High ISO comparo: 5DIII vs. D800

[Tuggem]

From the measurment performed on D800 it seems to be about 1 stop from an idel FF with bayer sensor.
So it quite obvious that it is impossible to be 1 stop better than D800 and if some photos would suggest such a thing then something is wrong.
We know D800 is very good at high ISO. Perhaps 5D3 is slighly better, perhaps it's slighly worse. It will be less than 1/2 stop either way.

Rereading the entire thread more carefully, I don't think that's what the thread was saying. One post she said that the D4 line was 2.2db from being the perfect sensor which is what I think you are referring to, but only at the highest EV levels.  None of the sensors are anywhere near the ideal FF bayer sensor at low EV levels.  They all exhibit a lot of noise. 

This is the quote:

"Just draw a parallel line to the D4 graph in the EV +1 to +3 range, 2.2dB above the D4, then extend it to the left. That's a 100% QE sensor with no read noise.
D4: Only 2.2dB from ideal (for Bayer sensors)!"

She's saying to draw a parallel line based on the D4 graph in the EV +1 to +3 range... not considering the negative values.  In otherwords, a perfect Bayer sensor would have the same noise level as a D4 at + 3 EV as it does in the -10 EV.  Obviously no sensor is even close to that, therefore all sensors have A LOT of room for improvement.

Yes, its correct that 1 step is valdid for about down to -3EV and in thery a lot could be improved in dark shadows.

[Tuggem]

Canon 5dMarkus the 3rd. ISO shoots:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/1779787/iso-50?inalbum=canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples

Seems reasonable since Canon made clear they had 2 stops improvement in JPG thanks to improved noise reduction processing. Even though this is way to much noise reduction its gives reason to be quite hopefull.

[swiss]

Let the DXO guys do their job. These two cameras are good in their own right. I am happy with what Canon has done as thats the camp I am in (lenswise).

That's the point, and, as long as the cost of the 5D3 is over 3k I will invest in additional glas... Hope the new 100-400 is comming soon... 

[Tuggem]

Well, as expected on 100% comparison 5dIII blows D800 out of the water. It's a t least 1 stop better, but we must not forget that scaled down images just might look pretty much the same, as the D800 has so much detail captured.

Wondering how do they compare scaled down???

What I'm afraid will happen to the d800 is that many wedding photographers won't need it as it is too slow and the files are too big, and many are already shooting Cannon, which has better lenses up it's line (don't argue). Fashion community might embrace it.

Serious people always only compares att same sizes.

My guess, as I already stated, is that it will be a marginal difference between 5D3 and D800. I dont understand all of those who on before hand assumed that Canon had made no improvement and would be inferior. It doesn't take much of an improvement from 1D4 to be on pair with D800.
If I must make a bet which will have the edge I put the money on D800 but I will not put more than a dollar.

I hope Canon 5D3 will have 1 stop of improvement from 5D2, even though it sounds unrealistic, but I will be OK with that its equal or better than D800.
If they have surpassed 1 stop of improvement I will just bow for them and go into a condition of euphoria.

Canon has already confirmed themselves that the improvement from 5D2 is not 2 stop so that I think people shall stop hoping for.

[Dovepixel]

The tests on DPreview are done with good lighting, the noise will not be that pronounced.
Here are some tests done by others, probably less financially orientated as DPreview:

http://www.canonklub.cz/clanky/prvni-test-eos-5d-mk-iii-na-sum

[DavidRiesenberg]

The DPR tests are hardly in good lighting at 3EV. If anything, shooting at ISO 25600 with shutter speed of 1/4000 is hardly a real life situation. In the end the results are very impressive in both tests.

[kenraw]

what is the point of constantly comparing these two cameras?
you either have a canon or Nikon and get on with it.
or if your that bothered buy one of each.

lets get out and shoot already.

[psolberg]

Well, as expected on 100% comparison 5dIII blows D800 out of the water. It's a t least 1 stop better, but we must not forget that scaled down images just might look pretty much the same, as the D800 has so much detail captured.

Wondering how do they compare scaled down???

What I'm afraid will happen to the d800 is that many wedding photographers won't need it as it is too slow and the files are too big, and many are already shooting Cannon, which has better lenses up it's line (don't argue). Fashion community might embrace it.

could not dissagree more.

The same could have been said of the 5DmkII. The D700 was faster and produced cleaner images and smaller files. did that stop the 5DII? How many weddings were shot with the SLOW 5DmkII? I'll tell you that more that I can count. It seems every wedding photog with a canon set had a 5DmkII and was ok with the speed. As you said, at 100% the 5DIII is clearly better and has ISO ranges that are not possible with the D800, althought the quality of these is questionable.

