Comparing my 60d with my new 5d3 not seeing much of a difference.

[koolman]

I'm sure what I'm going to say will stir up lots of flack.

For me as a hobbiest, part of the hobby is placing emphasis on trying to improve my skills as a photographer. I am not under pressure to "get the shot" and I'm not under pressure to shoot in low light fast moving situations. I dont have a customer to satisfy - other then myself.

My 550d and certainly a 60d - is plenty of camera for a hobby. Sure - the IQ of a $3,500 FF camera will be better, but that is due to its superiority as a tool. Yes, there are some creative advantages in FF cameras that are not available in crops, but I cant justify the extra $$$$ just for that.

I get much more exited seeing great shots taken with "simple" equipment - that emphasize the photographers skill, then "great shots" - that express an expensive piece of equipment.

Thats me I guess.

[smirkypants]

I think in good light at iso100 it will be difficult to see much IQ difference. The most obvious difference is the bg blur when compared to a  ff

What he said. With a good lens and a good lighting set-up, there is no reason why you can't produce magazine-quality results with a 60D. If you are super-super picky you can pick things out. The 5D3 however should be much more forgiving when presented with sub-optimal conditions. That's really the reason to get it.

[Marsu42]

I'm sure what I'm going to say will stir up lots of flack.

I guess you'd be surprised how many people will agree with you, esp. seeing clueless owners of top equipment (bless them, they keep Canon in business!).

It's just like in the computer biz: One year, a given cheap PC "type a" is for entry level word processing, the more expensive "type b" is for serious enthusiast apps. The next year, everything has magically moved down and "type b" is only good for your kids or wife anymore and so on... that's "planned obsolescence" and keeps the companies running.

The one thing that really separates equipment seems to be: How will your gear react if used in the rain or a sandstorm, and how will it do if dropped to a concrete floor from medium height.

[MarkB]

I too moved from a 60D to a 5d3.  I would say moved is not fair.  The 60D will likely see a lot of work for bird photos and other long shots where the 1.6x helps a lot.

After some tests I would say that I can get really useable shots up to 12800 and maybe 25600 with a lot of post.  I did occasionally use up to 3200 on the 60D.  So thats about 2 more useable stops.  Maybe two and a half.

One big difference I noticed the first day was that the 50mm f1.4 lens correction profile isn't default loaded on the 5d3.  I enjoyed that lens on my 60D and got some of my favorite photos from it when it was stopped down to about 1.8 or more.   I tried out that lens right away because I wanted to see the low light limit!.  I have attached on shot showing how bad the vignetting is without the correction.  The second (insanely noisy) shot was taken with all lights off at max iso (102480) and 1.4 aperture.  I could not see her at all but the camera achieved autofocus!

[NotABunny]

Okay, here it is:

1.

Using a long focal length while shooting at an angle, usually gives photos an off look. So, either get lower at the level of the cat or use 24 mm at about the same angle. You'll see that the subject sticks out.

2.

You have to consider what photos are. A photo is a bunch of shapes that the human eye has to see; for a good photo, the human also says "wow". For this, you need enough light to make those shapes clearly visible (sure, mood photos may differ). However, this is not enough. You also need to see differences among shapes, and this requires dynamic range. You have to fill a lot of more of the eye's dynamic range to make the subject pop.

What the cat photo lacks (and the flower shot as well) is dynamic range (aside brightness). Basically, everything is murky, it's difficult to perceive where one shape ends and another starts.

Because the original scene has a very low dynamic range, you can improve it through exposure only to a limited degree. However, you can improve it more in post processing, by increasing for example the Whites (in LR4).

[Marsu42]

One big difference I noticed the first day was that the 50mm f1.4 lens correction profile isn't default loaded on the 5d3.

... I guess that you know that you can put Canon lens profiles on the camera with dpp. But it's interesting that it's not inside the 5d3 by default, so Canon might not expect this combination to be used often - this could point to the rumored 50mm replacement or can prove the fact that Canon also thinks that their current 50/1.4 is crappy.

Concerning the second picture: I wouldn't say this is strictly "in focus" :-p

[KKCFamilyman]

Thanks for the advice. I have posted a few threads but not about the same topic. I am looking at plan b with a lens upgrade if the 5d3 does not prove to have the results I am after. To be totally honest I think the 5d3 would be great for me if I could have afforded the soon to be released 24-70 II and 70-200 2.8 II then there would be no questions but since I can only afford the camera for now I am debating. I do like how it sounds and how much faster it locks on and the fact that when better glass gets put on I can comfortable shoot at higher iso's than my 60d which is why I was considering this in the first place. That's the main reason and maybe some lessons will help me bring maximize that FF sensor because no matter what I still need a higher iso capable body. I simply hate using a flash just to grab an indoor daylight pic of the kids playing. I think that the 5d3 will do better at acheiving that with less noise.

[unkbob]

Ok here's an analogy for you.

Let's say I live in the city and walk to work everyday. It takes me 30 minutes. So I upgrade to a Ferrari, but because of the traffic it still takes me 30 minutes. Therefore I can see no difference between the two modes of transport.

SELL THE FERRARI OR MOVE OUT OF THE CITY.

[KKCFamilyman]

ok 5d3 iso6400

[KKCFamilyman]

5d3  iso12800

[KKCFamilyman]

60d iso 6400

[unkbob]

5D3. 1/125s F4 ISO 12,800

[jasonsim]

If you're going to take photos of static objects, I recommend ditching the 5D III and put the 60D on a sturdy Gitzo or RRS tripod.  And get a flash with a diffuser...Gary LightSphere or something.

[DarkKnightNine]

I am having a hard time comparing photos at various iso's between the two in real life around the house shots any suggestions that anyone has would be great on how to test this during my return period. So far it has better color saturation and lower noise but it's still there. Maybe it's the kit lens but if so that's all I can afford right now. Ohh yeah and I do like the auto shutter speed you can set. Those who said it does not work just don't realize if the camera cannot shoot at your max set iso it will lower the shutter speed. That is a good thing. It's like people would want it not to work. Either way any good testing suggestions would be great. Also it seems like the 24-105 is really not that far of a zoom. I think if I keep it I will have to invest in a zoom before a prime.

What "Auto Shutter" are you referring to? Are you talking about "Av (Aperture Priority) Mode" that lets you choose the Aperture while the camera chooses the Shutter Speed automatically, because that's on your 60D as well every other modern DSLR that Canon makes. Or did I miss something new?

[KKCFamilyman]

If you're going to take photos of static objects, I recommend ditching the 5D III and put the 60D on a sturdy Gitzo or RRS tripod.  And get a flash with a diffuser...Gary LightSphere or something.

No those where just examples to show the forum. I am taking them of my kids but my wife would rather I not post pics of my children online and as they move each one would be different. What are you processing your raws with and are you doing any post to them?