumors FORUM

Rumors => EOS Bodies => Topic started by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 08:19:01 AM

Title: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 08:19:01 AM
All files are RAW and were taken with a 5D mkIII (preproduction model).

For dynamic range purposes (LetTheRightLensIn and Tijn, do you hear me? :D) :

ISO 100, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 100, 3sec lens cap off.
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1840998687/iso100_dr.zip
ISO 160, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 160, 3sec lens cap off.
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/3548948977/iso160_dr.zip

And now the portraits.
Handheld 24-105 @73mm f/5.6, IS on.

ISO 400
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1163476234/218A0014_iso400.zip
ISO 800
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/4212388373/218A0015_iso800.zip
ISO 1600
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1061267807/218A0016_iso1600.zip
ISO 3200
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1910229011/218A0017_iso3200.zip
ISO 6400
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/3517426404/218A0018_iso6400.zip
ISO 12800
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/962452783/218A0019_iso12800.zip
ISO 25600
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1193339724/218A0020_iso25600.zip
At iso 3200 and 12800 you 'll notice a yellow line. It may be due to a weird sync effect from shutter speed/lights, but I'm not sure about it.

Dad shot with 5d mkIII+70-200 II
ISO 4000
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/3570984079/218A8989_iso4000_dad.zip

For comparison reasons I took a couple of shots with my dad's 5D mkII+24-70.

70mm, f/4.5

ISO 3200
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/561557718/IMG_4770_mkII_iso3200.zip
ISO 6400
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1125200045/IMG_4771_mkII_iso6400.zip
I see a yellow stripe here too. Maybe it was some weird sync of lights and it was showing up when I was using high shutter speeds?

Video
http://youtu.be/CF3rDNk8QYY (http://youtu.be/CF3rDNk8QYY)
If you found that interesting, there are 3 more videos here (http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9B689963B93F0457)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes
Post by: Abraxx on March 11, 2012, 08:36:04 AM
Thank you for your efforts akiskev!
Really appreciated.

 :)

Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes
Post by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 08:45:05 AM
No problem Abraxx. You'll notice some weird stuff in iso 3200 and 12800 shots (a stripe of yellowish color, as if WB changed). Seems something like a firmware problem because this yellow color was present in all the ISO 3200 and 12800 shots I took. The camera was a preproduction model.
Today the shots were taken with less lights on  ;)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes
Post by: PhilDrinkwater on March 11, 2012, 08:57:58 AM
Thank you :)

That ISO3200 shot cleans up very nicely using my standard settings. I reckon it's about as good or maybe a bit better than a d3s (when scaled down), which was my goal for the high ISO on my next camera.

The best thing though is the quality of the noise - it's just a lot nicer than before and the shot looks really sharp. It would print really well :)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes
Post by: PhilDrinkwater on March 11, 2012, 09:01:34 AM
Also, the 6400 shot looks good too. The sharpness is still really there. I found the 5dii was breaking down at that point before. Yes - it's a bit noisy - but with higher NR settings it still contains lots of details.

Great!
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: sh0dan on March 11, 2012, 09:37:47 AM
Any chance you could do a sample in each of the sRAW modes?

I'm doing a freeware RAW converter, and would like to confirm that these modes are also working!

Thanks!
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: tonyp on March 11, 2012, 11:07:32 AM
Considering you underexposed that ISO 6400 shot it looks pretty damn amazing.  Wow.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: nightbreath on March 11, 2012, 11:15:28 AM
When I was looking at the ISO 3200 shot I've found a white cross in the RAW image. Don't know whether it's a drawback of converter (IrfanView plug-in released in October, 2010) or something Canon use to mark their pre-production cameras / sensors, but it is definitely something interesting.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: poker_jake85 on March 11, 2012, 11:27:32 AM
When I was looking at the ISO 3200 shot I've found a white cross in the RAW image. Don't know whether it's a drawback of converter (IrfanView plug-in released in October, 2010) or something Canon use to mark their pre-production cameras / sensors, but it is definitely something interesting.

It's a hot pixel
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 11:28:32 AM
When I was looking at the ISO 3200 shot I've found a white cross in the RAW image. Don't know whether it's a drawback of converter (IrfanView plug-in released in October, 2010) or something Canon use to mark their pre-production cameras / sensors, but it is definitely something interesting.
Interesting but I don't see it on ACR. It must be a software issue.

