6D pattern noise compared to 5D2, the info you won't get from DxO

[Aglet]

Got to play with one a bit at the shop today, shot some dark frames and pushed them as i usually do to better visualize the pesky noise patterns.

The 6D is considerably improved over the 5d2 and even 5d3. Although the total amount of dark level noise is not so greatly reduced, the subjective annoyance of its patterning is noticeably less.

5d2 could produce some fairly harsh noise lines (hor. & vert) in shadows at 100 ISO, they soften a bit from random noise at 400 ISO and up.

6d, at the same ISO settings, produces far less obviously structured noise lines. THIS IS A GOOD THING!
Canon has actually made some significant improvement in this area over the older cameras!

6d's overall noise is more random and uniform, tho still exhibits some fine vertical stripe structures at 400 ISO, similar to 7d's low iso noise but not as severe. Overall there is still some coarse but smooth transition variations in horizontal and vertical axis, almost like large blotchiness. This would not show up on large prints anywhere near as bad as 5d2 or 7d noise stripes.

6d's subjective total noise at 400 iso is similar to 5d2 at 100 iso. And the 6d's noise would clean up better with NR software.

6d's high iso performance is impressive!
I could print a decent 6x9" from a reasonably exposed 25600 iso shot! (larger if not too fussy)

So, altho 6D's dynamic range will not be significantly better than 5D bodies at low ISO, its raw files should provide more post-processing leeway because of the reduced severity of patterned noise. Its extra performance at high ISO is a definite bonus.
Fussy shooters who do a lot of post-processing should definitely consider the 6D over either 5D body if low ISO performance is critical to their work.

SoNikon sensored cameras still do blow the 6D into the weeds with far cleaner low ISO data.
Hopefully Canon's (soon to be released?) next generation sensors will further improve on this dark/read noise issue.

As it is now, I am very tempted to sell my 5D2 to fund the 6D, it's that much more usable to me.

 

[Stichus III]

Sounds great.

Could you maybe post some sample images?

 

[David Hull]

Got to play with one a bit at the shop today, shot some dark frames and pushed them as i usually do to better visualize the pesky noise patterns.

The 6D is considerably improved over the 5d2 and even 5d3. Although the total amount of dark level noise is not so greatly reduced, the subjective annoyance of its patterning is noticeably less.

5d2 could produce some fairly harsh noise lines (hor. & vert) in shadows at 100 ISO, they soften a bit from random noise at 400 ISO and up.

6d, at the same ISO settings, produces far less obviously structured noise lines. THIS IS A GOOD THING!
Canon has actually made some significant improvement in this area over the older cameras!

6d's overall noise is more random and uniform, tho still exhibits some fine vertical stripe structures at 400 ISO, similar to 7d's low iso noise but not as severe. Overall there is still some coarse but smooth transition variations in horizontal and vertical axis, almost like large blotchiness. This would not show up on large prints anywhere near as bad as 5d2 or 7d noise stripes.

6d's subjective total noise at 400 iso is similar to 5d2 at 100 iso. And the 6d's noise would clean up better with NR software.

6d's high iso performance is impressive!
I could print a decent 6x9" from a reasonably exposed 25600 iso shot! (larger if not too fussy)

So, altho 6D's dynamic range will not be significantly better than 5D bodies at low ISO, its raw files should provide more post-processing leeway because of the reduced severity of patterned noise. Its extra performance at high ISO is a definite bonus.
Fussy shooters who do a lot of post-processing should definitely consider the 6D over either 5D body if low ISO performance is critical to their work.

SoNikon sensored cameras still do blow the 6D into the weeds with far cleaner low ISO data.
Hopefully Canon's (soon to be released?) next generation sensors will further improve on this dark/read noise issue.

As it is now, I am very tempted to sell my 5D2 to fund the 6D, it's that much more usable to me.

I have seen the same thing (having owned a 5DII and now a 5DIII). The noise seems to be about the same in the case of the 5DIII but it is predominantly one dimensional which allows it to be MUCH more easily dealt with by some of the third party NR plugins like those from Topaz and Nik. The DxO measured DR remains the same though so the fanboys who are used to making a big deal about that will not be disappointed

 

[dswatson83]

There is a review at : http://learningcameras.com/reviews/4-dslrs/91-canon-6d-review
with a bunch of pictures of the 6D noise from ISO 1600-25000

Also has some dynamic range tests with the shadows pushed.
There is also a 5D mark III (couldn't find a mark II) test with the 6D : http://learningcameras.com/reviews/4-dslrs/92-canon-6d-vs-5d-mark-iii
that shows noise and dynamic range results.

It does seem that the 6D is considerably better than the older cameras like the 5D2 and just a tiny bit better than the 5D3. Though when it comes to dynamic range, the Canon cameras are still way behind Nikon.

 

[Ricku]

Thanks for the info!

It sounds like Canon rushed the 5D3, in order top stop Nikon D800 from "stealing the whole show".

