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

[Marsu42]

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?

Wups, sorry, I read my own post and have to admit that the strenght of the aa filter is just an assumption (unlike the 5d2/5d3 sharpness vs. the 6d) because of the stronger moire, it can also be due to another sampling algorithm vs. the 5d3. So sorry for that, I corrected it above but would also like to have more information on this.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

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 - while this is certainly true for saying how some gear handles 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 evaluating 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.

I don't think that I ever said that you could "not tell anything about it". I do question trying to make such a strong point that seems to contradict prevailing wisdom without more evidence to back it up...and I don't recall you ever actually quoting a source.

I think your policy of using other people's RAW files to get a sense of the camera's ability is a good one. I think that doing research is very smart. But I don't think just having RAW files is going to tell you the whole story about all the potential variables at capture or give you a real sense of the operation/workflow of the camera. I'm not looking for an argument; I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have had a chance to use the camera for yourself.

 

[Marsu42]

I don't think that I ever said that you could "not tell anything about it". I do question trying to make such a strong point that seems to contradict prevailing wisdom without more evidence to back it up...and I don't recall you ever actually quoting a source.

Well, you didn't ask for a source on any specific item yet ... and sorry if I seemed to generalize your post, I was also commenting on various other past threads where the idea that you have to own something to be able to comment on it is often mentioned - so sorry for being too strong on this.

I'm not looking for an argument; I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have had a chance to use the camera for yourself.

Me neither, and actually I really value your posts because of you I now decided to go for the Tamron and 6d combination, saving €2000 (that's a lot of money to me) - if you can shoot with it like you do, I certainly don't need the 5d3+Canon mk2 combination. And I'll certainly tell about my experiences here, though I'll wait some for the 6d to drop some more in price.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Good enough I hope the combo works as well for you as it has for me so far.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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

Well they all have read noise at low ISO, all a lot more than the exmor stuff, but the 1Ds3 did have among the least low ISO banding that Canon had ever released and some of the better ISO100 read noise for a Canon.

From what I hear and have seen and in some, but not all, cases tested, it seems like for the FF cams from Canon that 1Ds3,1DX,6D all have noticeably less banding than the 5D3/5D2 (5D3 completely cures it in one direction but since it still has it so strongly in the other direction it doesn't really do much anything to help). From what I recall 1Ds3 has no horiz banding and a little bit of vertical and the 5D2 has a lot of both and the 5D3 has no almost vertical but a lot of horiz. Those three (1Ds3/6D/1DX) also all have a bit less read noise than the 5D3/5D2 as well at ISO100 (5D3 is actually the worst of them all for ISO100 read noise, although the degree that it is worse than the 5D2 in that regard is so minor that I don't it is possible to notice real world). Some say the 6D has the least banding of these Canon FF cams, I didn't check that out carefully myself yet.

1DX/6D and even 5D3 (and even 5D2) all have better high ISO DR than the 1Ds3 though (even starting by just ISO800 or even 400 really, not even talking high). And at say ISO3200 the 1Ds3 DR actually does fall quite far behind the 5D3 and bit farther still than the 6D and even a touch yet than the 1DX. Even compared to the 5D2 it doesn't even fair so well at ISO3200.

1DX/6D/5D3 all have better SNR than the 1Ds3 across the range (although SNR is so good that at ISO100 it doesn't matter that much and with the better color filters and less banding and a bit less read noise I'd say 1Ds3 does ISO100 better than the 5D3 even if the SNR is worse outside of the darkest tones).

1Ds3 appears to have the least color-blind color array filter when shooting under outdoor lighting of all those cameras. 6D may be the most color blind. In what ways and what the difference means exactly is very complex and hard to say.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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

It would mess up the video being only 20MP instead of 22MP. Not 100% sure it could drive the 6fps either, might need more readouts added (might be require only a modest little fix in the grand scheme of things though).

I don't get why they didn't just make the 6D sensor 22MP instead of 20MP and just use the same one in both cameras. Very bizarre.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

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

It would mess up the video being only 20MP instead of 22MP. Not 100% sure it could drive the 6fps either, might need more readouts added (might be require only a modest little fix in the grand scheme of things though).

I don't get why they didn't just make the 6D sensor 22MP instead of 20MP and just use the same one in both cameras. Very bizarre.

And that is at the heart of what got me when doing research. The 6D wasn't even on my radar, but as I actually researched the key things that matter to me (IQ being #1), there wasn't really a clear pecking order between the 5D3 and the 6D. The 5D3 is the better camera...but not in every way. The 6D was not just a "dumbed down" 5DIII. In some ways it is actually a superior camera; in others it is considerably inferior. I was dead set on buying a 5D3 until I did the research and discovered that (at least for my actual purposes) the 6D might actually be the preferred camera. While I have not yet used a 5DIII, I can safely say that I am very happy with my purchase of the 6D.

But my point is that Canon has really muddied the waters for potential customers like myself. If the 5D3 was clearly superior in every way, I would be purchasing one right now. It's not, so I didn't. Was that in Canon's best interest?