(http://i43.tinypic.com/34zztj4.jpg)

edit: It must be a hot pixel because it's there on the JPG (I was shooting raw+jpg).
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: altenae on March 11, 2012, 11:59:13 AM
Quote
edit: It must be a hot pixel because it's there on the JPG (I was shooting raw+jpg).

If it is a hot pixel wouldn't this also be present in the RAW file ?
Title: Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: PeteG on March 11, 2012, 01:12:57 PM
Looked at the RAW ISO 400 (I know ISO 100 would have been better), move “Fill Light” to 100% and 100% crop and really didn’t see any banding (looking more I see some).
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: fred_jb on March 11, 2012, 01:49:41 PM
Thanks for these samples.  Do you know if they have in-camera NR set to on?

I've looked at the portrait shots and it looks like they might have in-camera NR on as there is an absence of colour noise and in its place the gritty looking luminance noise which in the past I've found to be a characteristic of Canon files with NR applied.

Fred
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on March 11, 2012, 01:56:02 PM
All files are RAW and were taken with a 5D mkIII (preproduction model).

For dynamic range purposes (LetTheRightLensIn and Tijn, do you hear me? :D) :

ISO 100, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 100, 3sec lens cap off.
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1840998687/iso100_dr.zip
ISO 160, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 160, 3sec lens cap off.
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/3548948977/iso160_dr.zip

And now the portraits.
Handheld 24-105 @73mm f/5.6, IS on.

ISO 400
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1163476234/218A0014_iso400.zip
ISO 800
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/4212388373/218A0015_iso800.zip
ISO 1600
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1061267807/218A0016_iso1600.zip
ISO 3200
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1910229011/218A0017_iso3200.zip
ISO 6400
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/3517426404/218A0018_iso6400.zip
ISO 12800
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/962452783/218A0019_iso12800.zip
ISO 25600
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1193339724/218A0020_iso25600.zip
At iso 3200 and 12800 you 'll notice a yellow line. It may be due to a weird sync effect from shutter speed/lights, but I'm not sure about it.

Dad shot with 5d mkIII+70-200 II
ISO 4000
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/3570984079/218A8989_iso4000_dad.zip

For comparison reasons I took a couple of shots with my dad's 5D mkII+24-70.

70mm, f/4.5

ISO 3200
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/561557718/IMG_4770_mkII_iso3200.zip
ISO 6400
Code: [Select]
https://rapidshare.com/files/1125200045/IMG_4771_mkII_iso6400.zip
I see a yellow stripe here too. Maybe it was some weird sync of lights and it was showing up when I was using high shutter speeds?

Awesome, thanks. I will see if I can check them out during half-time, if not then not until tonight, going to check for eagles after the game.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: fred_jb on March 11, 2012, 01:56:42 PM
Never mind, my mistake - looks like Lightroom has automatically appled colour NR to the DNGs I created from the files.

Haved tried again with settings zeroed - plenty of colour noise now!
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on March 11, 2012, 02:32:15 PM
disappointing results at ISO 100:

banding:
horizontal banding appears to be entirely removed, this is good, and will help make ISO look better and get less badly clumped chroma noise and all but vertical banding appears to be zero improved and it shows up enough that I don't think you gain any usable amount of low ISO DR back compared to the 5D2

so for low ISO I'm not sure the removal of horizontal banding alone will really help usable DR any since the vertical sticks out to the eye just as much, maybe here on there on parts of the image it might help

DR:
5D2: 15760,1024,6.1 AU,3.8 8MP normalized ADU, DR - 11.2  , DR8MP - 11.9

5D3: 15309 (maybe the channels were still not quite blown though?),2048, 6.6 ADU, 6.4 normalized to 5D2 6.4 and then to 8MP 3.96, DR- 11.0  DRto5D2 - 11.0  DR8MP - 11.7
and let us say WP should be 15760 instead then DR8MP - 11.8
and let us even say it should be max 14bit 16383 - 11.8

so I actually get fractionally worse DR than for the 5D2, but it's for all intents, the exact same, within copy to copy variation and well within any difference you'd be able to notice

Sad to say but even the DX D7000 handily beats the latest Canon FF for DR, and not by a little. The D800, at 100% view, full 50% MP advantage may beat it by 2 stops, maybe even 2.5 usable stops.

