September 17, 2014, 08:06:48 PM

Author Topic: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)  (Read 3407 times)

poias

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
    • View Profile
DxoMarks shows 5D mkIII's high iso is pretty low, much lower than its Nikon counterparts. And that is backed up by DPReview comparison tool. Have a look at this:



Absolutely no detail in 5DIII's high-iso JPG. It looks like the so-called high ISO improvement is in JPG, and only at the expense of the image quality and detail. So, please explain what is so amazing about 5DIII's high iso performance? Its RAW is same as D800's, albeit lower detail. JPG is just embarrassing.

I have Pentax has the reference. It shows what-should-have-been ideal.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2012, 08:05:24 PM by poias »

canon rumors FORUM


LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
    • View Profile
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2012, 09:28:56 PM »
DxoMarks shows 5D mkIII's high iso is pretty low, much lower than its Nikon counterparts. And that is backed up by DPReview comparison tool. Have a look at this:



Absolutely no detail in 5DIII's high-iso JPG. It looks like the so-called high ISO improvement is in JPG, and only at the expense of the image quality and detail. So, please explain what is so amazing about 5DIII's high iso performance? Its RAW is same as D800's, albeit lower detail. JPG is just embarrassing.

I have Pentax has the reference. It shows what-should-have-been ideal.

???

Anwyay DxO mark doesnt say 5D3 has much worse high, it says it has the same, tied for best of all, SNR. The overall low iso score is a bit lower because they did things with the color filter and it is a bit more color blind and chroma noise but it basically has close to the best high iso there is.

Low ISO DR is pretty sad in that it is not better than 3-5 years ago (actually slightly worse!).

YoukY63

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2012, 12:47:26 AM »
Why do you compare high iso jpeg from 5DmIII with high iso RAW from 40MP bodies?

Of course you will find less details because of lower number of pixels and NR seriously kicking in... ::)
Canon 5D MkII + 24-105mm f/4L + 70-200mm f/4L IS + 35mm f/1.4L + 85mm f/1.2L + 135mm f/2L + Sigma 50mm f/1.4EX + Samyang 14mm f/2.8

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2012, 01:37:40 AM »
Oh no - not another "my Nikon is better than your Canon" thread  ??? ??? ???

VirtualRain

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2012, 03:07:20 AM »
I wouldn't choose money as a test subject...  it's a like taking a photo of a dot matrix print out... Who would ever shoot this?  And then analyze and draw conclusions from it?  The photos I've taken of real people at extreme ISO look great. The noise is palatable and easily cleans up without loosing a lot of detail with he right processing.

Here's 16,000 ISO...
Canon 5D Mark III, 35L, 85L, 24-105L, 70-300L

itsnotmeyouknow

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
    • View Profile
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2012, 03:45:53 AM »
You're comparing the 5D3 at 12800 ISO to a Pentax 645D? How high does the 645D's ISO go? Do you know? I do as I have the camera. 1600 is the highest the 645d will go. So you're comparing apples and oranges.

Not only that, you are comparing much lower ISO on a camera with a much bigger sensor. These theoretical discussions bore me. If you expose correctly you'll have little noise where it matters. I shoot sometimes at higher ISO than I'd like but don't always use noise reduction in post
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 03:54:59 AM by itsnotmeyouknow »

Hesham

  • Guest
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2012, 04:06:58 AM »
You're comparing the 5D3 at 12800 ISO to a Pentax 645D? How high does the 645D's ISO go? Do you know? I do as I have the camera. 1600 is the highest the 645d will go. So you're comparing apples and oranges.

Not only that, you are comparing much lower ISO on a camera with a much bigger sensor. These theoretical discussions bore me. If you expose correctly you'll have little noise where it matters. I shoot sometimes at higher ISO than I'd like but don't always use noise reduction in post

I guess Pentax was thrown just as a deviation, the real, hidden message, is how D800 has more detail!!!! I have seen this in every Canon forum, Nikon marketing are working extremely hard...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2012, 04:06:58 AM »

PhilDrinkwater

  • Guest
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2012, 04:22:00 AM »
To be honest, it's been known for months that a lot of the high ISO improvement was in JPEG. Canon hinted at this with the 1dx back in October.

