February 28, 2015, 10:31:03 PM

Show Posts

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.

Topics - LetTheRightLensIn

Pages: 1 [2] 3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX new all-time low-light king?
« on: June 27, 2012, 06:19:28 PM »
Hard to tell from one test of the sort posted, but wow, the high iso looks impressive. It's shocking, but it might actually beat the 5D3 by a good 2/3 of a stop! I'm not sure if it is even possible to build one that would do better without radically different tech. This may be the best we ever get from any standard design. High ISO appears to be insanely good on it. At worst it ties the 5D3/D800/D4 but I think it almost certainly beats them all, some by a margin not even really thought to be entirely realistic. Some insane high iso!

I really don't see the D4 being able to match this level of performance (and it has 2 less MP), although I guess the difference won't be all that large, maybe a solid 1/3 stop behind? (again with 2 less MP though).

(The sad note, for the 5D3 users, is it seems proof that Canon did in fact reserve all of their new sensor fab for the 1DX only and decided to milk the old process one more time for the 5D3 sensor, figuring they could get away with it since they bumped up the body specs so much (but they also bumped up the price so much so.... hmm. Maybe it was all about insuring 5D3 had largest profit margin for a 5 series). Seeing the D800 sensor's quality I wonder if someone in Canon marketing is not ruing their decision.)
(That said the 5D3 is still one of the very best ever at high ISO, if not quite there. At low iso it's a pretty outdated sensor at this point though, at least if you ever shoot scenes with lots of dynamic range.)

EOS Bodies / 5D3 profiles and also 5D3 LCD color accuracy vs others
« on: June 01, 2012, 09:02:00 PM »
It seems to me that the 5D3 LCD shows colors slightly more accurately than the 7D and vastly more accurately than the 5D2. It seems to have about the same general accuracy as a stock new iPad using a stock image viewer. Doesn't quite match a well calibrated monitor though, colors are slight bit different and WB a little moreso. The 5D3 and 7D are close enough to at least be able to get a general in field sense of what WB matches the real life scene though. The 5D2, not so much.

For in cam jpgs/movies on the 5D3 it seems that profile Faithful gives the truest colors overall for stuff shot under direct sunlight or bright indirect sunlight, very late in the day or in deep shade or with odd lighting then it seems Neutral is better overall. Landscapes gives the most bizarre colors, by far, of all the profiles and Portrait the next. All the profiles oversaturate things, Standard and Landscape and Portrait a ton, Faithful a fair amount and Neutral a touch. Contrast -1 to -4 and saturation -1 to -3 is often a bit truer to life, that said, since no camera captures what the real experience is like, sometimes a modest artificially boost can be more natural in the end, it depends.

In ACR, Adobe Standard seems to give the most natural overall colors of all the built-in 5D3 profiles (you may need to knock down saturation a tiny bit though), although I found that under stadium lighting they all went wacky other than Camera Standard.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / A few hours with a 5D3
« on: May 12, 2012, 02:29:33 AM »
The dynamic range on this unit measures even a little bit worse still. a Full 1/3 stop WORSE than my 5D2. Nikon got 2.4 stops better since the 5D2 and Canon got 0.36 worse.  :o  :'( Nikon has about 5 or 6 recent releases, DX and FF, that just destroy the 5D3 for dynamic range. 5D3 even measured a full 0.4 stops worse dynamic range AND with worse banding than a 1Ds3 someone lent me some files from. The 5D3 actually has just about the worst read noise per photosite of all the Canon models. Worse than 40D,50D,60D,7D,1D4,5D2,1Ds3,etc. I had to go back to a 30D to find worse per photosite read noise. Not sure what they did with it in that regard. If they had it with 1D4 per photosite read noise it might have gained almost a half stop of DR compared to the 5D2 instead of losing 1/3 stop.