I did not expect this at all.  :'(

(the high iso side of things should turn out more favorable though, most likely)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 06:58:33 PM
I uploaded a video for people that don't have acr.

http://youtu.be/CF3rDNk8QYY?hd=1 (http://youtu.be/CF3rDNk8QYY?hd=1)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 07:29:24 PM
And the 25600 shot:

http://youtu.be/5EGwkPEewtg?hd=1 (http://youtu.be/5EGwkPEewtg?hd=1)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: jrista on March 11, 2012, 07:38:04 PM
Thank you, @akiskev, for those sample videos! I'm really amazed at how much 10% luma and 30% chroma noise reduction cleaned the photo of your father right up. With my 7D, I often have to crank chroma noise reduction up a lot more than that at higher ISO's, and I usually apply about 25% luma noise reduction.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: PeteG on March 11, 2012, 08:17:29 PM
Akiskev,
Thanks for the video, I know it seems the 5D III is getting dragged thru the mud lately but I believe I’ll be pretty happy with it.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: akiskev on March 11, 2012, 08:34:23 PM
I'm happy you enjoyed the videos guys! Here's some more (http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9B689963B93F0457)!

PeteG it's a nice product so I'm sure you will be more than happy with it!
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: dystorsion on March 11, 2012, 09:36:16 PM
Thanks for your work akiskev!
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: vWings on March 11, 2012, 11:39:07 PM
Thanks akiskev.  I looked at the videos you provided but not following exactly what/why you tweaked in ACR.  I use Aperture and PS but am an admitted novice at best.  Color balance, dodging, burning, cropping, and sharpening are easy enough.  But removing noise and cleaning up photos as you did in the videos is uncharted territory for me.   Any recommendations for tutorials?
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on March 11, 2012, 11:46:07 PM
I'm not sure yet but at quick peek it seems like it still uses the fake intermediate ISOs.
Someone said that real ISOs go higher than the prior ISO1600/3200 of other Canon models though.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: Aglet on March 12, 2012, 12:35:39 AM
disappointing results at ISO 100:

Arghh!  :(

If D800's DR and S/N turn out to best the 5D3 at pixel or print levels I'm gonna be SO disappointed I recently spent a load on new Canon glass.

Thanks for your dogged analysis of the 5D3's files.  I'm hoping the production version of the thing shows more tangible improvements.

Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: te4o on March 12, 2012, 12:36:49 AM
Thanks akiskev.  I looked at the videos you provided but not following exactly what/why you tweaked in ACR.  I use Aperture and PS but am an admitted novice at best.  Color balance, dodging, burning, cropping, and sharpening are easy enough.  But removing noise and cleaning up photos as you did in the videos is uncharted territory for me.   Any recommendations for tutorials?

Try NIK at www.niksoftware.com (http://www.niksoftware.com) . I was like you and I don't have time to learn CS5 and PS, so I "tried the trial" and got hooked: easy and effective enough. From Aperture it works quite easy as a plug in. The whole suite is at a good price at B&H.
Just as an idea.
There are plenty of other options too, but we are off-topic here.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: te4o on March 12, 2012, 12:39:57 AM
Yes, I'd be turning into 5D2 territory slowly. Why spend the money for features I don't need. Let the pro-s use the 6 fps and the high ISO. I needed IQ improvements at base ISO, well, another 4 years of waiting. Probably not possible with the current sensor tech.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: wickidwombat on March 12, 2012, 12:42:46 AM
Thanks akiskev.  I looked at the videos you provided but not following exactly what/why you tweaked in ACR.  I use Aperture and PS but am an admitted novice at best.  Color balance, dodging, burning, cropping, and sharpening are easy enough.  But removing noise and cleaning up photos as you did in the videos is uncharted territory for me.   Any recommendations for tutorials?

I use Topaz de-noise which works really well
it lets you apply different strength noise reduction to shadows and highlights as well as control
specific colour channel noise and has an option for pattern noise if you are pushing that far

the only issue i have is when i load it as a plugin to lightroom the colours go all crazy in the topaz editor
(doesnt affect the image though but its annoying i'm hoping lightroom 4 fixes this)
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: te4o on March 12, 2012, 12:54:55 AM
wickidW, do you think 5D2 will drop further in price when the 5d3 is in the shops? Now 1839 A$, I think I'll stop dreaming for the 4000+ 5D3, no point for me. This will be slowly the end of a dream.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: wickidwombat on March 12, 2012, 01:03:13 AM
wickidW, do you think 5D2 will drop further in price when the 5d3 is in the shops? Now 1839 A$, I think I'll stop dreaming for the 4000+ 5D3, no point for me. This will be slowly the end of a dream.
$1839 is pretty cheap, where is selling it that cheap?

