July 31, 2014, 05:08:15 PM

Author Topic: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III  (Read 5832 times)

irena

  • Guest
$0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« on: March 24, 2012, 12:59:48 AM »
Very briefly, since this isn't necessarily objective nor scientific... but I feel that the Mark III is orders of magnitude better than the Mark II.

I bought a Mark II at the beginning of the month wanting to save money and/or spend the difference in price on better glass.  It's the same dilemma I see posted about time and time again. 

Autofocus: I'm a portrait photographer (children and newborns, primarily) who is getting back into weddings, and I have to say that the new autofocus makes a WORLD of difference in the ratio of usable photos.  In editing after a simple demo session with my own son, I only eliminated a handful of photos due to focus misfire, as opposed to the 1/3 I usually  do with the Mark II.  This will make a huge difference in saleable prints.  The same goes for the noise level in higher ISOs.  ISO 3200 looks like ISO 200 on my old 30D (likely much better).

Metering, Sensor, & IQ: I don't know what it is, but even though I shoot manual, the contrast and color quality of my shots came out so perfect that I could get away with no post processing in Lightroom if I was feeling lazy.  That's a huge time savings in workflow.  This makes a big difference when sorting through 3-400 images per shoot.

Mind you, I just upgraded from a 30D to a 5D Mark II just this month, and that upgrade didn't make me as giddy as the move from the Mark II to the III.  And this is after only 20 minutes of shooting.  I'm sure I'll have more opinions in the next few days.


canon rumors FORUM

$0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« on: March 24, 2012, 12:59:48 AM »

Bosman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 879
    • View Profile
    • Bosman Photography
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2012, 12:32:12 PM »
Very briefly, since this isn't necessarily objective nor scientific... but I feel that the Mark III is orders of magnitude better than the Mark II.

I bought a Mark II at the beginning of the month wanting to save money and/or spend the difference in price on better glass.  It's the same dilemma I see posted about time and time again. 

Autofocus: I'm a portrait photographer (children and newborns, primarily) who is getting back into weddings, and I have to say that the new autofocus makes a WORLD of difference in the ratio of usable photos.  In editing after a simple demo session with my own son, I only eliminated a handful of photos due to focus misfire, as opposed to the 1/3 I usually  do with the Mark II.  This will make a huge difference in saleable prints.  The same goes for the noise level in higher ISOs.  ISO 3200 looks like ISO 200 on my old 30D (likely much better).

Metering, Sensor, & IQ: I don't know what it is, but even though I shoot manual, the contrast and color quality of my shots came out so perfect that I could get away with no post processing in Lightroom if I was feeling lazy.  That's a huge time savings in workflow.  This makes a big difference when sorting through 3-400 images per shoot.

Mind you, I just upgraded from a 30D to a 5D Mark II just this month, and that upgrade didn't make me as giddy as the move from the Mark II to the III.  And this is after only 20 minutes of shooting.  I'm sure I'll have more opinions in the next few days.
Congrats on the discovery process! :D
Bosman Photography www.bosmanphotography.com, Fast Photo Pro www.fastphotopro.com
Follow Bosman Photography on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Bosman.Photography
Sports Photography  Follow Fast Photo Pro on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Fast.Photo.Pr

Seamus

  • Guest
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2012, 12:43:23 PM »
The best review yet! Thanks Irena, I think I will be just as excited when mine arrives in a few days. Love to hear more about your experience, the excitement is contagious! Keep on posting. Thanks again.

Arkarch

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 174
    • View Profile
    • Karl Buiter Photography
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2012, 01:11:45 PM »
Great Review!  Yes, I agree.  Got my 5DmIII and last night went out to the Las Vegas strip. 

The AF was deadon and quick - it was difficult to throw it off even when looking at darker areas.

I was surprised by the white balance - it was great in challenging conditions.  My friend's D7000 kept going warm.

And then in the Conservatory (now in Spring mode), it was fun shooting handheld with the 5DmIII and the 70-200 2.8 II.  I was mostly at ISO 1600 and felt no pressure to go to 3200 if I needed to to freeze the moving Dutch windmill blades or water fountains.   

We did several test shots of the Paris "Hot Air Balloon" logo sign from the top of the Bellagio parking garage.  The dark blues and golden sun symbols - not directly lit at night - were very readable at 12800 ISO - some noise in the darker area.  Whereas my friends D7000 the symbols were completely lost in the noise.

Quality of shots / keepers  - focus and headroom to find it - much better than my 7D - where I would have needed to tripod for longer exposures - with the mill blades no doubt motion blurred.