The 6D sensor should clearly have been in the 5D3, and the 5D3 sensor in the 6D.

 

[Marsu42]

As it is now, I am very tempted to sell my 5D2 to fund the 6D, it's that much more usable to me.

I applaud Canon's effort with the 6d as they managed to adapt their current "legacy" tech to meet customer's expectations = low iso noise and a bit more dr. But don't forget the 6d is also less sharp since obviously it has more forced nr than the 5d3 - so for comparisons the 5d2/5d3 images have to be downscaled a bit and then nr'ed to match the 6d's sharpness. The improved banding reducton is a clear, non debatable plus though.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

6d, at the same ISO settings, produces far less obviously structured noise lines. THIS IS A GOOD THING!
Canon has actually made some significant improvement in this area over the older cameras!

Actually more like significant improvement in this over over the newer cameras! (since the 1Ds3 and even 40D already did this more than half a decade ago ). But yeah it is good that they at least have back to their past best banding levels. Certainly a shame that they didn't bother to do that for the 5D3 which was pretty ridiculous.

 

[Ricku]

I've been looking for some downloadable 6D raw-files for hours, but haven't been able to find any.

Can someone here be so kind and upload a couple of raw files for me? ISO 100 - 400.

You can use quick file sharing services like http://www.zippyshare.com/ or http://www.sendspace.com/

I just want to play around with the sliders in Lightroom and see how the files hold up.

 

[jonathan7007]

LetThe...
Your comment seems to say the 1DsMkIII had no low ISO noise/banding. As someone considering purchasing one I wanted to confirm that positive endorsement (if that's what it was!)
The 5DMkIII and 6D are a confusing pair of cameras. Like the earlier poster I'd like to mix the features differently, some from each... my 5DMkIII a poor copy, I believe, but wished for more improvement in IQ over the 5DMkII.

jonathan7007

 

[CarlTN]

One question is, what will happen to Nikon if Canon's next generation sensors actually do get closer to their DR performance, let alone equal or best it? They will continue to lose market share, that's what...then Nikon fanbois will be going off the deepend...And again, how do you Nikonians manage that ridiculous grip, shutter release placement, and rear panel ergonomics?

Dswatson83, interesting link, I will look at it carefully.

Interesting that there's vertical band noise, where my 50D has horizontal band noise. I'm sure it's idiotic to ask what is common knowledge on here, but why is one vertical and the other horizontal? One is full frame, the other crop...is there something about the smaller size that makes the banding horizontal?

The problem I noticed with my cousin's 5D3 files in Lightroom 4, was a coarse pebble like grain noise at ISO 4000 (not related to color), which LR4 couldn't take away without losing a lot of detail. The luminance slider had to be all the way up to like 85 or 90, to make any difference...and then all the detail is gone. I didn't notice any banding or much color noise, although I'm sure it had some.

So my question is, what do all of you experts do about this coarse grain? I presume Topaz or some other plugin does better than LR4, for this aspect of noise also (besides the color banding)?

 

[DanielW]

What if Canon simply ditched the 5D3's sensor and put the 6D's sensor in it? I mean, same body, same AF system, everything, but made all 5D3s with the 6D's sensor from now on... Same sensor size, same company... Is it feasible, on the technical side?
Daniel

 

[bgran8]

"5d2 could produce some fairly harsh noise lines (hor. & vert) in shadows at 100 ISO, they soften a bit from random noise at 400 ISO and up."

Is it better to shoot with the 5d2 at ISO 400 than ISO 100 to avoid the pattern noise? Thanks.

 

[Ricku]

What if Canon simply ditched the 5D3's sensor and put the 6D's sensor in it? I mean, same body, same AF system, everything, but made all 5D3s with the 6D's sensor from now on... Same sensor size, same company... Is it feasible, on the technical side?
Daniel

That'd be very nice, but it ain't gonna happen.

A lot of people who already bought the 5D3 would go berserk! Even the ones who claim that they are perfectly happy with the current sensor, and that they don't need more DR for "their shooting style". They would instantly change their mind and start whining.

 

[Marsu42]

What if Canon simply ditched the 5D3's sensor and put the 6D's sensor in it?

From the reviews I read and the raw samples I looked at myself you're absolutely overestimating the 5d3/6d difference - the 6d might have 1/3 stop less iso noise, but the 5d3 also has improved banding, has more resolution and is sharper than the 6d. Except maybe for iso12800 (favors 6d) or low iso studio shots (favors 5d3) the differences won't show.

Edit: removed assumption about aa filter strenght on the 6d, sorry.

 

[Ricku]

Marsu: Could you please link some of those comparisons between the 6D and 5D3? I mean one that proves the 5D3 is sharper?

I have searched but did not find any.

 

[DanielW]

What if Canon simply ditched the 5D3's sensor and put the 6D's sensor in it?

