Examples of DR photos and why this is important to landscape shooters

[bdunbar79]

* I can afford it, but I won't pay $3500 for it: I don't think it's good bang-for-buck, there are better alternatives in the market (D800).

* The only 5D3 strengths I see are "it can use my current Canon lenses" and "it has clean video". At anything else, the D800 wins, or it's a tie.

* I also think many people think like me, and sales are low (yes, I know it's out of stock everywhere, but only because Canon has had lots of manufacturing issues, not because demand was strong, see link at the end).

* I know it's worth whatever people are ready to pay for it. If manufacturing issues are solved and cameras start to pile up in the shelves, the price will fall. That is what happened with 60D vs D7000, and D700 vs 5D2, and I expect to see it soon with the 5D3.

* You think I'm crazy? In the first weeks, where it was really hard to find a 5D3 in stock, they sold on ebay for a big markup ($4000 body only). But now it can already be bought at a discount at reputable ebay sellers ($3220). I think the official price will follow in the coming weeks.



that's why I started this thread: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6539.45

The only strengths you see? Please post photos you have taken with the 5D Mark III sir and point out to us which features of your photos you are not sufficiently satisfied over the 5D Mark II. Do you own the 5D Mark III? Have you used it extensively? I have had both and there are many improved features vs. what you list. How do I know? I used both everyday. Do you own or have you used a D800? Or are you just literate?

 

[cliffwang]

* I can afford it, but I won't pay $3500 for it: I don't think it's good bang-for-buck, there are better alternatives in the market (D800).

I also won't pay 3.5K for 5D3. However, I have different thought.
1. Selling my 5D2 and buying 5D3 will cost about 2K. It doesn't worth for me.
2. The price of 5D3 should drop in few months because of its competitor D800.
However, D800 is not a really alternative of 5D3. The market between 5D3 and D800 is still quite different. High ISO vs high MP/DR is just like apple vs orange. Maybe D600 will be the really alternative of 5D3.
The only thing I feel bad is why Nikon can give its users better price and Canon cannot. I will buy 5D3 if its price drops to 3K in end of this year. Otherwise, I might just wait for Canon's other model. I am okay with my 5D2 now, so I can just wait. No rush for me.

 

[Marsu42]

However, D800 is not a really alternative of 5D3. The market between 5D3 and D800 is still quite different. High ISO vs high MP/DR is just like apple vs orange.

If you're going to upgrade to the 5d3 I'd advise you to look at the 5d2/5d3 controlled raw samples yourself (see dpreview): This is the nearly the same sensor, the successor only has a "nicer" noise pattern - you fell for the "high iso" marketing. Only extremely high iso will show a difference, but then dynamic range is low.

The 5d3 has other nice features like the af if your lens happens to be in a group that allows it to use the full af (see the manual), more fps, silent shutter, yadayadayada. But a denoised and scaled down d800 image is just as good as the 5d3's, I'm sorry to say as a Canon user.

Maybe D600 will be the really alternative of 5D3. The only thing I feel bad is why Nikon can give its users better price and Canon cannot.

Simple: Sony has done the r&d, and Nikon uses their sensors while Canon cannot get at the patents - so they're stuck with the tech that was current when they developed the 5d2. They have to develop something on their own, ask again in two or more years for progress.

 

[cliffwang]

If you're going to upgrade to the 5d3 I'd advise you to look at the 5d2/5d3 controlled raw samples yourself (see dpreview): This is the nearly the same sensor, the successor only has a "nicer" noise pattern - you fell for the "high iso" marketing. Only extremely high iso will show a difference, but then dynamic range is low.

I heard that the raw IQ on 5D2/5D3 is not much different. However, when I see some samples on ISO 3200 and 6400 from 5D3, I feel they have better noise control then my 5D2.
You mentioned that 5D3 has nicer noise pattern then 5D2. Does that mean after I use LR to reduce the noise from 5D2 raw files, they will looks similar to the 5D3 raw files? By the way, do you have the review link?

The 5d3 has other nice features like the af if your lens happens to be in a group that allows it to use the full af (see the manual), more fps, silent shutter, yadayadayada. But a denoised and scaled down d800 image is just as good as the 5d3's, I'm sorry to say as a Canon user.

A quick question. If you scaled a ISO 6400 D800 image files from 36MP to 22MP, will the file has same quality with files taken from 5D3 @ISO 6400?

 

[Kernuak]

If you're going to upgrade to the 5d3 I'd advise you to look at the 5d2/5d3 controlled raw samples yourself (see dpreview): This is the nearly the same sensor, the successor only has a "nicer" noise pattern - you fell for the "high iso" marketing. Only extremely high iso will show a difference, but then dynamic range is low.