At ISO 100: Vertical banding seems to me to be at least as present as in the 5D2 although horizontal banding is 100% gone. 7D has the worst vertical banding by a long shot. 1Ds3 has none, the only Canon camera I've tested that has no vertical banding, it does have some horizontal banding but less overall banding than 5D3. The only Canon to really pass the banding test is the 1Ds3 and the 40D isn't bad at all from what I recall, otherwise they all suffer from banding, the 5D3 may be the best of the rest, although that doesn't really say a ton.

Anyway that stuff was all, to one degree or another, already known.

EOS Bodies - For Video / 5D3 short film, quality doesn't look so bad
« on: April 21, 2012, 02:29:48 AM »
Canon 5D Mark III - Copelandia

Make sure to sign in and download the original and then watch that.
He applied 35mm CineGrain.

EOS Bodies / any more word on the 5d3+24-70 II Pro Kit?
« on: April 11, 2012, 06:58:07 PM »
Way back when it was announced they'd have a pro kit for a few hundred off buying them separately but it's been radio silence since.... Anyone heard any updates? Still in the cards? It would help make the 5D3 price seem more reasonable and justifiable.


4k video
crop mode video (arrrrgghh why the heck did Canon marketing reserve the crop mode for the 1D video cam only?!! The 1D Cinema with 4k already offers the extra reach and crispness natively, it's the 5D3 video that desperately could actually make use of the crop mode! Sure the 1D Cinema needs it for those wanting to use non-FF Cinema lenses but otherwise it doesn't need the mode the way the 5D3 does, the 5D3 needs a mode that is crisper and has more reach, the 1D Cinema has that even shooting FF to begin with)


Download the original version to avoid the nasty vimeo compression!

If you get yourself an expensive anamorphic lens and want to shoot those ratios this certainly sharpen things up fully along one axis and improve noise performance yet even more.

Boy he really went wide, WIDE format there. Not the typical 2.35/2.40:1 but 2.66:1.

Looks good!

EOS Bodies - For Video / some 5D3 vs D800
« on: April 04, 2012, 11:18:36 PM »
The F%^&ing Nikon D800 vs. Canon 5D mkIII Shootout

The 5D3 video handily beats the D800 at ISO6400 and wins by a laughable margin at ISO12,800 and up. The D800 looks good to ISO1600 and close to ISO3200 but starts losing noticeably in darker areas by ISO6400 and just turns to junk beyond junk above there, the 5D3 holds together better above ISO3200 to an almost unimaginable degree. (then again you may ask do most people shoot at higher than ISO3200? at times yeah, but it's never really ideal and I'd prefer awesome, perfect ISO100-1600 than 6400+). If you did super low light stuff the 5D3 is clearly the way to go by a million miles.

But man what the heck did Canon do to the 5D3 resolution? The D800 isn't even all that sharp but the 5D3 is just mush (at first when you look a the women on the ground you think the weird checkboard of different colors is just D800 moire but her jacket later gets revealed to have that and the 5D3 doesn't even pick it up at all, it looks 100% white and red? where the heck did the other color checkers go? mushed 100% away!).

What was the whole 22MP for 3x3 about if they get such mush? Where is the mush coming from? It has simply super weak micro-contrast until you get to scales far, far, far below 1920x1080. Luckily it is free enough of moire/aliasing that it takes sharpening well, but most video programs have very old sharpening that is prone to haloes so it's hard to bring back the micro-contrast ideally (and even then the actual res is still a bit low).

Did they gimp it that much to save the C300?? I don't know what's going on. The micro-contrast and res are total let downs.

And where is the cropped video mode? Why no 2x2 sampled mode at 1.6x crop????