 

[Chosenbydestiny]

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 - while this is certainly true for saying how some gear handles 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 evaluating 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.

I don't think that I ever said that you could "not tell anything about it". I do question trying to make such a strong point that seems to contradict prevailing wisdom without more evidence to back it up...and I don't recall you ever actually quoting a source.

I think your policy of using other people's RAW files to get a sense of the camera's ability is a good one. I think that doing research is very smart. But I don't think just having RAW files is going to tell you the whole story about all the potential variables at capture or give you a real sense of the operation/workflow of the camera. I'm not looking for an argument; I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have had a chance to use the camera for yourself.

+1 it's a completely different perspective to own the actual product. I bashed the 6D when it was announced and bought one for my wife because she needed "just" the better ISO performance. Ended up buying one for myself as well because of the compact delivery of IQ nearly identical to 5D3. For still subjects at least. It's easily a level above the 5D2 for image quality and AF which matter the most, and several other features. The weaknesses are easily outweighed. I bashed the 60D when it was announced as well, but last year we ended up buying 3 of them instead of the somewhat noisier 50D. IQ just wins in the end over other features, especially since Canon is beginning to trail behind in sensor technology. Not saying it's the only thing that matters, but if you want to make the most out of your lenses I'm sure it's a good place to start.

 

[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

It would mess up the video being only 20MP instead of 22MP. Not 100% sure it could drive the 6fps either, might need more readouts added (might be require only a modest little fix in the grand scheme of things though).

I don't get why they didn't just make the 6D sensor 22MP instead of 20MP and just use the same one in both cameras. Very bizarre.

And that is at the heart of what got me when doing research. The 6D wasn't even on my radar, but as I actually researched the key things that matter to me (IQ being #1), there wasn't really a clear pecking order between the 5D3 and the 6D. The 5D3 is the better camera...but not in every way. The 6D was not just a "dumbed down" 5DIII. In some ways it is actually a superior camera; in others it is considerably inferior. I was dead set on buying a 5D3 until I did the research and discovered that (at least for my actual purposes) the 6D might actually be the preferred camera. While I have not yet used a 5DIII, I can safely say that I am very happy with my purchase of the 6D.

But my point is that Canon has really muddied the waters for potential customers like myself. If the 5D3 was clearly superior in every way, I would be purchasing one right now. It's not, so I didn't. Was that in Canon's best interest?

That is why I believe the 5D3 was rushed, in order to go up against the D800, and thus "stealing some of the spotlight" from Nikon.

It is an ugly theory, but it also makes perfect sense.

I also believe that the 5D3 will have a much shorter product cycle than the previous 5D-cameras. A replacement (the 5DX?) will most likely come sooner than later.

 

[Aglet]

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

that is a viable workaround for the problem which I should have used more often myself.
dynamic range is almost the same from iso 100 to 800 or more but the effective read noise drops as you move up the iso scale and the signal to noise ratio also gets worse. BUT, the SNR is still pretty good overall so some minor NR in post will clean up a 400 or 800 ISO raw file to be nearly as good as a 100 iso should be. IF you have enough shutter speed and other exposure latitude to do this (careful when using flash fill)
after all that, yes, if you can move to iso 400 or more without affecting your composition elements from flash fill then use it to avoid the strong banding because the increased random noise/pattern noise is a benefit in this case.
Of course,all this only applies if you're lifting shadows or raising the overall exposure in post. If you're not doing that, there's no need to. the 5d2's shadow banding is usually barely noticeable in shadows that are not lifted at all. It sort of depends on what you do with the image.

 

[Aglet]

i DID notice one more little flaw of sorts that affected my 5d2 and the 6d I looked at.
Altho it appears similar to FPN, it likely is not a noise issue but a small variation in pixel performance occurring .

I'll have to post the shots when I have time to monkey with them some more but the effect is this;

A "ribbon" shaped area was affected such that when shooting SMOOTH MIDTONES there was some fine vertical banding-like structure evident. This is actually the first flaw i noticed on my 5d2 when i bought it but thought it was a noise issue at the time. If it were a normal FPN issue,the banding would have been evident over the whole range of the smooth tone area. instead, it was confined to a ribbon-like shape that meandered a bit over part of the sensor.

I managed to replicate and identify it by shooting a flat surface and enhancing the heck out of the contrast.
But it was in a real image of a foggy mountain lake at sunrise where i first found it.

So far I've only found this on the 5d2 and 6D.
I've sold my 5d2 recently, now waiting for price drop before getting a 6d, if I get one at all.

 

[Marsu42]

But my point is that Canon has really muddied the waters for potential customers like myself. If the 5D3 was clearly superior in every way, I would be purchasing one right now. It's not, so I didn't. Was that in Canon's best interest?

You just got a bunch of Canon marketing guys fired :-> ... they really tried *everything* to make the 6d look inferior to the 5d3, esp. in the specs - except for the anti-d600 joker "low light af" and the button layout / smaller size, but on the latter they probably aren't sure themselves if this is good (travel) or bad (i.e. to make it look less "pro").

