5D mkIII untouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

[akiskev]

All files are RAW and were taken with a 5D mkIII (preproduction model).

For dynamic range purposes (LetTheRightLensIn and Tijn, do you hear me? ) :

ISO 100, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 100, 3sec lens cap off.

https://rapidshare.com/files/1840998687/iso100_dr.zip

ISO 160, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 160, 3sec lens cap off.

https://rapidshare.com/files/3548948977/iso160_dr.zip

And now the portraits.
Handheld 24-105 @73mm f/5.6, IS on.

ISO 400

https://rapidshare.com/files/1163476234/218A0014_iso400.zip

ISO 800

https://rapidshare.com/files/4212388373/218A0015_iso800.zip

ISO 1600

https://rapidshare.com/files/1061267807/218A0016_iso1600.zip

ISO 3200

https://rapidshare.com/files/1910229011/218A0017_iso3200.zip

ISO 6400

https://rapidshare.com/files/3517426404/218A0018_iso6400.zip

ISO 12800

https://rapidshare.com/files/962452783/218A0019_iso12800.zip

ISO 25600

https://rapidshare.com/files/1193339724/218A0020_iso25600.zip

At iso 3200 and 12800 you 'll notice a yellow line. It may be due to a weird sync effect from shutter speed/lights, but I'm not sure about it.

Dad shot with 5d mkIII+70-200 II
ISO 4000

https://rapidshare.com/files/3570984079/218A8989_iso4000_dad.zip

For comparison reasons I took a couple of shots with my dad's 5D mkII+24-70.

70mm, f/4.5

ISO 3200

https://rapidshare.com/files/561557718/IMG_4770_mkII_iso3200.zip

ISO 6400

https://rapidshare.com/files/1125200045/IMG_4771_mkII_iso6400.zip

I see a yellow stripe here too. Maybe it was some weird sync of lights and it was showing up when I was using high shutter speeds?

Video
http://youtu.be/CF3rDNk8QYY
If you found that interesting, there are 3 more videos here

 

[Abraxx]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes

Thank you for your efforts akiskev!
Really appreciated.

 

[akiskev]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes

No problem Abraxx. You'll notice some weird stuff in iso 3200 and 12800 shots (a stripe of yellowish color, as if WB changed). Seems something like a firmware problem because this yellow color was present in all the ISO 3200 and 12800 shots I took. The camera was a preproduction model.
Today the shots were taken with less lights on

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes

Thank you

That ISO3200 shot cleans up very nicely using my standard settings. I reckon it's about as good or maybe a bit better than a d3s (when scaled down), which was my goal for the high ISO on my next camera.

The best thing though is the quality of the noise - it's just a lot nicer than before and the shot looks really sharp. It would print really well

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes

Also, the 6400 shot looks good too. The sharpness is still really there. I found the 5dii was breaking down at that point before. Yes - it's a bit noisy - but with higher NR settings it still contains lots of details.

Great!

 

[sh0dan]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

Any chance you could do a sample in each of the sRAW modes?

I'm doing a freeware RAW converter, and would like to confirm that these modes are also working!

Thanks!

 

[tonyp]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

Considering you underexposed that ISO 6400 shot it looks pretty damn amazing. Wow.

 

[nightbreath]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

When I was looking at the ISO 3200 shot I've found a white cross in the RAW image. Don't know whether it's a drawback of converter (IrfanView plug-in released in October, 2010) or something Canon use to mark their pre-production cameras / sensors, but it is definitely something interesting.

 

[poker_jake85]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

When I was looking at the ISO 3200 shot I've found a white cross in the RAW image. Don't know whether it's a drawback of converter (IrfanView plug-in released in October, 2010) or something Canon use to mark their pre-production cameras / sensors, but it is definitely something interesting.

It's a hot pixel

 

[akiskev]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

When I was looking at the ISO 3200 shot I've found a white cross in the RAW image. Don't know whether it's a drawback of converter (IrfanView plug-in released in October, 2010) or something Canon use to mark their pre-production cameras / sensors, but it is definitely something interesting.

Interesting but I don't see it on ACR. It must be a software issue.

edit: It must be a hot pixel because it's there on the JPG (I was shooting raw+jpg).

 

[altenae]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

edit: It must be a hot pixel because it's there on the JPG (I was shooting raw+jpg).

If it is a hot pixel wouldn't this also be present in the RAW file ?

 

[PeteG]

Re: 5D mkIII ountouched files for testing purposes (RAW)

Looked at the RAW ISO 400 (I know ISO 100 would have been better), move “Fill Light” to 100% and 100% crop and really didn’t see any banding (looking more I see some).

