August 23, 2014, 05:31:33 AM

Author Topic: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison  (Read 6820 times)

dswatson83

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« on: March 28, 2012, 10:23:13 AM »
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/10

compared to the 5D mark II and D800, the D800 raw files suffer noise even more than the 5D mark II! The mark III seems to be about .5-1 stop better as far as raw files go from the Mark II. Everything seems sharp.

dswatson83

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2012, 11:10:13 AM »
I'm actually a little disappointed from these noise tests with raw files. It beats the D800, 7D, and 5D mark II but not by much. Looks like the Mark 3 is the best by about .5 stop (and only at high ISO), then the mark II, then the D800, then the 7D which is about a stop below the mark 3. The biggest differences seem to be a usable 12,800 iso vs the other cameras that are not...but on the raw files, the difference isn't huge. This is no Nikon D3S but then again it is 22MP which is still very large.

Astro

  • Guest
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2012, 11:27:18 AM »
i saw this in the comments.

compare it to the 550D sample:

http://i.imgur.com/AYQoL.jpg

mhm.... :

http://i.imgur.com/KHNeA.jpg


after having a close look at the samples i have to say while the 5D MK3 is sure a great camera the maximum IQ has not much (if at all) improved for canon over the last years.
i don´t speak about HIGH ISO.. i speak about ISO 100-400 for maximum IQ.

i don´t realy need high iso.
i checked my database and only 5% of my 43542 images are shot with an ISO higher then 800.
most of my pictures are landscapes, still life studio shots or portraits.



« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 11:39:43 AM by Astro »

skitron

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2012, 12:40:49 PM »
All I can say is I sure am glad I bit on the 5D2 for $1999 bundled with about $350 street value of software that I actually use. 5D3 looks slightly better in RAW but not even close to twice as much $ better. AF isn't much a problem so far with 5D2, nothing to write home about but useable for me. I'd say the 5D3's biggest problem is price point.
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4 DG, Canon TC 1.4x III

awinphoto

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1983
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2012, 12:46:13 PM »
I'm actually a little disappointed from these noise tests with raw files. It beats the D800, 7D, and 5D mark II but not by much.

To be honest, i've mentioned and so have others that with these cameras now-a-days, things are getting so tight, so competitive, so close that from this point forward, I doubt you will ever really see, in raw terms, any clear hands down superior camera given similar generations of camera...  things are so close and so minimal, the difference between 2 already very spectacular sensors are probably going to get smaller and smaller as we progress with digital cameras and photography. 
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.

Canon-F1

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 715
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2012, 01:41:03 PM »

compare it to the 550D sample:

http://i.imgur.com/AYQoL.jpg

yep that does not look good.
6D, 5D MK2, 7D, 550D... a lot of Glass.

helpful

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 199
  • Ecclesiastes 3:11
    • View Profile
5DIII, 5DII, 7D x5, 6D, T2i, T3, 1D X, 10-22mm, 16-35mm II, 18-55mm II, 18-135mm IS x2, 70-200mm f/2.8L II, 24mm f/1.4L II, 50mm f/1.4, 50mm 1/1.8 II x2, 85mm f/1.8 x2, 100mm f/2 x2, 135mm f/2L x2, 200mm f/2.8L II x2, 1.4X III, 2.0X II, 60mm f/2.8 Macro, etc. only had room to list a few Canon items

SpartanWarrior

  • Guest
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2012, 02:47:48 PM »
Guy's don't forget though the 5D II also has a slower shutter speed than the 5D III, I kind of think the 5D III has about 0.5-1 stop advantage to the 5D II.

VirtualRain

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2012, 02:52:14 PM »
I'm actually a little disappointed from these noise tests with raw files. It beats the D800, 7D, and 5D mark II but not by much. Looks like the Mark 3 is the best by about .5 stop (and only at high ISO), then the mark II, then the D800, then the 7D which is about a stop below the mark 3. The biggest differences seem to be a usable 12,800 iso vs the other cameras that are not...but on the raw files, the difference isn't huge. This is no Nikon D3S but then again it is 22MP which is still very large.

Are we looking at the same images?  Looking at their 100% crop of the coins... 5D3 at 25K looks about the same as the 7D at 3200.  And, the 5D3 at 12.8K looks much better than the 7D at 3200.

In general, I've noticed that looking at 100% crops of the 5D3 reveals obvious noise at high ISOs, but it's of a much more palatable variety and maintains much better contrast and sharpness than any other camera, especially my 7D.