Some people do need to shoot at that level at times though. From my quick tests just after the announcement, there were about 1.5 stops difference between the MkII and MkIII. Even without the need for lower noise, the focusing improvements will also be a benefit for many. While it is by no means a sports or wildlife camera, it can be used for most applications in sports and wildlife. It is a relatively low number of occasions where I actually need a high frame rate, in which case, I'd use my 7D (when I eventually get a 5D MkIII). I have actually used my 5D MkII for moving wildlife (diving gannets), but it was a real chore. Basically it was a single shot, trying to time when they dived (I did get some success though). The extra two fps and better focus tracking would have been much better. At the time, I wasn't convinced that my 7D was performing properly IQ-wise, but it turned out it was a Lightroom issue annoyingly.

 

[TTMartin]

Then why is the Canon 5D Mk III, now out selling the Nikon D800 at Amazon?
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3017941

* I can afford it, but I won't pay $3500 for it: I don't think it's good bang-for-buck, there are better alternatives in the market (D800).

* The only 5D3 strengths I see are "it can use my current Canon lenses" and "it has clean video". At anything else, the D800 wins, or it's a tie.

* I also think many people think like me, and sales are low (yes, I know it's out of stock everywhere, but only because Canon has had lots of manufacturing issues, not because demand was strong, see link at the end).

* I know it's worth whatever people are ready to pay for it. If manufacturing issues are solved and cameras start to pile up in the shelves, the price will fall. That is what happened with 60D vs D7000, and D700 vs 5D2, and I expect to see it soon with the 5D3.

* You think I'm crazy? In the first weeks, where it was really hard to find a 5D3 in stock, they sold on ebay for a big markup ($4000 body only). But now it can already be bought at a discount at reputable ebay sellers ($3220). I think the official price will follow in the coming weeks.



that's why I started this thread: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6539.45

 

[TTMartin]

...
If you're going to upgrade to the 5d3 I'd advise you to look at the 5d2/5d3 controlled raw samples yourself (see dpreview): This is the nearly the same sensor, the successor only has a "nicer" noise pattern - you fell for the "high iso" marketing. Only extremely high iso will show a difference, but then dynamic range is low.
...

Here's the link at DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/28

When you change it to higher ISO the 5D MkIII sure looks like it has less noise to me.

Nicer noise is that the new Nikon phrase for less noise when it applies to Canon cameras?

 

[briansquibb]

I have no problem with people buying either the D800 or the 5DIII. Just a question of personal choice, I am not going to try to get them to change their mind as I dont want people telling me what to buy, so I wont tell them.

The D800 and the 5D3 are quite different cameras that appeal to different types of users, they are so far apart that it is difficult to make a objective comparison.

 

[Marsu42]

Here's the link at DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/28 When you change it to higher ISO the 5D MkIII sure looks like it has less noise to me. Nicer noise is that the new Nikon phrase for less noise when it applies to Canon cameras?

I downloaded all raws of 600d, 5d2, 5d3 and d800 (ugh! clearly the killer sensor) of all isos, imported them into Lightroom and compared them myself looking at the critical area of the threads in the box on a larger screen.

Up to iso1600 I cannot see any difference, at iso3200 it's small, and at iso6400+ it's noticeable - but then both sensors are so bad that it hardly matters to *me* and my future use for such a body (weddings, mostly with flash, if not lens with f2.8 or better). And when comparing the raw samples, it's no noise reduction and no downsizing, so hardly a real world comparison which will even the differences even further.

"Nicer" noise is my term and describes what 5d3 users reported in the forum - the acutal noise isn't much better, but looks more like film and is more "pleasing" - and looking at iso3200 5d2 vs. 5d3 I'd second to that.

 

[jaduffy007]

Check out this guy's work:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dmtoh/

He shoots with the 5D Mark III and Mark II previously. When people say these cameras have poor dynamic range just point them to this guy's work

Nobody is saying 5D Mark II has low dynamic range. Its DR was fine, similar to its competition 4 YEARS AGO!

Now, the new 5D Mark III has much lower DR than its competition. Good photographers can somewhat compensate using HDR techniques, but the facts don't change that 5D Mark III has much lower DR than the competition.

If you are a landscape shooter and are not married to Canon, then you will get much, much more bang for the buck if you use D800/E. OF course, the ultimate for landscape shooters is the MF backs, but that is beyond the scope of the DSLRs.

Too bad there aren't any good Nikon lenses that will utilize the full DR potential of the 800/E.

It is unfortunate that there isn't better moderation of online forums. Posts such as yours, misinform readers and waste the time of others correcting your mis-statements.

There are plenty of lenses by Nikon, Zeiss and Schneider that take full advantage of the D800.
Examples? Lenses such as the Nikon 200 f2, Nikon 14-24, Zeiss 100 f2 and Schneider 90mm TS give superlative results. Heck, even the $500 Nikon 85 f1.8G is producing stunning results.