I cant see it getting that much cheaper since its not going out of production and
is going to be cemented as the entry level full frame. The fact is the 5D mk2 still
produces outstanding images this isnt going to change if you are budget concious that extra
$2000+ can sure buy alot of nice glass to go with the camera depending on what you already have

i was considering selling 1 5Dmk2 but the price drops make it pointless I'll just keep it going
(both me and my wife shoot so for weddings we need 4 cameras, just in case anyone thought i was an octopus to be able to use that many cameras at once :P
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: Ricku on March 12, 2012, 01:06:29 AM
disappointing results at ISO 100:

banding:
horizontal banding appears to be entirely removed, this is good, and will help make ISO look better and get less badly clumped chroma noise and all but vertical banding appears to be zero improved and it shows up enough that I don't think you gain any usable amount of low ISO DR back compared to the 5D2

so for low ISO I'm not sure the removal of horizontal banding alone will really help usable DR any since the vertical sticks out to the eye just as much, maybe here on there on parts of the image it might help

DR:
5D2: 15760,1024,6.1 AU,3.8 8MP normalized ADU, DR - 11.2  , DR8MP - 11.9

5D3: 15309 (maybe the channels were still not quite blown though?),2048, 6.6 ADU, 6.4 normalized to 5D2 6.4 and then to 8MP 3.96, DR- 11.0  DRto5D2 - 11.0  DR8MP - 11.7
and let us say WP should be 15760 instead then DR8MP - 11.8
and let us even say it should be max 14bit 16383 - 11.8

so I actually get fractionally worse DR than for the 5D2, but it's for all intents, the exact same, within copy to copy variation and well within any difference you'd be able to notice

Sad to say but even the DX D7000 handily beats the latest Canon FF for DR, and not by a little. The D800, at 100% view, full 50% MP advantage may beat it by 2 stops, maybe even 2.5 usable stops.

I did not expect this at all.  :'(

(the high iso side of things should turn out more favorable though, most likely)

This is exactly what I have found out from my own tests.

What were Canon thinking?  :-\
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: simonxu11 on March 12, 2012, 01:17:46 AM
disappointing results at ISO 100:

banding:
horizontal banding appears to be entirely removed, this is good, and will help make ISO look better and get less badly clumped chroma noise and all but vertical banding appears to be zero improved and it shows up enough that I don't think you gain any usable amount of low ISO DR back compared to the 5D2

so for low ISO I'm not sure the removal of horizontal banding alone will really help usable DR any since the vertical sticks out to the eye just as much, maybe here on there on parts of the image it might help

DR:
5D2: 15760,1024,6.1 AU,3.8 8MP normalized ADU, DR - 11.2  , DR8MP - 11.9

5D3: 15309 (maybe the channels were still not quite blown though?),2048, 6.6 ADU, 6.4 normalized to 5D2 6.4 and then to 8MP 3.96, DR- 11.0  DRto5D2 - 11.0  DR8MP - 11.7
and let us say WP should be 15760 instead then DR8MP - 11.8
and let us even say it should be max 14bit 16383 - 11.8

so I actually get fractionally worse DR than for the 5D2, but it's for all intents, the exact same, within copy to copy variation and well within any difference you'd be able to notice

Sad to say but even the DX D7000 handily beats the latest Canon FF for DR, and not by a little. The D800, at 100% view, full 50% MP advantage may beat it by 2 stops, maybe even 2.5 usable stops.

I did not expect this at all.  :'(

(the high iso side of things should turn out more favorable though, most likely)

This is exactly what I have found out from my own tests.

What were Canon thinking?  :-\

I said this a few times:
Nikon focus on making better cameras, Canon focus on selling more cameras
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: maxxevv on March 12, 2012, 02:00:12 AM
disappointing results at ISO 100:

banding:
horizontal banding appears to be entirely removed, this is good, and will help make ISO look better and get less badly clumped chroma noise and all but vertical banding appears to be zero improved and it shows up enough that I don't think you gain any usable amount of low ISO DR back compared to the 5D2

so for low ISO I'm not sure the removal of horizontal banding alone will really help usable DR any since the vertical sticks out to the eye just as much, maybe here on there on parts of the image it might help

DR:
5D2: 15760,1024,6.1 AU,3.8 8MP normalized ADU, DR - 11.2  , DR8MP - 11.9

5D3: 15309 (maybe the channels were still not quite blown though?),2048, 6.6 ADU, 6.4 normalized to 5D2 6.4 and then to 8MP 3.96, DR- 11.0  DRto5D2 - 11.0  DR8MP - 11.7
and let us say WP should be 15760 instead then DR8MP - 11.8
and let us even say it should be max 14bit 16383 - 11.8

so I actually get fractionally worse DR than for the 5D2, but it's for all intents, the exact same, within copy to copy variation and well within any difference you'd be able to notice

Sad to say but even the DX D7000 handily beats the latest Canon FF for DR, and not by a little. The D800, at 100% view, full 50% MP advantage may beat it by 2 stops, maybe even 2.5 usable stops.