 

[fred_jb]

Thanks for these samples. Do you know if they have in-camera NR set to on?

I've looked at the portrait shots and it looks like they might have in-camera NR on as there is an absence of colour noise and in its place the gritty looking luminance noise which in the past I've found to be a characteristic of Canon files with NR applied.

Fred

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

All files are RAW and were taken with a 5D mkIII (preproduction model).

For dynamic range purposes (LetTheRightLensIn and Tijn, do you hear me? ) :

ISO 100, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 100, 3sec lens cap off.

https://rapidshare.com/files/1840998687/iso100_dr.zip

ISO 160, 1/8000 lens cap on.
ISO 160, 3sec lens cap off.

https://rapidshare.com/files/3548948977/iso160_dr.zip

And now the portraits.
Handheld 24-105 @73mm f/5.6, IS on.

ISO 400

https://rapidshare.com/files/1163476234/218A0014_iso400.zip

ISO 800

https://rapidshare.com/files/4212388373/218A0015_iso800.zip

ISO 1600

https://rapidshare.com/files/1061267807/218A0016_iso1600.zip

ISO 3200

https://rapidshare.com/files/1910229011/218A0017_iso3200.zip

ISO 6400

https://rapidshare.com/files/3517426404/218A0018_iso6400.zip

ISO 12800

https://rapidshare.com/files/962452783/218A0019_iso12800.zip

ISO 25600

https://rapidshare.com/files/1193339724/218A0020_iso25600.zip

At iso 3200 and 12800 you 'll notice a yellow line. It may be due to a weird sync effect from shutter speed/lights, but I'm not sure about it.

Dad shot with 5d mkIII+70-200 II
ISO 4000

https://rapidshare.com/files/3570984079/218A8989_iso4000_dad.zip

For comparison reasons I took a couple of shots with my dad's 5D mkII+24-70.

70mm, f/4.5

ISO 3200

https://rapidshare.com/files/561557718/IMG_4770_mkII_iso3200.zip

ISO 6400

https://rapidshare.com/files/1125200045/IMG_4771_mkII_iso6400.zip

I see a yellow stripe here too. Maybe it was some weird sync of lights and it was showing up when I was using high shutter speeds?

Awesome, thanks. I will see if I can check them out during half-time, if not then not until tonight, going to check for eagles after the game.

 

[fred_jb]

Never mind, my mistake - looks like Lightroom has automatically appled colour NR to the DNGs I created from the files.

Haved tried again with settings zeroed - plenty of colour noise now!

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

disappointing results at ISO 100:

banding:
horizontal banding appears to be entirely removed, this is good, and will help make ISO look better and get less badly clumped chroma noise and all but vertical banding appears to be zero improved and it shows up enough that I don't think you gain any usable amount of low ISO DR back compared to the 5D2

so for low ISO I'm not sure the removal of horizontal banding alone will really help usable DR any since the vertical sticks out to the eye just as much, maybe here on there on parts of the image it might help

DR:
5D2: 15760,1024,6.1 AU,3.8 8MP normalized ADU, DR - 11.2 , DR8MP - 11.9

5D3: 15309 (maybe the channels were still not quite blown though?),2048, 6.6 ADU, 6.4 normalized to 5D2 6.4 and then to 8MP 3.96, DR- 11.0 DRto5D2 - 11.0 DR8MP - 11.7
and let us say WP should be 15760 instead then DR8MP - 11.8
and let us even say it should be max 14bit 16383 - 11.8

so I actually get fractionally worse DR than for the 5D2, but it's for all intents, the exact same, within copy to copy variation and well within any difference you'd be able to notice

Sad to say but even the DX D7000 handily beats the latest Canon FF for DR, and not by a little. The D800, at 100% view, full 50% MP advantage may beat it by 2 stops, maybe even 2.5 usable stops.

I did not expect this at all. :'(

(the high iso side of things should turn out more favorable though, most likely)

 

[akiskev]

I uploaded a video for people that don't have acr.

http://youtu.be/CF3rDNk8QYY?hd=1

 

[akiskev]

And the 25600 shot:

http://youtu.be/5EGwkPEewtg?hd=1

 

[jrista]

Thank you, @akiskev, for those sample videos! I'm really amazed at how much 10% luma and 30% chroma noise reduction cleaned the photo of your father right up. With my 7D, I often have to crank chroma noise reduction up a lot more than that at higher ISO's, and I usually apply about 25% luma noise reduction.

 

[PeteG]

Akiskev,
Thanks for the video, I know it seems the 5D III is getting dragged thru the mud lately but I believe I’ll be pretty happy with it.