« on: March 04, 2012, 03:05:59 AM »
These samples were taken with a pre-production unit, right? I guess Canon are aware of it and might have it fixed once the first batch hits the street, or yes a firmware update will do.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
This is some of the reason I don't like the Dxo tests. As it states that the 5d2 is better at noise then athe mk4. Now, if you have tried these cameras you know it's completely wrong. On one hand...
Between 100-800 the 5d kills the mk4... But from 1600 and up the mk4 demolishes the 5d2. So seeing that the 5d shows noise at 1320 something and the mk4 is 1260 or whatever is just to take it way out of contex.....
Very valid question from the OP. And there is different answers...
I think Canon states two stops as being able to shoot at twice and four times the iso. And they claim the same noise at the highest setting being better than two stops down on the 5d2, which could easily be true.
Now take Lightroom in to the equation, Lr3 and the 5d2 vs the 5d3 with Lr4 gives you easily three stops, so "only for jpeg" two stops is only valid with the DPP software...
Yes I am drawing my own conclusions here, and claiming stuff, because it's friday and I'm enjoying a few beers, cheers everybody! Have a good one!
I just downloaded the high ISO images from DPR. All the images were taken at 3EV, so they are real low light images.
On my screen, I could see the noise at ISO 102400, but the 8.5 X 11 prints were sharp and clean. I then printed 3 more, 51200, 25,600, 12800, and they also suprised me. I could show any of these prints to someone, and they would not suspect that they were high ISO unless they had a magnifier.
These were jpegs with no additional processing by me, I would expect RAW to be better.
I certainly plan to use the ISO 25600 freely whenever I absolutely need it in low light for a fast shutter speed.
Canon has done some real work on the blacks, I can move the black slider in LR4 all the way to the right without seeing any banding.
yes they look more then okay!
Of course I would have been thrilled if the 5DIII was being released for $3000, or even $3200, but since I'll be upgrading from a 40D (that has served me well for the past four years) I feel that it'll be worth the full $3500. If I had a MKII I might feel differently, but this sounds exactly like the FF DSLR I've been waiting for (which is why I just preordered it!).
Samples are herethere's too much NR on all high iso shots..
at least there's no visible banding (not even pushing the jpegs from lightroom).
I am looking between 1DX and 5D mark III.
So looking to see what are the differences between the two. The ones i can see are
10. ISO difference - If the native is 1 stop lower on 5D Mark III, that means most probably the usable ISO is ISO 1600 and can go to ISO 3200/6400 in tough situations. For me coming from 5D, this is atleast 2 stop increase already for Mark III. And for the dance concerts i do take it is sufficient. There is enough lighting on the stage for me to be happy with a 2 stop increase. So professionally i am good. Personally higher ISO will allow me to take photos of parties etc without the flash and capture more of the ambience. So 1DX has an advantage - tiny bit only.
Anything else that is different. Anything else i need to consider?
The 5D3 will not be 2 stops better than 5D in high ISO performance.
Perhaps 1 stop. Perhaps even 1.5 stop as would be extremely good and better than D3s. Certainly not 2 stop.
I can't promise a level of excitement like the C300 announcement, but at least there WILL be a 5D Mark III, so it will be better than Geraldo and the vault.
Official announcement here a bit later today.
Announcements will be on March 2, due to the Academy Awards taking all the news.