Production of the EOS 5D Mark III Finished? [CR2]

[Schwingi]

Looking forward to it, pls Canon don't mess this up.

 

[Loswr]

I don't think the 5Ds is bad, but as DPR clearly demonstrates, it's not the best option in any category, save if for some reason 43 MP on the A7rII is not quite enough for you.

Ahhhh, yes – DPR, the source of all wisdom and unbiased information. DPR's general attitude is, "Nikon and Sony cameras deliver stellar performance and outstanding images, and Canon cameras take decent pictures." DPR has a nice, cozy relationship with DxO, who's scoring is based on the fact that DR and color depth at base ISO are the most important criteria by which cameras – and lenses! – should be evaluated. I mean, we all know how important lens DR is, right?

You might also consider that DPR base their reviews on LR-converted RAW images, and other converters often handle Canon RAWs better. But such considerations are usually irrelevant to those who've made up their mind in advance.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

HDR in TV's is talking about adopting 10bit, and even then the standard is that they don't need to display every discrete colour, cameras set to RAW already capture way more DR than even the best HDR TV can display, so your point is what exactly, that in another two generations TV's might catch up with today's cameras?

Except the standard isn't based simple linear bit depth.
Dolby Vision HDR baseband signal ranges from 0 (essentially) to 10,000 nits being able to be both shown at the same time. That range is what they found was able to reasonably satisfy 90% of viewers. Viewers felt that expanding DR made an even larger difference than expanding spatial resolution. The full DR is not available in monitor type displays yet but would require 12bits with their new EOTF instead of 14-15bits using a regular gamma function. This new perceptual quantizer has been standardized as SMPTE ST-2084 and is used in various HDR-related standards and applications. Some generic HDR approaches use the PQ EOTF with 10 bits instead of 12. New spatial resolution base standard will be 8MP to start (which is actually the normalization standard DxO uses).

But the main point was not any numbers but just that any improvements in DR in either capture device DR then tone mapped or device output DR made for a better visual experience and that viewers even prioritized DR improvements over spatial resolution improvements so that talk about getting better DR isn't a bunch of silly nonsense that only people sitting in labs care about (of course anyone who actually goes into the real world and tries to actually user their camera to take pictures would already known this since it's just not that hard to find shots that just don't fit on the current Canon sensors (one hopes this new batch really does finally get to Exmor territory)). And that many kept going on about how HDR sensors require too much tone-mapping but displays are going up 2-4 stops (probably more for some of the theatrical laser displays, I forget but I think they were talking 16-18 stops or something) and not way off decades from now and that's about the amount Exmor has done better by.

 

[Larsskv]

DPR specifically called out the 5Ds for having terrible banding in the shadows. By all accounts, the 5Ds is a specialty camera for those who want maximum detail at low ISO.

Where does this come from? Have not heard about this and see no owners complaining. On the contrary people seem unanimously to agree the 5DS/R has better high iso than the 5DIII. Which fits my own expiriance as well (never saw any banding myself and being a long time 5DII owner I sure know what banding looks like).

My guess is that he never used a 5Ds or a 5D3 and based his assumptions of online reviews sites. I read the review on DPR and that whole article was based around DR and how the competition has better sensor tech. They were really looking hard to find a fault in the camera and zoomed on a tiny little box of nothing on an otherwise great photo, just too say it had banding, pathetic! In actual real world use, the banding on the 5D3 was hardly an issue on a properly exposed image and is now barely non existent on the 5Ds. So yeah, if that is your benchmark to downplay an otherwise superb camera, than you can never ever be a satisfied photographer.

+1.

I remember that nonsense article. It was after that I gave up on DPR altogether. The shot was ok to begin with, but the shadows were pushed way more than I would ever do or want to do, and the so called banding was almost impossible to see. I don't dispute that a Sony sensor would do better, I just don't see much real world use for the Sony advantage. When DPR makes a big point out of this, and fail to appreciate many things I love about Canon, I don't find them relevant to me, or for real world shooting. I've decided to avoid them, as I disagree with most of what they say.

 

[Maiaibing]

Here, I'll save you the 30 seconds : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/12

Thanks. I probably let the intro be the more important part of my reading: "the best performing Canon sensor to-date". Fortunately "terrible" banding sure looks better today than it used to...

Anyway maybe I just don't set out to lift the shadows like dpreview did here since I have yet to see it.

 

[Etienne]

Maybe "Canon Rumors" should be renamed to "SoNikon is Evil" ... after all it's blasphemy here to suggest that Canon DSLRs are not the best at everything.