I did not expect this at all.  :'(

(the high iso side of things should turn out more favorable though, most likely)

This is exactly what I have found out from my own tests.

What were Canon thinking?  :-\

I have to ask ... where/what and how do you guys do the DR tests ?
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: WarStreet on March 12, 2012, 08:41:07 AM
disappointing results at ISO 100:

banding:
horizontal banding appears to be entirely removed, this is good, and will help make ISO look better and get less badly clumped chroma noise and all but vertical banding appears to be zero improved and it shows up enough that I don't think you gain any usable amount of low ISO DR back compared to the 5D2

so for low ISO I'm not sure the removal of horizontal banding alone will really help usable DR any since the vertical sticks out to the eye just as much, maybe here on there on parts of the image it might help

DR:
5D2: 15760,1024,6.1 AU,3.8 8MP normalized ADU, DR - 11.2  , DR8MP - 11.9

5D3: 15309 (maybe the channels were still not quite blown though?),2048, 6.6 ADU, 6.4 normalized to 5D2 6.4 and then to 8MP 3.96, DR- 11.0  DRto5D2 - 11.0  DR8MP - 11.7
and let us say WP should be 15760 instead then DR8MP - 11.8
and let us even say it should be max 14bit 16383 - 11.8

so I actually get fractionally worse DR than for the 5D2, but it's for all intents, the exact same, within copy to copy variation and well within any difference you'd be able to notice

Sad to say but even the DX D7000 handily beats the latest Canon FF for DR, and not by a little. The D800, at 100% view, full 50% MP advantage may beat it by 2 stops, maybe even 2.5 usable stops.

I did not expect this at all.  :'(

(the high iso side of things should turn out more favorable though, most likely)


LetTheRightLensIn thanks for your time. Thanks for akiskev too, for providing the raw files !

So, from my understanding, these new measurements with lens cap on/off confirms the ones that you did using the masking area ?

I am disgusted with the results. Will look at DXO measurments when out, but I am afraid that they won't be significantly different from yours. :(  Do you confirm that DR has improved @ the high ISO's ?
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: LetTheRightLensIn on March 12, 2012, 01:41:41 PM
I am disgusted with the results. Will look at DXO measurments when out, but I am afraid that they won't be significantly different from yours. :(  Do you confirm that DR has improved @ the high ISO's ?

It's tricky to say for the high ISOs since Canon was at it's least conservative ISO rating time back in the 5D2 days so it might not be fair to compare ISO6400 DR of the 5D2 to ISO 6400 DR of the 5D3. Head to head I actually found a real but very small DR advantage for the 5D3, I forget but it may have been not even quite a quarter stop or something, nothing meaningful. However, there is some reason to believe that that comparison was not fair and due to quite possible changes in named to actually delivered ISO so the 5D3 result might need to get 1/3-1/2 stop added to it, so maybe it is almost 1/2 stop to almost 3/4 stop more. But I'm guessing a bit. It's tricky to try to do with the samples we have and I don't feel like taking all the time it would take to try to plot out gain differences and so on. I'd rather wait until DxO calculates the ISO differences.

It's maybe dangerous to judge using ACR, but it seems like the high iso noise has a slightly nicer look on the 5D3 so that might give a tiny bit of an extra advantage too (At super duper high isos and for really tricky scenes it might give a notice usable bonus compared to the 5D2 over the pure measured values).
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: DavidRiesenberg on March 12, 2012, 03:07:11 PM
I am disgusted with the results.

Isn't this a bit extreme?
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: WarStreet on March 12, 2012, 03:56:59 PM
I am disgusted with the results.

Isn't this a bit extreme?

Yes might be, I am not english native. So, what should I say which is less severe than disgusting ? Not happy is just too soft, for 3.5 years.
Title: Re: 5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)
Post by: tt on March 12, 2012, 06:10:50 PM
I am disgusted with the results.

Isn't this a bit extreme?

Yes might be, I am not english native. So, what should I say which is less severe than disgusting ? Not happy is just too soft, for 3.5 years.

Perhaps the word "disappointed"? Though the same issues with softness came out prior to the 5D Mark II launch if that's any consolation.