Granted the sharpened 5D3 isn't too far behind D800 detail (not that that says much) and with much less moire I think it's better than the D800 for video.

looking at some AF tests on some forums, early tests, rather brief, etc. etc. keep that in mind, hint at a really humungous improvement in AF. In one test a guy focused a fast lens, wide open, barely any DOF on his little girl's eye and the center point 5D2 was dead on sometimes and somewhat off sometimes only truly nailing focus about 50% of the time, the 5D3 was dead on pretty much every frame, considerably better performance; using the left point, the 5D2 was off on by far most frames, looked like 80%+ off, while the 5D3 appeared to be just about dead on on every single frame. :D

So the AF earlier results, at least for non-sports tracking, are showing some very encouraging signs. I also saw one guy post a perfectly focused shot of a backlit shopkeeper with tons of brigher and more contrasty and detailed stuff behind him, a test that canon af has often failed on, certainly below 1 series, so that was looking great too.

OTOH, one of the guys posted a high ISO comparison and yeah the 5D3 was better, but wow it looked closer to only 1/3rd stop better. :(   Granted using ACR is NOT the best way to test and maybe at the super duper high iso above ISO6400 the story would be different. But if this result held up then we have basically the same sensor as the 5D2 with just a few minor tweaks while nikon put much process sensors in the D4 and D800, even the D4 a non-exmor, managed to improve 1 stop low ISO DR over a few years, but Canon not a single bit  :'(. It seems Canon is investing less in sensor fab while charging a lot more for their equipment now.  :-\

So we are facing a new situation, we are like the Nikon of old, body performance may be fantastic but the sensor kinda pales in comparison (although maybe at ISO1600+ it will be top notch current so it may only be behind on one end of the scale, IF it does get to D3s-type leves on the top end that is certainly a nice improvement, no doubt).

Hopefully the more careful tests of DxO will paint a better picture of the High ISO tale though. And we will at least get high ISO up to D3s,D4 standards. This guy's test looked a bit worrisome, looked questionable to even match the D800 at high ISO, but other tests make it seem quite possible. ANd it's all but been established that the D800 will be noticeable better at ISO 100 for scenes having large dynamic range (they really are not that hard to come across, in part, people were so used to thinking them impossible, they don't even see them anymore in their photographic mind's eye and automatically right them off without even thinking about it).

But the early AF tests are looking VERY, VERY good so far. The body performance seems great this time.

ADD: I've since seen reports from a few people who shot a game or two and they said it did better than their 1 series body when it came to AF.

ADD: The video is apparently blurry and not real 1920x1080 again, getting blasted on the video pro blogs apparently, if they couldn't do 3x3 smoothtly since those blocks are too large compared to the AA filter without having to blur down res to stop aliasing then why not offer a second, cropped mode, using 2x2 blocks like the C300? That may have made the video on this totally killer and been better for the wildlife videographers just in general.

EOS Bodies / early EOSHD video report on 5D3, hmmmm
« on: March 20, 2012, 06:55:35 PM »

Wow, a bit hard to believe after the big deal about 22MP for ideal video and image quality that the old GH2 apparently kills it for resolution and it still has some of that non-filmlike very digital-like compression. If the cheap GH2 can use a better compression chip, the 5D3, 3.5 years later still can't?? More internal protectionism? Protect the C300? Not that the Nikon D800 is supposed to be any better, even a bit worse. But many Panny and Sony just make take them both to school for video. I was hoping that the video on the 5D3 would at least totally knock it out of the park. Sounds kinda weak for 3.5 years of development. darrrrrrn.

I had a bad feeling when I heard they decided to use a very old canon video cam image processing chip in the C300 and not a digic 5+.

Hopefully, he had NR on standard or something and with it off the res will come back and this will be another report proven false in the end.

EDIT: I did just find one video that does some hint as possible solid sharpness, a bit hard to tell though.

EOS Bodies / grip gives fps boost on 5D3 to 6.7-6.9fps????????
« on: March 20, 2012, 12:33:01 AM »
A crazy rumor from DPR. But one person says they heard it "somewhere" and another claims that he just went to a demo 3 days ago and the rep told him that the grip increases fps, to something probably about 6.7fps, maybe 6.9.

I'm not sure I buy it, but wow, that would be cool if so. It might also explain all those rumors that had all the 5D3 specs on target but then were off with the fps 6.9fps vs 6.0fps.