 

[zim]

DPR specifically called out the 5Ds for having terrible banding in the shadows. By all accounts, the 5Ds is a specialty camera for those who want maximum detail at low ISO.

Where does this come from? Have not heard about this and see no owners complaining. On the contrary people seem unanimously to agree the 5DS/R has better high iso than the 5DIII. Which fits my own expiriance as well (never saw any banding myself and being a long time 5DII owner I sure know what banding looks like).

I won't get back that 30 seconds of my life that it took me to find it, so here you go: commenting on DR ... "And it's not just landscapes that suffer: the shot below contained an impossible-to-control background scene of high contrast, and exposing to retain the sky meant that shadow brightening to make the foreground anything but a sea of black resulted in noise and banding, which you can see even in the 50% crop below."

Here, I'll save you the 30 seconds : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/12

Thanks, saved me 30s as well.
I don't really understand that photo with the 50% crop showing banding. Do they mean that the little box that they pull up is a 50% crop of that whole picture or do they mean that that picture is itself a 50% crop of another picture?
In either scenario I don't see how that enlarged box to show banding is a 50% crop?

 

[Loswr]

Maybe "Canon Rumors" should be renamed to "SoNikon is Evil" ... after all it's blasphemy here to suggest that Canon DSLRs are not the best at everything.

I guess that makes me a blasphemer here, then. :

 

[privatebydesign]

DPR specifically called out the 5Ds for having terrible banding in the shadows. By all accounts, the 5Ds is a specialty camera for those who want maximum detail at low ISO.

Where does this come from? Have not heard about this and see no owners complaining. On the contrary people seem unanimously to agree the 5DS/R has better high iso than the 5DIII. Which fits my own expiriance as well (never saw any banding myself and being a long time 5DII owner I sure know what banding looks like).

I won't get back that 30 seconds of my life that it took me to find it, so here you go: commenting on DR ... "And it's not just landscapes that suffer: the shot below contained an impossible-to-control background scene of high contrast, and exposing to retain the sky meant that shadow brightening to make the foreground anything but a sea of black resulted in noise and banding, which you can see even in the 50% crop below."

Here, I'll save you the 30 seconds : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/12

Thanks, saved me 30s as well.
I don't really understand that photo with the 50% crop showing banding. Do they mean that the little box that they pull up is a 50% crop of that whole picture or do they mean that that picture is itself a 50% crop of another picture?
In either scenario I don't see how that enlarged box to show banding is a 50% crop?

It would also have been nice, considering he admits he lifted the shadows, to know exactly what he did to those shadows, because as far as I can see there is not a vast DR in the sky, the sun has long since set. I have images from considerably older Canon cameras that contain the sun and the lifted shadows are not as bad as those shown.

Personally I can't take anything DPR says seriously anymore, they are liars and they are biased.

 

[Pompo]

For my purposes (note the emphasis), the 5D3 is as close to perfection as any camera can be. I cannot imagine needing another camera for many years, if ever. That being said, I just got a better paying job so we will see if my statement holds true or not!

As for high ISO on 5D3 vs 5Ds, why are you all needing ISO 12,800 or higher? Do you all shoot for the CIA or something?

if you shoot at concerts or on movie sets you need high high shutter speeds and those places are very dark. yes I Need to stop the action and sometimes to stop down a bit to get enough dof for tho- tree actors, I would love to have usable IS0 30k isn The 1DX Mark II may be my ticket to heaven! Cant wait to try it!

 

[scyrene]

For my purposes (note the emphasis), the 5D3 is as close to perfection as any camera can be. I cannot imagine needing another camera for many years, if ever. That being said, I just got a better paying job so we will see if my statement holds true or not!

As for high ISO on 5D3 vs 5Ds, why are you all needing ISO 12,800 or higher? Do you all shoot for the CIA or something?

Try birds under a full woodland canopy. Or people dancing at an evening wedding reception disco. You don't need extreme situations to hit such high ISO speeds.

 

[YuengLinger]

For my purposes (note the emphasis), the 5D3 is as close to perfection as any camera can be. I cannot imagine needing another camera for many years, if ever. That being said, I just got a better paying job so we will see if my statement holds true or not!

As for high ISO on 5D3 vs 5Ds, why are you all needing ISO 12,800 or higher? Do you all shoot for the CIA or something?

Try birds under a full woodland canopy. Or people dancing at an evening wedding reception disco. You don't need extreme situations to hit such high ISO speeds.

+1

I am an idiot to still be following this thread.