Same will be true when Canon release their mega MP / high DR camera in the relatively near future.

 

[jaduffy007]

Can anyone provide me with example(s) of pictures that needed high DR to expose/bring out shadows/clip highlights, etc.? I am trying to evaluate how important it is to my shooting.

With the 17-40L, I do need to upgrade in the future to get the most out of this 5d2 sensor. I am including 5d3 users in this conversation as well, since at low ISO these cameras are nearly identical. I think I have seen a few examples where my camera could use more DR, especially when pulling shadows and banding that occur (in these situations).

I just started using LR 4.0 so I have spent tons of time in post, but I do use DPP quite regularly. So, if you can provide some samples would be greatly appreciated.

Birdman, usually people are going to think of its obvious advantages with landscape photography such as Peter Lik.
http://www.lik.com/

For me as a portrait /editorial shooter, DR is a big deal too.

The larger sensors and film negs will still have their advantages over the D800, but it's getting a LOT closer now.

 

[jaduffy007]

If you are a landscape shooter and are not married to Canon, then you will get much, much more bang for the buck if you use D800/E.

The D800 has its shortcomings as well. Seems no one can can the proper color right on this camera. The AWB in comparison to the Canon fails miserably where as the 5D Mark III out of the box appears spot on. Also trying to use the D800 custom WB settings still does not reflect the right colors or shifting.

See for yourself > http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=11652

Very amusing.

The video was posted on Cinema5D, so guess who was the winner?

They tested the 5D3 with the 50mm f/1.4 USM while they put the old Nikkor f/1.4 D on the D800. Why not the G lens? How can you compare autofocus when Canon is mounting an USM lens and the Nikon an old micromotor one? Why the dear Dave didn't see fit to mention it?

He pointed out Canon's better performance in low light - which is something plainly known - but it was very unfair. It's very apparent, when you compare those hi-ISO pics (minute 2:40 on) that Nikon's images look 1/3 or even 1/2 stops brighter. Why the dear Dave didn't point it out, when comparing noise levels?

One other very amusing part was the one about continuous shoot. Instead of praising Nikon's higher fps and buffer in spite of the file size, he urged to stress how slow the Nikon was on writing those files on what? On a Class 6 sd card!!! Jesus, you're spending several thousands bucks on a camera, and then you're niggard with cards??? Do this test with a hi-performance CF card and then you can have a sound and concrete opinion. Of course, being D800's files much bigger, using a slow card creates a terrible bottleneck, much more than with the 5D3. Even if you spend 200 bucks on cards, you're still getting a better bargain than the 5D3. So again, complaining on what?

And then yes, dulcis in fundo, the AWB problem. I mean, seriously, it's about moving 2 slides. T W O. Calibrate your camera with LR and you have to do it just once. Unless he's saying that D800's files are greenish - and it would be quite a novelty - he's really complaining on nothing.

Amusing indeed. My personal fave was a fashion blog site comparing the D800 to a Hassleblad H3D-39. They concluded that the Hasselblad was better, but were very surprised how well the D800 performed. "Amusing" part? They used the $5000 HC Macro 120mm-II lens on the hassy and the $100 50mm f1.8D Nikon lens on the D800. Yah.

 

[Marsu42]

There are plenty of lenses by Nikon, Zeiss and Schneider that take full advantage of the D800. Same will be true when Canon release their mega MP / high DR camera in the relatively near future.

... and Canon is doing it, see the new 24-70ii - the only question is if other updated Canon lenses for high mp camera bodies will keep being that much more expensive, or if Nikon and Canon will be even again in 2-3 years.

 

[mrjimmy]

Into the sun This photo was taken at a rest stop in Florida off I-10 its on a display stand about 30 feet in the air ok yes I did use a filter on my lense and taken with a canon 5D mk 3

 

[rpt]

Into the sun

Oooooooh! Lovely! I would love to learn your technique if you can share it.

 

[Viggo]

Into the sun

Oooooooh! Lovely! I would love to learn your technique if you can share it.

A big ass reflector...

 

[briansquibb]

Into the sun

Oooooooh! Lovely! I would love to learn your technique if you can share it.

A big ass reflector...

Green screen and a good sky image

 

[aznable]

Into the sun

Oooooooh! Lovely! I would love to learn your technique if you can share it.

A big ass reflector...

Green screen and a good sky image

i tought the same...looks too extreme

 

[serendipidy]

Great photo, but where is the pilot? I've shot some Blue Angels and even though the planes appear smaller and not as clear, I often can see the pilot in the cockpit. Could it be the angle of the sun on the canopy?

 

[expatinasia]

Green screen and a good sky image

I am sure a few had that thought as well.

I hate to be cynical but I thought it looked like a model airplane when I first looked at the picture. In fact I thought was why we do not see the whole aircraft as someone or something was holding it.

Like I say, I hate to be cynical but...