From the reviews I read and the raw samples I looked at myself you're absolutely overestimating the 5d3/6d difference - the 6d might have 1/3 stop less iso noise, but the 5d3 also has improved banding, has more resolution and is sharper (even with a much stronger aa filter!) than the 6d. Except maybe for iso12800 (favors 6d) or low iso studio shots (favors 5d3) the differences won't show.

I agree about the overestimation thing -- I'm thinking of selling my 60D and getting a 7D (mark 1!) because of AFMA. A FF would be great, indeed much better than my 60D or my "new" 7D, but what's keeping my photos from being better is definitely not my camera.
Going FF with Canon would mean losing the built-in flash as a commander (I have only one flash) and becoming restricted to on-camera flash, when what I need is just the opposite: quit being such a lazy ass and get the flash off-camera more often. Sure, I could just buy another flash, but going FF, buying new lenses and accessories is expensive and probably wouldn't make my photos much better, if any. I'm the limiting factor...
And, as jrista pointed out recently, there are softwares with incredible NR capabilities available nowadays. I've found that ISO 1600 and 3200 are really good after adequate NR on the RAW files of my 60D, and for what I shoot it's really enough.
Daniel

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

What if Canon simply ditched the 5D3's sensor and put the 6D's sensor in it?

From the reviews I read and the raw samples I looked at myself you're absolutely overestimating the 5d3/6d difference - the 6d might have 1/3 stop less iso noise, but the 5d3 also has improved banding, has more resolution and is sharper (even with a much stronger aa filter!) than the 6d. Except maybe for iso12800 (favors 6d) or low iso studio shots (favors 5d3) the differences won't show.

With all due respect, you seem to be repeatedly making this point in a variety of threads, but without substantiating it. You also don't seem to own any full frame Canon camera body according to your signature, so where is the source for your information?

I don't own and have not used the MKIII, but I did extensive research before purchasing the 6D and have processed many thousands of images with the MKII (which I continue to own). I can tell you from my research that many professional reviewers when doing testing were surprised to find the improvement in dynamic range, high ISO performance, and reduced noise in the shadows in the 6D. They weren't looking for it; they were shocked to find it! I can tell you from my own experience that the difference between the RAW files in these qualities from the 5D2 to the 6D is huge. I am sure it is far less obvious when compared to the 5D3, but I have not really heard any professional assert that still image quality is better (or even 100% as good). The 5D3 is unquestionably the better camera; it probably doesn't produce better images.

 

[Brock]

Canon can not be equal with theirs old sensor lay out and and and signal path way.
Thera are no indications that Canon has gone from the old 180nm tech to Sonys, Panasonic Aptina, Toshiba tech which are down at 65nm

http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

Canon is at 500nm.

Nikon 350nm & 250nm

Sony at 250nm & 180nm (though technically the 180 is in the Nikon D800)

Where are you getting 65nm from?

 

[Marsu42]

With all due respect, you seem to be repeatedly making this point in a variety of threads, but without substantiating it. You also don't seem to own any full frame Canon camera body according to your signature, so where is the source for your information?

Asking for sources is perfectly fine - though since this is not a scientific article, skipping them unless asked to is imho also ok. While looking for the adequate ff camera (5d2/5d3/6d) I did a lot of research and downloaded multiple raw comparisons and had a look for myself in Lightroom. What exact source are you asking for - that the 5d2 is sharpest at low iso, or that the 6d is less sharp than the 5d3? If I can I'll try to post where I got the information from, though it were a lot of articles so I'll really have to look. Not to be misunderstood: I also think the 6d iq is overall much better than the 5d2, that's why I'll buy the 6d.

Btw: I'm not a big fan of the "you don't own that gear, you can't tell anything about it" argument - I for one never told it to anyone commenting on, bashing, praising or comparing the 60d w/o owning it. While it is certainly true that ownership or extended rental is required for evaluating gear handling over longer periods of time, your 6d probably has the same sensor as any reviewer's 6d, so I'm confident I can come to valid conclusion when using other people's raw files. If reading sources would be no viably way to acquire information, scientific or journalistic work would be confronted with quite a problem.

 

[CarlTN]

Daniel, AFMA is a must, and the 60D was "rebel-ized" to appeal to Rebel fans. I've never liked it, which is why I still use my 50D. Let's face it, the noise is not that much better in the 60D and 7D, nor is the resolution. By contrast, the resolution was increased a whopping 50% going from 40D, to 50D. Sure the 40D had less noise at the pixel level, but not when you downsample the 50D's images to match the 40D's 10MP image size.

So the 5D3 has a stronger anti-aliasing filter than the 6D? I did not know dat...maybe that partially explains why the 6D's video has more moire?

As for 5D3 owners going crazy, how about all those who bought the first production run of the 5D3 with the light leak under the top lcd screen? Were they not angry too? hahahaha....

And how about all those Nikon D4 owners who have to contend with the green tinting of both the LCD and the files themselves, with no acknowledgement of a problem from Nikon? A lot of them just sold everything and bought a 1Dx and the far superior Canon lens line. Not sure that problem was ever fixed, and don't really care either.