Very controlled lighting contrasts between the dark and the intense strip lighting.  Some but not annoying blowout.

Normally I always shoot RAW, but I can now see a reason to send JPEG's off to the SD card;  In many cases the JPEGs were good for the 'catalog' shots.  In Post-  I think less need to rescue images.  More time to polish your best.


« Last Edit: March 24, 2012, 01:24:27 PM by Arkarch »
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

Seamus

  • Guest
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2012, 01:22:40 PM »
Good stuff guys! Any comments on software issues? Lots of issues getting posted... What are your thoughts so far?

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4359
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2012, 02:15:54 PM »
My friend's D7000 kept going warm.

It's interesting to read about the 5d3, I might get one used when the 5dx is out in a year or so... but when comparing it to anything, it's still useful to have in mind that you get nearly 3 d7000 bodies or 2 5d2 bodies for one 5d3, so the question is "is it double or triple as good?", too.

JR

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1244
    • View Profile
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2012, 02:17:20 PM »
Got my 5DmkIII this afternoonn and will shoot my daugther birdthay with it tonight!
1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, and a whole bunch of Nikon lenses

canon rumors FORUM

Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2012, 02:17:20 PM »

Daniel Flather

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 850
    • View Profile
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2012, 02:59:31 PM »
Coming from a 50D the AF on the 5D3 is a HUGE leap.  I'm loving the silent mode of the 5D3, and did I mention the AF? 
| 5D3 | 8-15L | 24L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 100 macro | 200/2L | EOS M | 22 STM |

sheedoe

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2012, 03:17:49 PM »
Got my 5DmkIII this afternoonn and will shoot my daugther birdthay with it tonight!

Congrats on the 5D Mark III and wishing your daughter a very happy birthday. But I think you have gotten the better gift this year  ;D. Atleast she'll have some nice pics that she'll appreciate for sure.
Canon- 5D II x2 | 70D | 8-15mm f4L Fisheye | 16-35mm f/2.8L II | 24-70mm f/2.8L II | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 24mm f/1.4L II | 35mm f/1.4L | 50mm f/1.2L | 85mm f/1.2L II |100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | 600EX-RT x3 | 580EX II | ST-E3 RT | EOS M w/22mm Lens | Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 | Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 | GH4

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3310
    • View Profile
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2012, 03:21:33 PM »
Very briefly, since this isn't necessarily objective nor scientific... but I feel that the Mark III is orders of magnitude better than the Mark II.

I bought a Mark II at the beginning of the month wanting to save money and/or spend the difference in price on better glass.  It's the same dilemma I see posted about time and time again. 

Autofocus: I'm a portrait photographer (children and newborns, primarily) who is getting back into weddings, and I have to say that the new autofocus makes a WORLD of difference in the ratio of usable photos.  In editing after a simple demo session with my own son, I only eliminated a handful of photos due to focus misfire, as opposed to the 1/3 I usually  do with the Mark II.  This will make a huge difference in saleable prints.  The same goes for the noise level in higher ISOs.  ISO 3200 looks like ISO 200 on my old 30D (likely much better).

Metering, Sensor, & IQ: I don't know what it is, but even though I shoot manual, the contrast and color quality of my shots came out so perfect that I could get away with no post processing in Lightroom if I was feeling lazy.  That's a huge time savings in workflow.  This makes a big difference when sorting through 3-400 images per shoot.

Mind you, I just upgraded from a 30D to a 5D Mark II just this month, and that upgrade didn't make me as giddy as the move from the Mark II to the III.  And this is after only 20 minutes of shooting.  I'm sure I'll have more opinions in the next few days.

It seems the AF is really getting raves. Great stuff.

melbournite

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2012, 03:51:11 PM »
Good stuff guys! Any comments on software issues? Lots of issues getting posted... What are your thoughts so far?

Not with the camera but yes, Aperture or Lightroom will not recognise my RAW's yet!.  Therefore I have only been shooting in JPG - something I never do, not even at home.  So it's a bit frustrating not being able to do direct comparisons with images shot with my MkII at varying ISO's.  Nonetheless, I am blown away by the following:

-high ISO performance (in JPG at least)
-focusing speed and functionality
-new buttons and layout (on back)
-(and as suggested above) AWB looks beautiful


DarkKnightNine

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 170
  • The best camera is the one that's with you.
    • View Profile
    • Marven Payne Creative Visuals
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2012, 04:07:27 PM »
Very briefly, since this isn't necessarily objective nor scientific... but I feel that the Mark III is orders of magnitude better than the Mark II.