I see myself using ISO 12,800 regularly and 25K in a pinch on the 5D3 where I am not happy with the noise at 3200 on my 7D and try to stick to max of 1600 ISO there.  That's an effective 3 stop improvement for me.

« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 03:00:55 PM by VirtualRain »
Canon 5D Mark III, 35L, 85L, 24-105L, 70-300L


shizam1

  • Guest
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2012, 03:17:46 PM »
Unless you shoot JPEG, make sure you select RAW to compare the two cameras.

With RAW selected, and ISO 800, the 5DII actually looks sharper than the 5DIII... I wonder what method they used to do the conversion?

helpful

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 199
  • Ecclesiastes 3:11
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2012, 03:22:55 PM »
I'm actually a little disappointed from these noise tests with raw files. It beats the D800, 7D, and 5D mark II but not by much. Looks like the Mark 3 is the best by about .5 stop (and only at high ISO), then the mark II, then the D800, then the 7D which is about a stop below the mark 3. The biggest differences seem to be a usable 12,800 iso vs the other cameras that are not...but on the raw files, the difference isn't huge. This is no Nikon D3S but then again it is 22MP which is still very large.

Are we looking at the same images?  Looking at their 100% crop of the coins... 5D3 at 25K looks about the same as the 7D at 3200.  And, the 5D3 at 12.8K looks much better than the 7D at 3200.

In general, I've noticed that looking at 100% crops of the 5D3 reveals obvious noise at high ISOs, but it's of a much more palatable variety and maintains much better contrast and sharpness than any other camera, especially my 7D.

I see myself using ISO 12,800 regularly and 25K in a pinch on the 5D3 where I am not happy with the noise at 3200 on my 7D and try to stick to max of 1600 ISO there.  That's an effective 3 stop improvement for me.

I agree. I think that there is some confusion about sharpness vs. noise. Sharpness is merely a matter of lenses, focus, and image software processing. The AA filter is not going to play that big of a role in the D800 vs. 5D3 except when it is completely removed. All these images could be made to appear much sharper if someone simply used Lightroom to sharpen for screen display. When strictly talking about noise, someone needs to look at the shadow and the blacks, and at colors for chroma noise (odd splotches of color in areas of a single color, ideally looking at multiple patches of different colors in the image). Sensors always have more green in a Bayer array, so it is better to look at red or blue to see chroma noise. Noise always tends to go down in brighter parts of an image (even at high ISO everything is blown out white with a bright enough exposure, so the noise goes away).

This is a center crop of an image at ISO 4,000 from a Nikon D7000 (night softball game). It is simply to demonstrate that ISO 4,000 of the D7000 is the same as ISO 1,600 of the Canon 7D (basketball game photo). Both of the images are mine--I have obscured the watermark only to keep my privacy.

I have looked at all the samples and as near as I can tell the 5D3 does have at least 2 stops lower noise than the 5D2, and at ISO 12,800 should perform about the same as the Nikon D7000 at ISO 4,000.

For any Canon 7D shooters out there, I would recommend the 5D3 has a must-have upgrade. Anyone wondering whether to buy the 7D or the 5D3 should absolutely go with the 5D3 if you can afford it.

The Canon 7D was simply unbelievable in almost every aspect, and it has filled in just as good as a full-frame camera in many situations for me. It is pretty amazing that another camera came out that was 1 1/3 stops better (Nikon D7000), and it is like a miracle that another camera exists which is 3 full stops better than the 7D (3 stops is eight times better, for those who don't know the vernacular). Don't hesitate to purchase the Canon 5D Mark III!
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 03:24:58 PM by helpful »
5DIII, 5DII, 7D x5, 6D, T2i, T3, 1D X, 10-22mm, 16-35mm II, 18-55mm II, 18-135mm IS x2, 70-200mm f/2.8L II, 24mm f/1.4L II, 50mm f/1.4, 50mm 1/1.8 II x2, 85mm f/1.8 x2, 100mm f/2 x2, 135mm f/2L x2, 200mm f/2.8L II x2, 1.4X III, 2.0X II, 60mm f/2.8 Macro, etc. only had room to list a few Canon items

helpful

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 199
  • Ecclesiastes 3:11
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2012, 03:28:51 PM »
Unless you shoot JPEG, make sure you select RAW to compare the two cameras.

With RAW selected, and ISO 800, the 5DII actually looks sharper than the 5DIII... I wonder what method they used to do the conversion?

