Comparing my 60d with my new 5d3 not seeing much of a difference.

[agierke]

KKCF

it appears to me that you are in the process of learning photography and that your focus has been on getting familiar with the tools. that is great and it sounds like you are starting to see what the 5d3 has to offer over previous models. it is very important to understand how to use your tools in order to get better at photography.

but that will only take you so far....

at a certain point you will maximize your understanding of how your camera and lenses work. it is at this point that separates the truly great professionals from the serious amateurs. understanding and identifying great light is the next step. once you start to understand what lighting conditions provide for really fantastic photography you will start to see that your gear is not the limiting factor. more often than not the greatest limiting factor is timing and opportunity. the light will dictate what you can and cannot do as well as if there is a truly great photograph to be had.

i only wanted to point that out because i got a sense from your posts that you were expecting the 5D3 to provide a significant improvement in your images through its technology alone. this is rarely the case as the best light will provide great photos regardless of the camera you are using (assuming there are capable hands operating that camera).

i hope you continue to make strides and enjoy your new camera! i do encourage you to start thinking more about different qualities of light and what settings are required to take fullest advantage of that light.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

KKCF

it appears to me that you are in the process of learning photography and that your focus has been on getting familiar with the tools. that is great and it sounds like you are starting to see what the 5d3 has to offer over previous models. it is very important to understand how to use your tools in order to get better at photography.

but that will only take you so far....

at a certain point you will maximize your understanding of how your camera and lenses work. it is at this point that separates the truly great professionals from the serious amateurs. understanding and identifying great light is the next step. once you start to understand what lighting conditions provide for really fantastic photography you will start to see that your gear is not the limiting factor. more often than not the greatest limiting factor is timing and opportunity. the light will dictate what you can and cannot do as well as if there is a truly great photograph to be had.

i only wanted to point that out because i got a sense from your posts that you were expecting the 5D3 to provide a significant improvement in your images through its technology alone. this is rarely the case as the best light will provide great photos regardless of the camera you are using (assuming there are capable hands operating that camera).

i hope you continue to make strides and enjoy your new camera! i do encourage you to start thinking more about different qualities of light and what settings are required to take fullest advantage of that light.

Thanks for the advice. I plan on learning more and more about light, flash, composition, etc. i have made great strides in the short two years I have had a dslr. I do realize that phtography lessons are needed but i figured they woukd be better practiced on this than having to learn methods and apply them to a different body later. I will still play with this a week or so longer and decide if the investment is worth it now or in a year or so when I have gained more skill. Did you think the photo's turned out ok?

 

[KKCFamilyman]

Try shooting at 25600 ISO and see the difference.... the 60D should show quite a bit of noi....... waitamminit




also: if you're shooting flowers at ISO 400 and seeing noise.... just what are you doing? Post more shots?

Will do but I never said my flowers were bad at iso400. The pic I posted was iso5000.

 

[DCM1024]

I went through a very similar experience last year comparing a Rebel T2i to the 5d2. First 2 shoots were in studio. Bride selected 2 enlargements, one from each camera and I was disappointed that I couldn't see any remarkable difference in side-by-side enlargement comparisons. Next shoot was a band performing at sunset. The ONLY useable shots came from the 5d2 due to the expanded ISO performance. Keep shooting in more demanding conditions - you'll see. Debbie

 

[Drizzt321]

I went through a very similar experience last year comparing a Rebel T2i to the 5d2. First 2 shoots were in studio. Bride selected 2 enlargements, one from each camera and I was disappointed that I couldn't see any remarkable difference in side-by-side enlargement comparisons. Next shoot was a band performing at sunset. The ONLY useable shots came from the 5d2 due to the expanded ISO performance. Keep shooting in more demanding conditions - you'll see. Debbie

Yea, I went from the Rebel XSi (450D) to the 5d2, and the first day I got it I went to a dance performance and got some nice shots and was blown away by what I could do with the ISO performance. Now, I'm looking forward to pushing what I can do with the 5d3

 

[RAKAMRAK]

[/quote]

Thanks for the advice. I plan on learning more and more about light, flash, composition, etc. i have made great strides in the short two years I have had a dslr. I do realize that phtography lessons are needed but i figured they woukd be better practiced on this than having to learn methods and apply them to a different body later. I will still play with this a week or so longer and decide if the investment is worth it now or in a year or so when I have gained more skill. Did you think the photo's turned out ok?
[/quote]