I bought a Mark II at the beginning of the month wanting to save money and/or spend the difference in price on better glass.  It's the same dilemma I see posted about time and time again. 

Autofocus: I'm a portrait photographer (children and newborns, primarily) who is getting back into weddings, and I have to say that the new autofocus makes a WORLD of difference in the ratio of usable photos.  In editing after a simple demo session with my own son, I only eliminated a handful of photos due to focus misfire, as opposed to the 1/3 I usually  do with the Mark II.  This will make a huge difference in saleable prints.  The same goes for the noise level in higher ISOs.  ISO 3200 looks like ISO 200 on my old 30D (likely much better).

Metering, Sensor, & IQ: I don't know what it is, but even though I shoot manual, the contrast and color quality of my shots came out so perfect that I could get away with no post processing in Lightroom if I was feeling lazy.  That's a huge time savings in workflow.  This makes a big difference when sorting through 3-400 images per shoot.

Mind you, I just upgraded from a 30D to a 5D Mark II just this month, and that upgrade didn't make me as giddy as the move from the Mark II to the III.  And this is after only 20 minutes of shooting.  I'm sure I'll have more opinions in the next few days.




I couldn't agree more. I shot with the Mark II only once and disregarded it as an unusable camera for my professional use (personal taste). After shooting with 1D bodies all of my career I was interested to see what all the fuss was about, but the AF irritated me so much that I vowed to never use it again.


Today I picked my 5D Mark III and 600EX-RT Speedlite. After picking up my Mark III, I had dinner with a friend in a dimly lit restaurant and decided to shoot some snap shots of her (too anxious to wait until I got home). Haven't pixel peeped any images yet but to my necked eye the IQ looks to be excellent. The AF is leagues above the Mark II but I'm still not sure if it's better than my trusty old 1D Mark IV. Only more shooting experience with it will tell. So far I would have to say I'm very happy with my purchase. The new Speedlite does a great job of mixing fill flash with ambient light.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2012, 04:10:08 PM by DarkKnightNine »
Canon 1DX, Canon 5D Mark III, EF 85mm F1.2L II USM, EF 100mm F2.8L IS USM Macro, EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM, EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM, EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM, 600EX-RT Speedlites, Profoto Studio Strobes, and a whole lot of boat load of light modifiers.

irena

  • Guest
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2012, 09:33:00 PM »
Low light performance is amaaaaazing.  I'm focusing in a dark room lit only by a dimmed light through the door.  Incredible.  Receptions are going to be a breeeze. :)

And I wanted to share just how awesome my "straight from camera" shots were.  These had no post processing.  Not sure if picasa saved the exif data, but here we go:


ISO 400 50mm at f/1.2 1/100
Not perfectly sharp, but the metering came out fantastic for what I wanted.  My son definitely wanted me to put the camera away but let me take a few shots anyway.  Cloudyish day, close to sunset, and yet it looks like it could have been midafternoon.



ISO 800 50mm f/2.0 1/100
This one is pretty sharp for handheld on the 50mm 1.2 (which is notoriously soft). 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2012, 09:33:00 PM »

Stephen Melvin

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2012, 09:39:23 PM »

My friend's D7000 kept going warm.

It's interesting to read about the 5d3, I might get one used when the 5dx is out in a year or so... but when comparing it to anything, it's still useful to have in mind that you get nearly 3 d7000 bodies or 2 5d2 bodies for one 5d3, so the question is "is it double or triple as good?", too.

After playing with mine for a day and a half, my answer is "yes." It's a tremendous upgrade from the Mk II.

Fleetie

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Watching for pigs on the wing
    • View Profile
    • My Facebook
Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2012, 09:48:00 PM »
Coming from a 50D the AF on the 5D3 is a HUGE leap.  I'm loving the silent mode of the 5D3, and did I mention the AF?
It's like being flippin' James Bond! I have fitted a silencer to my camera, and I shall be shooting you covertly!

I love the silent mode! Not because I really need it most of the time; it's just sexy!
Canon 5D3  ,  70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II ,  24-105mm f/4 L IS  ,  50mm f/1.4  ,  85mm f/1.8 ,  EF 2x III
Olympus OM2-SP , 50mm f/1.2 , 55mm f/1.2 , 50mm f/1.4 Silvernose , 135mm f/2.8 , 28mm f/2.8

canon rumors FORUM

Re: $0.02 on the difference between the Mark II and Mark III
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2012, 09:48:00 PM »