Can anyone post production 5D Mk III raw files?

[Radiating]

I've been playing around with a few pre-production raw files in ACR. As a professional photo retoucher this is my area of expertise. I realize that the latest version of ACR is in beta and pre-production bodies aren't a good representation, but at 100, 200, and 50 ISO I'm noticing some profoundly terrible results which are noticably worse than the 5D Mk. II.

It just looks like there is way too much noise at low iso, the images look like they were taken with a 5 year old point and shoot camera at base iso, not the latest pro body. Specifically, at iso 100 I'm finding images look like the 5D Mk II at iso 800. I've seen this in two pre-production bodies so far and am becoming very concerned about the 5D Mk. III image quality.

So if you guys could post your 5D Mark III low iso raws, I'd appreciate it, thanks!

 

[daveburlo]

Hi
I have 2 off 5d mk111, I got them on friday 16th March from a UK canon stockist, who I purchase all my kit from.
My initial thoughts are I'm really concerned about the amount of noise the raw images are producing. There is confusion over use of Lightroom 4 as it currently doesn't support the canon cr2 files, but if you convert them using the new adobe dng converter v6.7 (still at beta stage though) then you can import them into lightroom 4. The raw files are extremely noisy, and I am currently processing the canon cr2 files with canons own software, and intend to run a few comparison's. So if anyone else has this issue, then I would be delighted to hear from you. I am currently very frustrated and concerned as all I see in the press is how amazing the camera is. I appreciate its early days though, and I really need to use the proprietary Canon software first before I get too despondent.
I'm a real canon fan and I'm back to using my lovely 1d mk111's and feeling much better. I also have two 1DX's on order so hope lightroom catches up in the interim as workflow is far slicker in lightroom.

 

[facedodge]

here's hoping Canon's software works...

 

[Alker]

Hi
I have 2 off 5d mk111, I got them on friday 16th March from a UK canon stockist, who I purchase all my kit from.
My initial thoughts are I'm really concerned about the amount of noise the raw images are producing. There is confusion over use of Lightroom 4 as it currently doesn't support the canon cr2 files, but if you convert them using the new adobe dng converter v6.7 (still at beta stage though) then you can import them into lightroom 4. The raw files are extremely noisy, and I am currently processing the canon cr2 files with canons own software, and intend to run a few comparison's. So if anyone else has this issue, then I would be delighted to hear from you. I am currently very frustrated and concerned as all I see in the press is how amazing the camera is. I appreciate its early days though, and I really need to use the proprietary Canon software first before I get too despondent.
I'm a real canon fan and I'm back to using my lovely 1d mk111's and feeling much better. I also have two 1DX's on order so hope lightroom catches up in the interim as workflow is far slicker in lightroom.

Two 5D Mark III and two 1Dx on order.......!!
Nothing wrong with the 5D Mark III raw files..
If you think there is....then post the raw file

 

[Radiating]

Hi
I have 2 off 5d mk111, I got them on friday 16th March from a UK canon stockist, who I purchase all my kit from.
My initial thoughts are I'm really concerned about the amount of noise the raw images are producing. There is confusion over use of Lightroom 4 as it currently doesn't support the canon cr2 files, but if you convert them using the new adobe dng converter v6.7 (still at beta stage though) then you can import them into lightroom 4. The raw files are extremely noisy, and I am currently processing the canon cr2 files with canons own software, and intend to run a few comparison's. So if anyone else has this issue, then I would be delighted to hear from you. I am currently very frustrated and concerned as all I see in the press is how amazing the camera is. I appreciate its early days though, and I really need to use the proprietary Canon software first before I get too despondent.
I'm a real canon fan and I'm back to using my lovely 1d mk111's and feeling much better. I also have two 1DX's on order so hope lightroom catches up in the interim as workflow is far slicker in lightroom.

Thanks for the reply I'm suprised I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere as it is a serious issue, let's hope it's just a software problem for now.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I've been playing around with a few pre-production raw files in ACR. As a professional photo retoucher this is my area of expertise. I realize that the latest version of ACR is in beta and pre-production bodies aren't a good representation, but at 100, 200, and 50 ISO I'm noticing some profoundly terrible results which are noticably worse than the 5D Mk. II.

It just looks like there is way too much noise at low iso, the images look like they were taken with a 5 year old point and shoot camera at base iso, not the latest pro body. Specifically, at iso 100 I'm finding images look like the 5D Mk II at iso 800. I've seen this in two pre-production bodies so far and am becoming very concerned about the 5D Mk. III image quality.

So if you guys could post your 5D Mark III low iso raws, I'd appreciate it, thanks!

One guy's low ISO black frame from retail model had the horizontal banding that the beta copies did not. :'(
Hopefully he just got a freak copy. He also had worse ISO 100 dynamic range and read noise than the beta copies. (people always say oooh oooh you can't trust beta cams, my experience is that the Canon beta cams have never been worse than the release copies) That said the dynamic range didnt seem like ISO800 or anything so that sounds pretty weird.

I noticed that DxO has now tested D4. It is not an Exmor sensor design AFAIK and yet it easily beats 5D2 (and every other Canon) by some bit over a stop of dynamic range proving that Canon could do better if they were as willing to spend on better fab as Nikon has been even without needing Exmor patents.

It's ironic that now that Canon finally gave us all of the AF performance and much of the body performance we asked for for years and made all of that awesome now they fall behind with the sensors, which is the one place they had always delivered. :-\

 

[ebrakus]

Where can you post RAW sized files?

My 5Dm3 ISO above 8K is unusable quality when shot at max rez and looking at full rez. Lower rez raw images up to 256k dont look bad.

I can see how after cleaning up the image high ISO would look good. but at full size its crap.

 

[ebrakus]

Here is a 10,000 ISO JPEG. 5DM3 pointing out the window. Looks phenomenally better than the RAW.

 

[ebrakus]

After running a sequence at every ISO setting, I would say the ceiling for ISO on the 5DM3 is 4000/6400 IF you need the full resolution. If you are scaling down to internet sized pics, run all the way up to 20K.

Why do I need full res? Well, I was hoping to shoot time lapse video of the night sky in Joshua tree and keep at least one copy of the video in 4k2k res. Will see how it goes.

Have no idea if this is a firmware issue or intrinsic.

_E

 

[daveburlo]

Hi
Yes, i have tried converting to DNG and using adobe 6.7, and the files when imported into lightroom4 are excessively noisy, however after many tests, the best solution I found is as you say to output from Canon DPP as 16bit tiff and then work in Lightroom. The tiffs are of course very large files and I'm looking forward to the update From Lighrooom to ease the overall workflow, as this at the moment is a little time consuming.