In terms of RAW improvement, it's a lot closer to the d4 / d3s now which is where the market is so it's pretty competitive. Not quite there, but not far off.

poias

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
    • View Profile
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2012, 10:08:46 AM »
You're comparing the 5D3 at 12800 ISO to a Pentax 645D? How high does the 645D's ISO go? Do you know? I do as I have the camera. 1600 is the highest the 645d will go. So you're comparing apples and oranges.

Not only that, you are comparing much lower ISO on a camera with a much bigger sensor. These theoretical discussions bore me. If you expose correctly you'll have little noise where it matters. I shoot sometimes at higher ISO than I'd like but don't always use noise reduction in post

Talk about missing the point. The pentax image was there to show what detail is present. 5D3 high iso jpg has absolutely no detail, which was my point. That is why I don't get so called improved high iso performance of 5D3.

poias

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
    • View Profile
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2012, 10:14:18 AM »
To be honest, it's been known for months that a lot of the high ISO improvement was in JPEG. Canon hinted at this with the 1dx back in October.

The jpg looks like a mush, no detail at all. I wouldn't call that an improvement.

PhilDrinkwater

  • Guest
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2012, 10:19:51 AM »
The jpg looks like a mush, no detail at all. I wouldn't call that an improvement.

Turn it off then.

Starting to seem trollish if I'm honest...

*edit* just read some of your recent posts. Clearly troll :)
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 10:21:57 AM by PhilDrinkwater »

altenae

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 186
  • Enjoy Wildlife
    • View Profile
    • Wildlife-photos
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2012, 10:55:49 AM »
A so called BS topic.

I also read his posts.
And indeed.

It's better to remove these kind of topics, because it's clearly wat he wants.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 10:58:51 AM by altenae »

tomscott

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 578
  • Graphic Designer & Photographer
    • View Profile
    • Tom Scott | Photography
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2012, 11:27:30 AM »
But you are talking 12800 ISO...

The fact is at 1600, 3200 it is very useable you could even get away with 6400. The ISO performance has been significantly improved over the 5D MKII if you ask me.

I dont think the raws are that bad for 12800 but just because it is there doesn't mean you should used it readily... the subject matter doesn't really help either. Yes the D800 has more detail but we already know that... so whats new here?
5D MKIII, 16-35mm F2.8 II L, 24-70mm F2.8 L, 24-105mm F4 IS L, 100mm F2.8 IS L, 70-200mm F2.8 IS II L, 50mm F1.8, 2x Ex, 580EX
BU: 40D,17-55mm F2.8 IS
www.tomscottphotography.co.uk

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2012, 11:27:30 AM »

awinphoto

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1991
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2012, 11:47:06 AM »
Turn NR off and sharpness up in jpeg and you may get closer to the detail in the raws...  raw is raw, jpeg is processed, what do you expect...  Unless you know what high ISO NR and sharpness settings were set for jpeg, it's apples and oranges.  Get over it. 
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.

PhilDrinkwater

  • Guest
Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2012, 11:54:54 AM »
But you are talking 12800 ISO...

The fact is at 1600, 3200 it is very useable you could even get away with 6400. The ISO performance has been significantly improved over the 5D MKII if you ask me.

I dont think the raws are that bad for 12800 but just because it is there doesn't mean you should used it readily... the subject matter doesn't really help either. Yes the D800 has more detail but we already know that... so whats new here?

There's a good saying in other places - "Don't feed the troll".

I suggest we just let this die gracefully and naturally :)
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 11:58:46 AM by PhilDrinkwater »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Please explain this (5D III's so called high ISO performance)
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2012, 11:54:54 AM »