 

[bseitz234]

Dustin-

Is there a post somewhere you've expounded on your decision making process, 6d vs 5d3? Curious because I bought a 7d around the time the 6d was released, decided at the time it wasn't worth paying for FF for my needs, and the 7d was half the price, and so far I've loved it. But there's still this part of me nagging to get into FF, and I'd love as much info as you are willing to spend the time to type out on a forum... haha.

Thanks!!

 

[CarlTN]

Dustin, what sort of photography do you mostly do? I too am wanting to decide which camera to buy, but won't actually buy for months. How workable is the AF on the 6D? I've only had a 5D3 in my hands, not really gotten to play with it much. Tried to tweak the files in LR4, didn't work too well.

 

[Ivan Muller]

Had a look at the 6d the other day and there was lots and lots to like, the handling is superb even with the missing joystick. I love the way the silent shutter sounds and focus seemed better than my 5d2...the thing is my 5d2 delivers the goods in spades, I can shoot happily up to 6400 and topaz cleans up most if not all of the visible banding in the shadows and when I overexpose the images a bit, then the shadows are clean and there is still plenty of detail in the highlights even if it looks overexposed...me I am waiting for that D800 competitor camera to be launched..until then my 5d2 works just fine and no client has ever complained about the image quality.

 

[pedro]

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

I also believe that the 5D3 will have a much shorter product cycle than the previous 5D-cameras. A replacement (the 5DX?) will most likely come sooner than later.

A shorter product cycle seems intresting. Can't wait to see the improvements in high ISO IQ. But I am sorry to say that, I'd be a bit of dissapointed if the 5D's were about to turn out to be the D800 equivalents. My 5D3 is too much of great allround cam at its MP count. I bought it especially because of its high ISO qualities. But anyway, as long as they maintain that or even improve it, why not? Hope they keep to M and S-Raw modes. Cheers, Pedro

 

[MintMark]

I don't think that I ever said that you could "not tell anything about it". I do question trying to make such a strong point that seems to contradict prevailing wisdom without more evidence to back it up...and I don't recall you ever actually quoting a source.

Well, you didn't ask for a source on any specific item yet ... and sorry if I seemed to generalize your post, I was also commenting on various other past threads where the idea that you have to own something to be able to comment on it is often mentioned - so sorry for being too strong on this.

Can I ask about the 6D sharpness compared to the 5D3? Is it just the slightly higher pixel density of the 5D3 or do you think there is another factor in play?

Thanks,

Mark

 

[Marsu42]

Can I ask about the 6D sharpness compared to the 5D3? Is it just the slightly higher pixel density of the 5D3 or do you think there is another factor in play?

You can discover this yourself by downloading any raw files with fine details yourself, use the dpreview widget http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-6d/11 or look at this comparison: http://www.etherpilot.com/photo/test/misc/6d_5d3_d600.jpg

The difference is not big enough to make a difference for me, but it is visible. The best test I know concerning the resolution differences is on the German site traumflieger.de - look for the 6d review video.

From what I've read and seen for myself this is not only due to the lower resolution of the 6d, but because Canon applies more forced noise reduction to the 6d raw files - look at the strong chroma noise on the 5d3 in black areas, it's nearly completely gone on the 6d but at a loss of sharpness.

To put it another way: If you downsize the 5d3 files to 6d resolution and apply strong chroma and mild luma nr until the sharpness matches the 6d it's a wash except for a slight luma noise advantage of the 6d @same iso: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11279.msg202164#msg202164

 

[MintMark]

Thank you for replying. I have seen those comparisons before but I'm not sure I share the same conclusion.
Looking at the Siemens star in the centre of the dpreview scene at various ISOs, it's hard for me to see a difference in resolution between the 6D and the 5D3. Especially at high ISO, the colour blotches obscure the fine detail for both cameras. At low ISO they seem equivalent to me.

What makes you think Canon is applying noise reduction to the raw data?

 

[Marsu42]

Looking at the Siemens star in the centre of the dpreview scene at various ISOs, it's hard for me to see a difference in resolution between the 6D and the 5D3. Especially at high ISO, the colour blotches obscure the fine detail for both cameras. At low ISO they seem equivalent to me.

I didn't have an in-depth look at the dpreview shots since they only came out recently. It's a pity you probably cannot understand the German traumflieger.de review. I'd suggest downloading some raw samples yourself and have a look in LR - I did this with the raw files from http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-1566/reflex-canon-6d-bruit-electronique-12.html and compared the print on the circuit board and the shadow noise at zero nr.

What makes you think Canon is applying noise reduction to the raw data?

Look at the other CR link I posted, there are 5d3/6d comparisons w/o nr and no way the 6d can have that little chroma noise at low iso w/o some nr. Afaik Canon also applies nr to the 5d3 et al on higher iso levels, and I know Nikon does.