From your statement it appears that you are not a professional photographer (I mean only that you probably do not earn anything substantial from photography yet) and you are learning and enjoying your photography technique. My understanding is that your 60D is a good enough camera (probably more than good enough) to do that. You have stated that you think it does not make sense to learn techniques on one camera body and then apply them with another camera body. Well it is not as if you are changing from Canon to Nikon to Sony where the lay out of buttons and menus makes the cross application of techniques time consuming. You are learning (or going to learn) techniques on a 60D which is more or less functionally similar (definitely not identical) to all other DSLRS of Canon lineup. Moreover, there is another issue to consider. Do you think you shall be satisfied with your 5DIII in 3 years/4 years down the line when 5DIV or something like that comes up? Then you will change to 5DIV and that will be a new body. You WILL have to "apply to a different body later" one way or the other. That is probably not a very sound rationale for buying 5DIII (you definitely may have other reasons to buy 5DIII, I am just saying this particular logic is not sound).

Ask yourself, if you do not see the difference between 60D photos and 5DIII photos then why buy 5DIII? Just because it is a "better" camera? But how would you enjoy its "betterness" if you yourself are not sure in what way it is better? Instead of buying 5DIII today you can invest in better lens/glass and two years from now when your 60D grow long in the tooth, you will definitely have developed so much as a photographer that you will probably buy 5DIV (may be or something even better) and enjoy it better. Because you WILL know "how" that is better than your old 60D or even the current 5DIII.

My 2 cents.

 

[briansquibb]

I think in good light at iso100 it will be difficult to see much IQ difference. The most obvious difference is the bg blur when compared to a ff

 

[Marsu42]

Here is my cat in manual 1/100 f4 iso 10000 105mm just converted raw in lr4.1.

Imho a good test picture of what *not* to do with a 5d3 and a f4 zoom. You'd gotten a much better picture when using two flashes (bounce and fill) and/or a faster lens - the lovely corner in the background really deserves to be blurred by bokeh. And generally IS does not freeze your cat, 1/100s is very slow for 100mm and your image is motion-blurred even at this resolution. Furthermore you'd have to overexpose to get more detail out of the black cat and then postprocess it properly - atm it looks like a black hole with yellow eyes.

So the OP has only a couple of zooms and needs advice about the best lenses for his 60D, and then ONE DAY later he's already bought a 5D3 and is complaining about it not being much of an upgrade? Jeez, slow down dude! Get to know your camera, what lenses you like, experiment with primes, and then you can figure out what the advantages AND disadvantages of a full frame camera are.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5088

KKCFamilyman, really, looking at your postings and the advice given from a lot of people, you seem to *want* to ignore advice given to you. If you are out to do something anyway and just want to have your opinion strengthened, you might think about saving other people's time around here - personally I'm happy to help with my limited knowledge, but no one likes to talk to a wall.

 

[Viggo]

If you can't tell the difference between a $5 bottle and a $50 bottle, by all means save your money and drink the $5 bottle.

I say the same things to my customers! When they are telling me that it's no point buying L just because they're better built , you know, in a way that they have discovered the horrible plot I haven't, LOL.

Then I say, if you have the right glasses and you can't see the L is better in every which way, then good for you, you saved a bunch a money... but it is way better, I add almost silently, and very arrogant ;D

 

[koolman]

I'm sure what I'm going to say will stir up lots of flack.

For me as a hobbiest, part of the hobby is placing emphasis on trying to improve my skills as a photographer. I am not under pressure to "get the shot" and I'm not under pressure to shoot in low light fast moving situations. I dont have a customer to satisfy - other then myself.

My 550d and certainly a 60d - is plenty of camera for a hobby. Sure - the IQ of a $3,500 FF camera will be better, but that is due to its superiority as a tool. Yes, there are some creative advantages in FF cameras that are not available in crops, but I cant justify the extra $$$$ just for that.

I get much more exited seeing great shots taken with "simple" equipment - that emphasize the photographers skill, then "great shots" - that express an expensive piece of equipment.

Thats me I guess.

