From a Japanese website, JPGs only:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/impression/20120307_516825.html
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/impression/20120307_516825.html
More images from 5D mark III
- Thread starter simonxu11
- Start date
- Status
I just came back from a photo exhibition. I played with the new Canon 5D mkIII (with 24-70 I and 70-200 II) . I shot some portraits from iso 1600 all the way up to 25600. I was impressed!
Here I uploaded 2 100% crops at iso 1600 and 25600. Sorry for not uploading the whole image but the model (my dad) is not very comfortable about it ;D
I also played with Canon G1X but didn't have an sd card to save the files..
Here I uploaded 2 100% crops at iso 1600 and 25600. Sorry for not uploading the whole image but the model (my dad) is not very comfortable about it ;D
I also played with Canon G1X but didn't have an sd card to save the files..
Upvote
0
tasteofjace said:
I don't know but I can ask tomorrow. I'll be getting a friend with me too, to shoot some portraits.
A bonus shot from today. ISO 4000 full size JPG
Upvote
0
I checked the ISO 4000 JPG image.
For me this is the proof that the 5D Mark III is going to be a very very nice camera.....
Taken with F2.8 with also the very nice 70-200 II
Imagine the RAW files.....I like it....
I am afraid more replies will be here soon telling us the image is soft and...and...
I don't care , because I am going to be happy with this Camera.
Edward van Altena
www.wildlife-photos.net
For me this is the proof that the 5D Mark III is going to be a very very nice camera.....
Taken with F2.8 with also the very nice 70-200 II
Imagine the RAW files.....I like it....
I am afraid more replies will be here soon telling us the image is soft and...and...
I don't care , because I am going to be happy with this Camera.
Edward van Altena
www.wildlife-photos.net
Upvote
0
akiskev said:
Wow! ISO1600 looks fantastic! ISO 25600 looks great too. Are these based on RAW, or are they just crops of camera JPEG?
Upvote
0
I was shooting raw+jpg. These shots that I uploaded are crops from the jpgs because I cannot open the raw files (tried dpp and acr).
Tomorrow I 'm planning to shoot portraits with 70-200 II @ 135mm f/4. I'll manual focus precisely with live view and shoot from iso 1600 to 25600. I think the results will be interesting.
Tomorrow I 'm planning to shoot portraits with 70-200 II @ 135mm f/4. I'll manual focus precisely with live view and shoot from iso 1600 to 25600. I think the results will be interesting.
Upvote
0
E
erfon
Guest
altenae said:
+1!
you can download the beta version of camera raw here and it works great: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cameraraw6-7/
then you'll be able to open the mark III RAW files in photoshop.
let's see those RAWs! the problem with the jpegs is they get a bunch of noise reduction applied in-camera.
i'm seriously confused as to why canon is broadcasting 2 stops noise reduction in *JPEG* but has been fairly mum about RAW. if i had to guess, i'd say 80% + of photographers buying a Mark III shoot primarily in RAW. why buy a camera like this to shoot in JPEG?
Upvote
0
OK guys. Tomorrow you'll have your raws (thanks for the info about acr!!!!).
70-200 II@135mm f/4, manual live view focus and iso 1600-3200-6400-12800-25600. Any suggestions for better settings?
I 'll upload the raw files to a filehosting site and we 'll discuss the results together
Do not forget that I'm shooting in a well-lit environment though.
70-200 II@135mm f/4, manual live view focus and iso 1600-3200-6400-12800-25600. Any suggestions for better settings?
I 'll upload the raw files to a filehosting site and we 'll discuss the results together
Do not forget that I'm shooting in a well-lit environment though.
Upvote
0
T
Tijn
Guest
Try one at 1/4000 with lens cap on and 1sec with lens off, if possible. (totally dark and totally blown out)akiskev said:OK guys. Tomorrow you'll have your raws (thanks for the info about acr!!!!).
70-200 II@135mm f/4, manual live view focus and iso 1600-3200-6400-12800-25600. Any suggestions for better settings?
I 'll upload the raw files to a filehosting site and we 'll discuss the results together
Do not forget that I'm shooting in a well-lit environment though.
Some people are interested in DR
Upvote
0
Tijn said:Try one at 1/4000 with lens cap on and 1sec with lens off, if possible. (totally dark and totally blown out)akiskev said:OK guys. Tomorrow you'll have your raws (thanks for the info about acr!!!!).
70-200 II@135mm f/4, manual live view focus and iso 1600-3200-6400-12800-25600. Any suggestions for better settings?
I 'll upload the raw files to a filehosting site and we 'll discuss the results together
Do not forget that I'm shooting in a well-lit environment though.
Some people are interested in DR
Yes a raw shot at ISO 100, 1/8000th with lens cap on (better a body cap on, or at least make sure the lens does not have a maximum aperture faster than f/2.8, if you use an f/2 or f/1.4 lens or such the results will be bad) and also try to shade the front of the lens as much as you can (hidden under a coat or something, but they might think you are trying to steal it though), f-stop doesn't matter. And then take one with the lens on and cap off, ISO 100 again, lens wide open and maybe 2-3" exposure, something that makes sure parts of the scene are 100% blown out. For kicks you can also do the same at ISO160 so we can see how they do the 1/3 ISOs this time.
Then we can see if the DR matches that measured from the masking area (likely) and if this sample is radically different from IR's or not (not likely) and we can get a much better look at the look of the noise and see if it looks nicer than the 5D2 noise (less banding and stuff that sticks out to the eye in more bothersome ways than tight-grained, random noise).
And it is kind of funny that whoever off the street handles the new bodies for 10 seconds always seems to be bale to put up sharper/better images than anything Canon ever puts itself, even after having all the time in the world to select images to post. ;D
Upvote
0
I am really oversensitive or just sensitive about image sharpness/softness. I have to admit that image of your dad (many thanks to him by the way) looks good as it is ISO 4000. Pretty good. What I am worried about the most is sharpness at ISO 100, 200. So far, from samples which ware provided on IR and Canon it looks terribly soft for me. Your image shows a positive side for me. I really, really hope the real images from 5d3 at low iso are sharp. Do u have any photos at low iso? I would be really pleased if you could provide. Anyway, big thanks for current uplaod.
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I don't think canon particularly cares about sample shots. Look what they offer up for lenses.
Take the new 24-70. They published this:
Not particularly useful.
I think they do it because they're expected to, but don't give it much thought, weight or effort.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