All the images posted to the internet are actually JPEG images (unless the original RAW is downloaded).

So the RAW images in the DP Review comparison tool are actually JPEGs that were processed at unknown settings by the staff of DP Review. The sharpness should not be looked at when evaluating noise.

The sharpness of the RAW images actually depends completely on what sharpness was selected when the images were processed to JPEG. And we just don't know. If you look at the JPEG generated by the camera, then that is at least an apples-to-apples comparison, unless they tweaked the default camera settings, which DP Review claims not to have done.
5DIII, 5DII, 7D x5, 6D, T2i, T3, 1D X, 10-22mm, 16-35mm II, 18-55mm II, 18-135mm IS x2, 70-200mm f/2.8L II, 24mm f/1.4L II, 50mm f/1.4, 50mm 1/1.8 II x2, 85mm f/1.8 x2, 100mm f/2 x2, 135mm f/2L x2, 200mm f/2.8L II x2, 1.4X III, 2.0X II, 60mm f/2.8 Macro, etc. only had room to list a few Canon items

shizam1

  • Guest
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2012, 03:36:24 PM »
Unless you shoot JPEG, make sure you select RAW to compare the two cameras.

With RAW selected, and ISO 800, the 5DII actually looks sharper than the 5DIII... I wonder what method they used to do the conversion?

All the images posted to the internet are actually JPEG images (unless the original RAW is downloaded).

So the RAW images in the DP Review comparison tool are actually JPEGs that were processed at unknown settings by the staff of DP Review. The sharpness should not be looked at when evaluating noise.

The sharpness of the RAW images actually depends completely on what sharpness was selected when the images were processed to JPEG. And we just don't know. If you look at the JPEG generated by the camera, then that is at least an apples-to-apples comparison, unless they tweaked the default camera settings, which DP Review claims not to have done.

Yeah, I know all that.  And you can't compare the JPEG's generated by the cameras, because most people who want quality already know to shoot RAW and have their computer comvert to JPEG.  Comparing in-camera generated JPEG's is not even close to comparing apples to apples if you want to gauge how the new sensor does at differen't ISO's, as the new Digic 5+ processor is some 30X more powerful than the one in the 5DII, and thus has time to do good conversions of the RAW data.

helpful

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 199
  • Ecclesiastes 3:11
    • View Profile
Re: DPReview Canon 5D mark III noise comparison
« Reply #14 on: March 28, 2012, 03:54:16 PM »
Yeah, I know all that.  And you can't compare the JPEG's generated by the cameras, because most people who want quality already know to shoot RAW and have their computer comvert to JPEG.  Comparing in-camera generated JPEG's is not even close to comparing apples to apples if you want to gauge how the new sensor does at differen't ISO's, as the new Digic 5+ processor is some 30X more powerful than the one in the 5DII, and thus has time to do good conversions of the RAW data.

Sorry, I should have been more positive. You are totally right that RAW is the way to make real comparisons.

The truth that I am trying to communicate is that the sharpness of "RAW" images when posted as JPEG images really depends on the processing done to them. The ultimate maximum level of sharpness depends on the sensor and AA filter of course, but I have seen scores of messed-up comparisons where a "better/sharper" camera's RAW images were just over-sharpened, and then compared to under-sharpened images from another camera.

The classic example of dishonesty with sharpening RAW images is to "prove" to newbies that they should "always shoot RAW." They give super sharp screen images produced by Lightroom from RAW images that are sharpened for viewing on a monitor, side-by-side with unsharpened (or even blurred) JPEG images from the camera at the lowest sharpening level. And then they crow about their conclusion that shooting RAW is the only pure way to take pictures, when it was all cooked.

And the very first word of my post was that noise isn't about sharpness.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to get across, anyway. I am defending the 5D3 based on accurate testing done by DP Review, and you are bringing up an irrelevant controversy about whether experienced shooters know how to shoot RAW vs JPEG and the power of the new Digic 5+ processor.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2012, 03:57:41 PM by helpful »
5DIII, 5DII, 7D x5, 6D, T2i, T3, 1D X, 10-22mm, 16-35mm II, 18-55mm II, 18-135mm IS x2, 70-200mm f/2.8L II, 24mm f/1.4L II, 50mm f/1.4, 50mm 1/1.8 II x2, 85mm f/1.8 x2, 100mm f/2 x2, 135mm f/2L x2, 200mm f/2.8L II x2, 1.4X III, 2.0X II, 60mm f/2.8 Macro, etc. only had room to list a few Canon items