September 17, 2014, 05:58:26 PM

Author Topic: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers  (Read 10220 times)

Dan Jurak

  • Guest
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2012, 11:29:26 AM »
The way I see it, you can shoot landscapes with almost any camera.

Obviously, what's best for one photographer is not the best for the next.

For all the hair splitting that goes on about which lens or body is better what is lost is the photos themselves. There are plenty of people who are experts on gear but when you look at their website or portfolio you've gotta give your head a shake.

Forget all the fact, figures and number crunching. This all comes down to personal preference. As a lifetime Canon user, thirty plus years, I think that there are better 35mm digital cameras for the cost and performance than the new Canon. Or for that matter either of the two new Canons.

Just my two cents. Now I'm off to Jasper for a cpl of days of photography after a huge dump of snow. :)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2012, 11:29:26 AM »

RedEye

  • Guest
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #31 on: March 07, 2012, 12:06:08 PM »
I think one area this 'low' MP camera will really shine is in photos of water and other continuously varying contract images, very amazing from the samples i've viewed!

Arkarch

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
    • Karl Buiter Photography
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #32 on: March 07, 2012, 12:35:00 PM »
Arkarch,
I do get your point and understand it. Having better grain/DR at higher ISO is always welcome. It certainly is.
However I would prefer higher resolution/mp in most landscape or product photography situation.
Please compare two photos, one with 22mp and the other with 40mp to see the difference.
Regards,

Yep, and I get your point about high MP.  Having both capabilities would be a potent combination.   

As a current 7D shooter, my first goal is reach FF.  And after several lengthy post-process sessions with DxO, Nik, LR, PS and my NEC wide-gamut to disassemble then reassemble low light shots to dump noise (and there is plenty in the 7D), I am really gun-shy about anything with potential noise.

So for that reason, I do hope that if Canon does come out with a high MP monster - that it has reasonable low light performance.  Otherwise there are many options for high MP later.  Its good to see Nikon at least dare to  enter Digitial MF territory with a DSLR format even if I remain wary on this first attempt.

For now, I think the 5DMIII will serve me well in the Landscape area :)


Landscape ( http://www.buiterphotography.com )
Motorsports ( http://www.buitermotorsports.com )
5DIII, 7D, EF 300/2.8 II IS USM, ZE 21/2.8, ZE 50/2 ZE 100/2, TS-E 24/3.5, EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II, EF 24-105 IS f/4, TC 1.4 III, TC 2.0 III

Arkarch

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
    • Karl Buiter Photography
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #33 on: March 07, 2012, 12:54:56 PM »
Just my two cents. Now I'm off to Jasper for a cpl of days of photography after a huge dump of snow. :)

Thanks Jurak!

Have a great shoot in Jaspar.
Landscape ( http://www.buiterphotography.com )
Motorsports ( http://www.buitermotorsports.com )
5DIII, 7D, EF 300/2.8 II IS USM, ZE 21/2.8, ZE 50/2 ZE 100/2, TS-E 24/3.5, EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II, EF 24-105 IS f/4, TC 1.4 III, TC 2.0 III

jaduffy007

  • Guest
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #34 on: March 07, 2012, 01:10:10 PM »
...


Here's a tip: get a tripod and shoot at ISO 100 more often.

You beat me to it.  High iso and IS lenses are not a substitute for a tripod.

awinphoto

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1991
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #35 on: March 07, 2012, 01:43:20 PM »
...


Here's a tip: get a tripod and shoot at ISO 100 more often.

You beat me to it.  High iso and IS lenses are not a substitute for a tripod.

Tripods, especially for landscapes, gives you that extra second or two or three to look at the scene, evaluate it, "walk the scene" in your minds eye and find that telephone pole or broke down car or whatever that you may not have seen otherwise to make sure your shoot is as good as possible before you capture the image.  It forces you to slow down and be more analytical...
« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 01:50:01 PM by awinphoto »
Canon 5d III, Canon 24-105L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 70-200 F4L, Canon 100L 2.8, 430EX 2's and a lot of bumps along the road to get to where I am.

Kernuak

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #36 on: March 07, 2012, 03:21:27 PM »
A couple of days ago, I wrote a long article on my blog about my first impressions and the insights of a CPS rep, following a one hour presentation/demo and the short play I had with it (minus cards, except ones in a sealed card slot). It was too long to post here, as I'd originally intended, but here is the summary:

Quote
Overall Impression

During the short time I was able to see the 5D MkIII, I was very impressed with the overall feel. The ISO sensitivity and noise levels stand out as some of the main features, but also of course the AF system. This is exactly the same as the 1D X, but is slower due to only having the single processor. For wildlife, I think it is ideal. It isn’t often that the motor drive is needed, I think I can count on both hands in two and a half years, the number of times that I have needed it on the 7D and if the AF matches the specs, then that will be a huge improvement, as will the IQ from the full frame sensor. The downside is the loss of reach from the crop factor, but I can keep the 7D to cover that problem. For landscapes, it will give me what I have now and probably a bit more too, especially if the DR is improved. If I was shooting primarily landscape photography, then it probably wouldn’t be worth the upgrade, but for wildlife, it will expand on what I can achieve, with improved AF and improved ability to shoot crepuscular subjects in low light.

