5D Mark III Reviews

[okcamera]

I came across this earlier on Unique Photo's blog:  http://blog.uniquephoto.com/?p=8629.  Comparison of noise levels.  Mark III vs. Mark II.  You can really see a drastic change in the higher ISOs.  Might make the difference between a usable image and a non-usable image.

[EYEONE]

"Hello I'm Gordon Lang, editor of Cameralabs.com.  I'd like to give you a brief video tour around the <insert camera name>. (Holds up camera). Here it is the <insert camera name>"

 

[dadgummit]

My review of the camera will be a week or two away. I really want to use the camera in a bunch of different situations

I am looking forward to it.  I purchased the 70-300L after reading your review and have been very happy.

[mememe]

Now look at the camera-lab test:

The Movie tests are strange. The III makes a darker image at the same settings as the mkII... Iso cheating eh?

[Sptherapper]

http://gizmodo.com/5895239/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review-the-best-dslr-for-shooting-video

Another review

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Yes, the reviews of the video have been pretty POOR as a whole.

Even DP Philip Bloom, the person who basically popularized the video DSLR movement who sold countless cameras for Canon seemed let down. And he's a very optimistic person. The main reason for all the discord is POOR, upscaled 700 lines of resolution. Some people are going as far as saying the new 5D3 has a softer image than the 5D2 because of the way they are dealing with Moire and Aliasing by blurring the pixels.

To Canon, the video people deserved a lot better than this. I'm passing on the 5D3 and hopefully the 4K C-DSLR comes out at NAB. I don't want to buy a Sony FS-100, but I might just have no choice soon as I've waiting so long for a decent video solution from Canon, only to be let down again and again

The ironic thing is they apparently went with 22MP again in order to get perfect video.... so what on earth happened???  The C300 and more internal protectionism???

It's weird that for years Canon gave us substandard AF in anything non 1 series and poor body specs but great sensors and now that they finally give great AF, the sensor seems like yesterday's news.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

HI all. First post after being an avid reader for a long time.

I have posted my own review of the high ISO performance of the 5D Mkiii versus the Mkii, after spening most of today running the tests getting this all done.

Feel free to review it here:

http://www.bellissimaphoto.co.uk/photographers/canon-5d-mkiii-review-vs-5d-mkii-high-iso-test.html

Also, any comments as to the setup or validity are most welcome.

It's been found by a huge number of people that DPP is smearing for no reason the RAWs and when you take that same RAW and convert to DNG usiing the 6.7 DNG converter and open in Lightroom or CS6 the same exact file magically gets way sharper. I think Canon might have rushed their update of DPP which is why it's not available on the web, just used as a temporary stopgap. Seriously I request you rerun your test with the Beta ACR 6.7 and then re-upload your results.

I think it may be to make the 'much improved' high ISO for the 5D3 be 'true'.

[Stephen Melvin]

A few things to note after I've played with mine for 20 minutes:

1. The "low light continuous drive" issue that is there with the 7D (which the Mk III inherits its meter from) isn't there in the Mk III. It's just as fast in low light as in bright.

2. Live View picture taking is much, much faster. You can actually use it to take pictures in environments with motion.

3. CDAF appears to be improved as well. It certainly feels faster, though I haven't compared it directly to my Mk II.

Thought I'd mention these, as everybody else seems to be focused on other things.

Speaking of focus. Oh. My. God. This thing is heaven. I've never seen AF that can do what this does.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Well so far all reports coming in about the AF are that it is totally amazing but the sensor results are looking more and more mediocre and, sadly, the video still seems to be a far cry from sharp  (this could have been the saving grace to make up for the sensor), although if you are willing to accept you are getting maybe a 1280x720p then it does seem to do that very well (and the Nikon D800 res appears to be no better plus it still has aliasing), but it does seem a little weak for 3.5 years....

D800 just got tested at 14.4 stops of dynamic range and even the D4, without Exmor, got 13.1 stops while, according to prelim tests outside of DxO, the 5D3 gets about (normalized the way DxO does to 8MP in a way) 11.75 so Nikon has gotten non-Exmor to 13.1 but Canon still used the same old, same old and the Exmor is truly wow now I mean nearing 3 stops better.

I can't get the high iso D800 results yet since DxO site seems to be overwhelmed but their overall low light score for it is close to the D4, which makes it sound like it might be at least a match for 5D3 there.

[simonfilm]

I wonder what kinda potential this thing has for improvement via firmware updates.....Can they actually affect image quality or is it just minor tweaks?

Canon can do a lot of improvement, but not us. We only can wait and dream. The problem is not if Canon can, but if Canon wants. Think that Digic 5+ is 17 times faster than Digic 4.

Simon.

[psolberg]

it's not so bad. the problem is that people were really hoping this camera would rival a scarlett. what are you people thinking? it is primarity designed for stills, not video. the sun is setting on the HDSRL video world with things like the C300, scarlet, etc.

[AndrewReid]

it's not so bad. the problem is that people were really hoping this camera would rival a scarlett. what are you people thinking? it is primarity designed for stills, not video. the sun is setting on the HDSRL video world with things like the C300, scarlet, etc.

Yes the sun is really setting, apart from for the 99% of people... To whom $16,000 makes for a slightly larger sum of money than the 5D Mark III costs.

DSLR video is not going anywhere dude!

Not until there is a 4K interchangeable lens video camera with large sensor for under $3000 will the masses shifts from DSLR video to that, and when that happens it'll essentially be the same thing anyway!

The form factor, and the stills.

Just my two cents. And Canon probably won't be a player in that market sub $3000 if they carry on with the lukewarm re-heats!

[CaiLeDao]

Well i follow the forum and read all the speculation about how good the mark iii would be... I almost cancelled my pre order based on the chatter.  I have had a 5d mark ii for three years and shot a lot always raw generally iso 100 and avoided moving targets.

To me the mark iii isn't 1 or 2 stops better about its about 100% better, go take some pictures.  I shot some really good candids today around Covent Garden in London, mainly because the camera was quiet and I can crank up the iso, so no flash and no noise to attract attention. 
My real interest in Landscapes and until a dxo raw convertor arrives I wont know the difference in IQ or noise but I always shoot landscapes at iso 100.. (today I was shooting 2000 and the pictures are clean really clean). I do know that as I travel around I only need take one body now, so I save the weight of a 7D from my backpack, as previously i took a 5Dii and a 7D I will now get more candids and avoid the back pain, with the loss of some lens reach.
I really like the mark III, and if the criticism has been as wrong about most other aspects the IQ when the raw convertors get finished and tuned it will be awesome as well.
Yes I do wish it was cheaper and expect the price to drop and will feel the bump, but its taking good pictures.

Now if I can figure out how to magnify live view to focus my TSE accurately I will be really happy.   I know RTFM

[kubrick]

there are some new "far cry from sharp" results at TDP:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx

[Tainted]

I'm primarily a stills guy, so take this from that perspective, but I see a lot to be happy about from a pro photographer's point of view:

- HUGE autofocus improvements, more sensors, faster, better low light sensitivity, better algos, etc.
- Microadjust at Both ends of zoom lenses!
- Dual card slots (huge backup improvement for pros!)
- Stop or two noise improvement in high ISO
- 60p video for slow mo
- headphone jack
- Audio adjust during record
- larger better LCD
- Much better grip (vertical controls!)
- Faster FPS on stills
- more customizable buttons
- Continuous recording (at least more than 12 mins)
- Less moire (I'll take a little more softness to improve that god awful problem any day)

My biggest beef is lack of precision focusing screen.