If it could do 7fps gripped that would be pretty awesome, you really have yourself a true action cam then (When you are doing serious sports you might grip the body anyway, but unlike 1 series you can then toss the grip for a nice sized camera for everything else). It'll still be awful for high dynamic range shooting at low ISO compared to the D800 but if it has better video, similar high iso, if the AF is awesome, an dif it can hit 7fps gripped it starts to make a bit more sense. It'll still be worse for ISO100-400 landscape stuff and for long reach wildlife stuff but it might be a nicer generalist action/sports/wedding/video cam perhaps.

Probably foolish to get my hopes up over this as it sounds a bit fanciful, but wow if that guy really did hear that from the rep and the rep really did know what he was talking about. There still seem to be a lot more reasons to doubt it though, but still.

Wow, I can't believe something so simple as AutoISO is STILL not usable! Good grief!

1. In Auto ISO M mode there is no EC allowed again! 

2. So then you are like well they added min. shutter speed to Auto ISO now so at least we might be able to often get away with using Av mode instead. BUT, they make the maximum allowed min speed only 1/250th??? They limit it from 1 second to 1/250th?! What!? What does 1/250th do you for action?? And if you are using 1 second long exposures and stuff you surely have enough time to adjust the ISO as needed manually anyway.
Wow. It is so beyond absurd. Why on earth do they limit it? It makes no sense.

And of course will they fix it in firmware? Not unless by new firmware you mean $4500 for the 5D4. (and even then, after almost 20 years dare we hope they finally hit upon a truly usable AutoISO? I'm not sure.)

I mean it would be soooooo easy to fix in firmware and I wouldn't make a big deal, but we all know it's like pulling teeth to get them to fix anything like that in firmware.

At least they did finally decide to listen and outline the histogram so you can see it in bright light but just as I was happy about that and the the AutoISO Av shutter limits then I see min shutter speed can be set from 1 second to 1/250th. arrrrrrrrr I mean they focus the limit on the very speeds where AutoISO is LEAST useful!

EOS Bodies / 5D3 same max dynamic range as the 5D2???
« on: March 08, 2012, 07:29:39 PM »
Assuming the side masking area can be used for the measurement then:

Same DR for 5D3 and 5D2 is what I get. Zero improvement for ISO 100 DR. :(
Wow I had really expected a big improvement. Canon still had a lot of room there to get better.

I think the D800 will quite a lot more maximum dynamic range unless they really messed up the D7000/D3x->D800 Exmor transition.

I just hope that it will turn out the side masking area on the 5D3 images is not valid for this purpose (the top masking area definitely appears to be invalid for this purpose with the 5D3, I just hope same can be said for the side, but it doesn't really look like that will be the case).

On a side note, the SNR might be 1/2 to 2/3rd stops better than the 5D2 though, but that is based off of using ACR which is a sketchy way to compare. High ISO banding appears to be cleaned up on the 5D3 compared to the 5D2, if so and if it is 2/3 better SNR than that is a pretty decent improvement on the high end, but I wonder if Canon has the tech to improve ISO100.

EDIT: I see the older version of the thread got brought back to life so I re-titled this one to not be misleading. I see the new thread got attached to the end of the original thread. Anyway on the new thread it was determined that is much more likely a poor tuning of the in cam jpg sharpening and NR algorithms than anything to do with the black dot issue of the 5D2.

Sorry my mistake. It's probably not a big deal at all. it wont' affect RAW at all. Hopefully they will fine the jpg sharpening/NR before release (these samples were taken months ago apparently). Still not sure why Canon always uses awful sample shots, each camera release seems to lower the bar for the samples they provide.

Wow, after the big deal about the black dots with the 5D2, they post a bunch of 5D3 samples where bright objects have black haloes. The issues looks worse than it ever did with the 5D2.

Hopefully they can fix it again. A bit surprised they have the same sensor issue again.

Pages: 1 [2] 3