For those who want full frame, but either can’t afford the 1D X or don’t need the extra features the 1D X has and shoot anything other than (or as well as) landscapes, then the 5D MkIII is the obvious upgrade path, but if you need the weather proofing bullet proof AF or any of the other features of the 1D X (such as the new anti-pixel blur), then that is the only option. Many who had ordered two 1D X’s, are now considering changing their pre-orders to one of each camera.

I’m sure there are some things I missed (we elected to skip the video bits) and there are other things that will come to light as more people see the camera and reps become more used to it, but hopefully this gives some insights into my first impression.
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #36 on: March 07, 2012, 03:21:27 PM »

tvde

  • Guest
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #37 on: March 07, 2012, 04:24:56 PM »
Were there even any Nikon landscape photographers before when 12MP was considered the "magic number"?

I actually start to wonder whether there are ANY landscape photographers today using Canon given the fact that Canon doesn't have a 36 MP camera today... :o  Just get out and shoot using this fabulous camera!

rod

  • Guest
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #38 on: March 07, 2012, 05:05:14 PM »
Hello,

I am interested because of the video capabilities of the 5DIII. But I'm also an photographer. When I look at the landscape pictures from the Canon website, hm. I'm not so olverwelmed.

In Lightroom the green plants in picture "Corsica" (50 mm, f8, 1/440 sec) look al little bit muddy, the differentation is not so great. Dito in picture "Slovenia" and the diffreenteation in picture "Colored Leaves" lacks also, the leaves.

I use a calibrated Eizo monitor.

What do you think?

Is there another place, where I can download original files, may be RAWs?

Regards, Rod

PS: Here is the link

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/



Kernuak

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #39 on: March 07, 2012, 05:39:13 PM »
Hello,

I am interested because of the video capabilities of the 5DIII. But I'm also an photographer. When I look at the landscape pictures from the Canon website, hm. I'm not so olverwelmed.

In Lightroom the green plants in picture "Corsica" (50 mm, f8, 1/440 sec) look al little bit muddy, the differentation is not so great. Dito in picture "Slovenia" and the diffreenteation in picture "Colored Leaves" lacks also, the leaves.

I use a calibrated Eizo monitor.

What do you think?

Is there another place, where I can download original files, may be RAWs?

Regards, Rod

PS: Here is the link

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/
I'm not really impressed by any of the sample files for landscapes on either the 5D MkII or D800(E) for different reasons. There are very few decent samples around at the moment. The 5D MkIII ones have apparent heavy noise reduction, the D800(E) ones are soft in the corners and at f/8, which results in the background being out of focus. I think we need to wait for some real reviews, with RAW files. There's no reason to believe it will be worse than the MkII though, particularly judging by the crude tests I saw on the back of the screen.
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

Arkarch

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
    • Karl Buiter Photography
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #40 on: March 07, 2012, 06:02:49 PM »

Regarding official "Sample Pictures".

The Marketing Departments of both Canon and Nikon are Fail.

There are several efforts out there, and no doubt we'll start getting nice stuff once the community has a chance.

The BS argument not to take RAW images because you can't convert them yet - and to make that argument means they were not prepared for the question.  I guess too many consumer-oriented marketing hacks in the pro-line divisions.
Landscape ( http://www.buiterphotography.com )
Motorsports ( http://www.buitermotorsports.com )
5DIII, 7D, EF 300/2.8 II IS USM, ZE 21/2.8, ZE 50/2 ZE 100/2, TS-E 24/3.5, EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II, EF 24-105 IS f/4, TC 1.4 III, TC 2.0 III

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4506
    • View Profile
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #41 on: March 07, 2012, 06:09:51 PM »
...


Here's a tip: get a tripod and shoot at ISO 100 more often.

You beat me to it.  High iso and IS lenses are not a substitute for a tripod.

no but there are places you are not allowed to take a tripod and so can only shoot handheld
so its good to have the option if you need it :D
APS-H Fanboy

te4o

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #42 on: March 07, 2012, 06:35:30 PM »
One question, friends:
Is there any advantage of using ISO>100 for tripod work in landscapes: i.e. do you get more DR or colors? I mean, the logic says NO but I was wondering - from the initial reports (?) the 5D3 has same/similar noise as 5D2 at 100 ISO, no horizontal banding and less vertical. So, if 80% of what I do is tripod based, I'd see no big improvements on the 5D3 for that?
5D3 (04/12), Carl Zeiss ZE 21, 35/1.4, 50MP, 100MP
Canon 135/2, Sigma 85/1.4
SONY RX100

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #42 on: March 07, 2012, 06:35:30 PM »

willhuff.net

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #43 on: March 07, 2012, 06:39:06 PM »
I think the weather sealing and dynamic range increase (if there is any) would make this a much better landscape camera than the 5DII.

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #44 on: March 07, 2012, 06:48:16 PM »
One question, friends:
Is there any advantage of using ISO>100 for tripod work in landscapes: i.e. do you get more DR or colors? I mean, the logic says NO but I was wondering - from the initial reports (?) the 5D3 has same/similar noise as 5D2 at 100 ISO, no horizontal banding and less vertical. So, if 80% of what I do is tripod based, I'd see no big improvements on the 5D3 for that?

Has the 5D3 got better IQ at iso 100 than the 5D2?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I think the 5D mkIII suits landscape photographers
« Reply #44 on: March 07, 2012, 06:48:16 PM »