I suspect that downscaling a 36MP file to 22 will improve a the images about a stop or so just like scaling down the 5DmkII images to 12MP improves them as well. The argument was always made that the 5DmkII gave you the option to scale down when you needed it, and preserve high resolution when you didn't. The same argument now applies to the D800.

Ultimately, I think the biggest gains of the 5DIII are for sports and action photographers that need a lot of speed. Wedding and portrait photographers made livings with "slow" 5DmkIIs so why can't D800 photogs? With the cost per gigabyte always dropping down, 36MP files are not that much of an issue compared to 22MP files. It is just 1/3 more pixels.

So while I totally see that sports photographers will enjoy the new 5DIII over a D800, I don't think the new model has anything over the D800 and in fact, I think the lower MP for a market that is based on a lot of printing and cropping may actually make the D800 the better camera.

[K-amps]

Canon 5dMarkus the 3rd. ISO shoots:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/1779787/iso-50?inalbum=canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples

+1: I am no PP expert but I took the ISO 102k image and did some very basic PP to it. Resize/ Nik's define for noise/ contrast adj and got this usable image. It is not something I would consider client worthy but considering I get images like this from my 5Dc at 800-1600 ISO, thats about 6 stops better ISO perf than my current gear ... impressed!

[K-amps]

Look at 5:36, that tells me what I needed to know...

Canon 5D Mark III Hands-on First Impression	Small | Large

[MikeHunt]

Canon have provided a sample video with the 5D3 coupled to various EF L lenses, some of which was shot at ISO 3200 and some at ISO 6400 (see below). Now compare that to any preview Nikon D800 HD video that is available

Canon 5D3 HD Sample Video	Small | Large

[scrappydog]

Look at 5:36, that tells me what I needed to know...

Yep, me too.

[cps_user]

So while I totally see that sports photographers will enjoy the new 5DIII over a D800, I don't think the new model has anything over the D800 and in fact, I think the lower MP for a market that is based on a lot of printing and cropping may actually make the D800 the better camera.

as a wedding photographer, I think I still prefer the 5d III (not just because it'll fit my EF lenses  ) since at this point 36mp raw files would not be very great for my workflow: I would need more memory cards and more memory card swapping, file ingestion for making a same day slide show to be played in the evening would take much longer (I usually have only an hour for making this) and I work off the NAS so larger files would slow me down a bit there.

I don't crop a lot and what's left is almost every time more than large enough for making 11x14 inch wedding albums (largest size I do) and nice enlargements for clients.

in the future, yes maybe larger files would be great, but at this point as a wedding photog, I'm quite happy with this.

[RafaPolit]

...Ultimately, I think the biggest gains of the 5DIII are for sports and action photographers that need a lot of speed. Wedding and portrait photographers made livings with "slow" 5DmkIIs so why can't D800 photogs? With the cost per gigabyte always dropping down, 36MP files are not that much of an issue compared to 22MP files. It is just 1/3 more pixels...

I don't think this encompasses the whole picture... It's not the storage of the files, either on camera or inside a hard drive, that is the issue but actually working with those files.  At 18MP, when you start adding layers of adjustments and corrections in photoshop, for instance, the resources on the computer start to see themselves heavily demanded.  At 22MP things get much worse, but at 36MP, unless you have heaps and heaps of RAM, you will be struggling with any change you want made, and probably could go for a cup of coffee when applying a heavy filter such as lens blur or radial blur.

Lightroom, also RAM hungry, will really struggle loading and developing 36MP images to a degree I would consider beyond reasonable limits.

Noise wise, I'm impressed with what I see on the 5DmkIII, and it's certainly more than 1 stop better than the 5DII under any circumstance.  But it's too early to draw final conclusions as very little real samples are out there.

Best regards,
Rafa.

[V8Beast]

In light of these D800 raws that I dug up, I might have to retract my worthless opinion. There's a link to download the raws and jpegs in a zip file.

http://www.arekgmurczyk.pl/

In comparing jpegs, the 5DIII files look like they have a clear edge, but compared to this set of raw files on Imaging Resource that have already been posted, both cameras appear equal in the noise department:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5d-mkiii/canon-5d-mkiiiTHMB.HTM

It's an apples to oranges comparison since they aren't images of the same subject/scene, but I have to admit that this is a surprisingly good showing by the D800. I was expecting the 5DIII to beat it by a comfortable margin due to the disparity in megapixel count.

In comparing the D800's raws to its jpegs, the noise is pretty similar. I think this validates people's suspicions that Canon is apply some heavy in-camera noise reduction in its jpeg files.