Image Quality 5D II vs 5D III

[scottkinfw]

I haven't seen many pics from the 5DIII compared to 5DII to really judge.  Anyone see comparisons and have an opinion?  I know that higher iso's look better from what I have seen, but what about lower iso's?

[DWL60Downer]

Have a look at this video from digitalrev. In the end, it compares still photos between the two 5Ds and the difference is strikingly obvious....

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

[infared]

So from what I am reading and seeing ..there is not that much difference in the IQ at lower (normal) ISO for the Mark III compared to the Mark II.  Kai infers that here...but it is very hard at this point in time to get confirmation on this fact.  Does anyone know or have image comparison samples at ISO 100, 400 etc.

[caMARYnon]

Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II noise
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/high_ISO_noise.shtml

[shizam1]

Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II noise
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Yeah, once again these are JPEG comparisons, and we know the new processor in the 5DIII does a much better job at that.

Still waiting for RAW comparisons.

[JR]

Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II noise
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/high_ISO_noise.shtml

Yeah, once again these are JPEG comparisons, and we know the new processor in the 5DIII does a much better job at that.

Still waiting for RAW comparisons.

Even if those are JPEG, I am really impressed!  Not only do we have 1-2 stops better in ISO performance, but colors rendition and details seem better at all ISOs as well.  I htink it is unrealistic for poeple to expect the low ISO (100-800) of the 5DmkIII to have a smuch details as the D800.  In every like for like comparison I saw the new mkIII seem better then the mkII and worth upgrading in my mind.

[shizam1]

Even if those are JPEG, I am really impressed!  Not only do we have 1-2 stops better in ISO performance, but colors rendition and details seem better at all ISOs as well.  I htink it is unrealistic for poeple to expect the low ISO (100-800) of the 5DmkIII to have a smuch details as the D800.  In every like for like comparison I saw the new mkIII seem better then the mkII and worth upgrading in my mind.

Yeah, it's great if you shoot JPEG, no doubt.  Detail is definitely attibutable to the new RAW conversion process, but I'm not sure about the color rendition.  And that's why I've been shooting RAW for years, the benefits over in-camera processing have been very evident.

But again, those are not RAW, so maybe if you take those same 5DII files in RAW format, and convert them with DPP into a JPEG, you get similar results to the 5DIII JPEG conversion done in the camera itself.