Messages

811

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III buffer with Sandisk Extreme III 16g 30MB/s CF card

« on: March 23, 2012, 05:31:46 PM »

thanks for those numbers. I actually have a few of those cards, and they are currently my best. Are these cards not fast enough for video? I'm sort of in the market for memory cards right now as the RAW files from the 5dmk3 are about 4x the size of the RAW files from the 5d. So the way i see it i'm going to need 4x the space i currently use, plus i have to consider video demands.

Yea givin that theres only 15 raw in continuous, video i hear is much more demanding on a card. If you look on the Lexar page they have a 600x and a 1000x speed rated card and they certify them for taking HD video. I dont have either of those but will at some point get one or two 32 gig cards, maybe even a 64gig at some point.

812

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III buffer with Sandisk Extreme III 16g 30MB/s CF card

« on: March 23, 2012, 05:27:51 PM »

Thanks for the real world test results. 

So with a 30MB/s card, you were able to achieve the following frame grabs before buffer overrun,

7 Raw + Large fine
15 Raw
10 med raw
14 small raw /12 small raw

Did I understood you correctly?

Yes, those are the qty of images i got in high speed continuous mode with those various file size settings.

813

EOS Bodies / Re: AF might be way better, sensor barely at all, video mode only half fixed(?)

« on: March 23, 2012, 05:18:46 PM »

I seriously gotta laugh at the misinformation! Check out the samples i just posted.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html

If you want to dispel the "misinformation" that the 5DIII has better image quality than the 5DII, then shouldn't you have taken RAW images from both cameras of the same thing, converted using the same settings in DPP, and then posted JPEG's of that?

Or are you talking about some other misinformation?

Just to appease you event though i am tired i took these in raw and converted to jpg in DPP with no edits.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html

814

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400! UPDATE Raw to jpg hi-iso conversion

« on: March 23, 2012, 05:18:20 PM »

Raw to JPG conversions for those who need it. Colors seem to pop more!!!

815

EOS Bodies / Re: AF might be way better, sensor barely at all, video mode only half fixed(?)

« on: March 23, 2012, 04:42:24 PM »

I seriously gotta laugh at the misinformation! Check out the samples i just posted.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html

If you want to dispel the "misinformation" that the 5DIII has better image quality than the 5DII, then shouldn't you have taken RAW images from both cameras of the same thing, converted using the same settings in DPP, and then posted JPEG's of that?

Or are you talking about some other misinformation?

At least i have samples and i told you exactly what i did and gave you visuals of the results. Until this camera is supported with raw conversion in LR 4 i dont need to concern myself with it. If you want to see my files I took raw and converted in CS5 then you go here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4685.0.html
It takes a lot of time and energy doing all this for people to see so if i dont do it exactly how you think it should be done then i'm sorry about that. I personally don't see diferences in the files from raw that make me think it has a clear advantage or disadvantage.

816

EOS Bodies / 5D Mark III buffer with Sandisk Extreme III 16g 30MB/s CF card

« on: March 23, 2012, 04:02:28 PM »

Using the older Sandisk Extreme III 16 gig CF card at speed rating at 30 MB/s.
This is all high speed shutter shooting mode.
126 Fine Medium jpeg  Tested once all around 3mg files no slowdown in buffer
115 Large Jpeg            Tested once all around 5.8mg files no slowdown in buffer
7 Raw + Large fine      2 times tested same Result
15 Raw                      3 times tested same Result
10 med raw               3 times tested same Result
14 small raw /12 small raw      2 times tested

Real life samples, no i dont want to measure every file size and combo.
It is interesting how the buffer changed when going to med raw, must be more processing involved...
I'd say this 30mb/s speed card is plenty for most situations. I might buy something like a 32 gig thats faster in the future just so I am covered for extreme situations.
For shooting video I def would get like a 600x or 90 MB/s or faster card.

817

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400!

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:58:01 PM »

As u can see even without noise reduction they look great!

818

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400!

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:56:19 PM »

top iso samples with noise reduction turned off.

819

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400!

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:39:43 PM »

I hear ya, i just didn't shoot it that way. Sorry about that. The Point is this is the kinda files you will get. You can take the time pixel peeping your stuff when you get your camera. It just takes a lot of time doing all this just so people can see it all. I havent even bothered turning it completely off, maybe i'll go back and do the highest ones again with nothing on but i didn't want to do raw, i didn't want to maybe give an advantage that way if there were one. I pretty much will shoot it on the settings i shot these images because i hate sharpening and de-noising images and since these look so awesome outta camera what not stick with it.

820

EOS Bodies / Re: AF might be way better, sensor barely at all, video mode only half fixed(?)

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:30:49 PM »

I seriously gotta laugh at the misinformation! Check out the samples i just posted.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,4728.0.html

821

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D III (body only) in stock at Norman.

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:27:59 PM »

I am glad everyone has been heading to Norman Camera, Ive had mine from them for 2 days now.

822

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400!

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:25:20 PM »

All the reading specs, criticizing the camera or Canon because its not 36 mp. All the rumors, all the speculations, all the comments about wedding photographers not using much beyond 800 iso, it just washes right away, seeing is believing!
The articles from a couple Canon Ambassadors talking about the camera were not playing it up so Canon looks good, so we buy more cameras. They gave feedback and obviously its true to the performance they described.
The articles i am referring to are articles Canon Sent me about the 5D Mark III from my Canon Professional Services Membership. Iso 25,600 isn't something I personally wouldn't shy away from using shooting a wedding. I quote Brent Stirton "I shot this Canon [EOS 5D Mark III] up to [ISO] 25,600 and it was, to my mind, at least as good as the file coming out of the EOS 5D Mark II at 1200 to 1600. So that’s a huge leap forward for me.”
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/brent_stirton_shooting_eos_5d_mark_iii.do
&
http://blog.jeffascough.com/photographers/2012/03/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review.html

823

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400!

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:01:36 PM »

last.

824

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400!

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:01:01 PM »

more

825

EOS Bodies / 5D Mark III samples from iso 100 to 102,400! UPDATE Raw to jpg hi-iso also

« on: March 23, 2012, 02:00:10 PM »

Ok, I didn't edit color or anything. These are medium size fine jpegs resized in photoshop to 4x6 120dpi quality of 8. Portrait picture style. Hi iso noise reduction set on low, Basically imported them into canon Imagebrowser ex. Unlike yesterdays samples all the data was imported in since i used canon software instead of unsupported lightroom. I actually have never seen data be removed from files before... UPDATE I opened a file back from the site to look at the data but it doesn't show for some reason but at least i put text on the file image. my copies have all the data but coming back from the site its all wiped...
I am sorry i didnt turn of noise reduction but there are 3 levels and it was set to medium yesterday and today it is on low iso noise reduction. You really wont see their software at work but it is quite outstanding. Honestly if you really needed it at 102,400 they look pretty usable. The detail is quite remarkable! I will have to make several posts to get them all on here since there are limitations so here we go.