 

[smirkypants]

I think in good light at iso100 it will be difficult to see much IQ difference. The most obvious difference is the bg blur when compared to a ff

What he said. With a good lens and a good lighting set-up, there is no reason why you can't produce magazine-quality results with a 60D. If you are super-super picky you can pick things out. The 5D3 however should be much more forgiving when presented with sub-optimal conditions. That's really the reason to get it.

 

[Marsu42]

I'm sure what I'm going to say will stir up lots of flack.

I guess you'd be surprised how many people will agree with you, esp. seeing clueless owners of top equipment (bless them, they keep Canon in business!).

It's just like in the computer biz: One year, a given cheap PC "type a" is for entry level word processing, the more expensive "type b" is for serious enthusiast apps. The next year, everything has magically moved down and "type b" is only good for your kids or wife anymore and so on... that's "planned obsolescence" and keeps the companies running.

The one thing that really separates equipment seems to be: How will your gear react if used in the rain or a sandstorm, and how will it do if dropped to a concrete floor from medium height.

 

[MarkB]

I too moved from a 60D to a 5d3. I would say moved is not fair. The 60D will likely see a lot of work for bird photos and other long shots where the 1.6x helps a lot.

After some tests I would say that I can get really useable shots up to 12800 and maybe 25600 with a lot of post. I did occasionally use up to 3200 on the 60D. So thats about 2 more useable stops. Maybe two and a half.

One big difference I noticed the first day was that the 50mm f1.4 lens correction profile isn't default loaded on the 5d3. I enjoyed that lens on my 60D and got some of my favorite photos from it when it was stopped down to about 1.8 or more. I tried out that lens right away because I wanted to see the low light limit!. I have attached on shot showing how bad the vignetting is without the correction. The second (insanely noisy) shot was taken with all lights off at max iso (102480) and 1.4 aperture. I could not see her at all but the camera achieved autofocus!

 

[NotABunny]

Okay, here it is:

1.

Using a long focal length while shooting at an angle, usually gives photos an off look. So, either get lower at the level of the cat or use 24 mm at about the same angle. You'll see that the subject sticks out.

2.

You have to consider what photos are. A photo is a bunch of shapes that the human eye has to see; for a good photo, the human also says "wow". For this, you need enough light to make those shapes clearly visible (sure, mood photos may differ). However, this is not enough. You also need to see differences among shapes, and this requires dynamic range. You have to fill a lot of more of the eye's dynamic range to make the subject pop.

What the cat photo lacks (and the flower shot as well) is dynamic range (aside brightness). Basically, everything is murky, it's difficult to perceive where one shape ends and another starts.

Because the original scene has a very low dynamic range, you can improve it through exposure only to a limited degree. However, you can improve it more in post processing, by increasing for example the Whites (in LR4).

 

[Marsu42]

One big difference I noticed the first day was that the 50mm f1.4 lens correction profile isn't default loaded on the 5d3.

... I guess that you know that you can put Canon lens profiles on the camera with dpp. But it's interesting that it's not inside the 5d3 by default, so Canon might not expect this combination to be used often - this could point to the rumored 50mm replacement or can prove the fact that Canon also thinks that their current 50/1.4 is crappy.

Concerning the second picture: I wouldn't say this is strictly "in focus"

 

[KKCFamilyman]

Thanks for the advice. I have posted a few threads but not about the same topic. I am looking at plan b with a lens upgrade if the 5d3 does not prove to have the results I am after. To be totally honest I think the 5d3 would be great for me if I could have afforded the soon to be released 24-70 II and 70-200 2.8 II then there would be no questions but since I can only afford the camera for now I am debating. I do like how it sounds and how much faster it locks on and the fact that when better glass gets put on I can comfortable shoot at higher iso's than my 60d which is why I was considering this in the first place. That's the main reason and maybe some lessons will help me bring maximize that FF sensor because no matter what I still need a higher iso capable body. I simply hate using a flash just to grab an indoor daylight pic of the kids playing. I think that the 5d3 will do better at acheiving that with less noise.

 

[unkbob]

Ok here's an analogy for you.

Let's say I live in the city and walk to work everyday. It takes me 30 minutes. So I upgrade to a Ferrari, but because of the traffic it still takes me 30 minutes. Therefore I can see no difference between the two modes of transport.

SELL THE FERRARI OR MOVE OUT OF THE CITY.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

ok 5d3 iso6400

 

[KKCFamilyman]

5d3 iso12800

 

[KKCFamilyman]

60d iso 6400