 

[bdunbar79]

Maybe "Canon Rumors" should be renamed to "SoNikon is Evil" ... after all it's blasphemy here to suggest that Canon DSLRs are not the best at everything.

It goes both ways. And if that's all that is said, it wouldn't be a big deal. It's really the constant proclamation that Sony and Nikon have set THE gold standard, and that Canon sucks horribly bad and will lose all market share if they don't match SoNikon's spec sheets soon. MILC of course is going to take over DSLR sales and since Canon doesn't have a big time pro MILC that should seal their fate.

Of course in the real world MILC sales are flat and Canon's market share keeps growing.

 

[hubie]

Oh boys, stop calling each other names... seriously. Canon makes good gear, so does Nikon and Sony. It depends on your liking wether or not you are going to shoot with either of these brands (or multiple of them). I chose Canon, not really knowing alot about either of them but just hearing about the nice Canon Glass (which was important for me back then) and I never really regretted making that choice.

Of course, I hope for better DR in the future, stellar SN-performance and 4K video (although I never used it yet - lol) combined in a 1500 - 2000 € (yeah, I do live in the EU ) package. Yet, I am still very happy with my 70D, which is my first camera (not considering mobile phone cameras).

I am very much looking forward on the succesor of the 6D, as I think that the 5D mk IV is way out of my reach, financially. I'd rather put the money into a 2000 € lens instead of adding it up to make the step from the 6D to a 5D.

Cheers

 

[Maiaibing]

Of course in the real world MILC sales are flat and Canon's market share keeps growing.

Think you got confused writing this. Its more like the opposite.

MILC sales increased from 2014 to 15 both in market share (from around 1-in-5 to around 1-in-4 of worldwide ILC sales) and even slightly in absolute numbers.

DSLR sales again were down 2014 to 2015 (for once only by a few percent).

However, according to Canon their ILC unit sales fell with much more - a full 12% in 2015. Because Canon's mirrorless sales does not account for much of their overall sales (and actually should have gone up if Canon mirrorless follows the market norm) Canon DSLR's are in fact loosing market share to both mirrorless overall and to their specific DSLR competitors.

All this in spite of my own two Canon DSLR purchases last year...

 

[eml58]

Maybe "Canon Rumors" should be renamed to "SoNikon is Evil" ... after all it's blasphemy here to suggest that Canon DSLRs are not the best at everything.

That may be correct in a very few instances, there are certainly a few rabid Canon Lads here at Canon Rumours, to be expected considering the name of the site. But we tolerate them because......well they are Canonites after all and at times can be a little confused, but hidden in the confusion can from time to time be hidden words of wisdom, you do need to concentrate though.

But if you've been around CR for a while I think you may find your comment is incorrect, most People on this site appreciate good photography and good advice to better their photography, and there's a lot of both at CR, there's even images taken with Sony & Nikon Cameras that are excellent (gasp), to be expected, both companies produce some excellent Cameras (another gasp), of which I personally own a few of (even bigger one, perhaps a gasp).

No, I think if you were really perceptive and wanted to rename Canon Rumours you might change it to something like "DPR deluded fools we are not" or "We dislike DPR stinkers" or "DPR BS artists blown wide open", yeah, I think any of those might work

Personally I think "Canon Rumours" works better though.

 

[Loswr]

Of course in the real world MILC sales are flat and Canon's market share keeps growing.

Think you got confused writing this. Its more like the opposite.

MILC sales increased from 2014 to 15 both in market share (from around 1-in-5 to around 1-in-4 of worldwide ILC sales) and even slightly in absolute numbers.

DSLR sales again were down 2014 to 2015 (for once only by a few percent).

Think you are simply confused about the terminology.

MILC sales have risen by ~1% per year – that slope is close enough to flat that it's reasonable to call it such. Clearly, it's not a 'growth market' by any stretch.

Market share is the fraction of sales by one manufacturer within a given market. For interchangeable lens cameras (ILCs – which comprise dSLRs and MILCs), Canon has had the largest market share for >11 years. Yes, the overall market is contracting – but Canon's market share has grown further over the past couple of years.

The ILC market contraction is extrinsic to Canon, their maintained/growing market share indicated they are doing very well intrinsically. Sony is, too (although the most recent BCN showed Sony losing a lot of market share to Olympus).

 

[Sporgon]

DPR specifically called out the 5Ds for having terrible banding in the shadows. By all accounts, the 5Ds is a specialty camera for those who want maximum detail at low ISO.

Where does this come from? Have not heard about this and see no owners complaining. On the contrary people seem unanimously to agree the 5DS/R has better high iso than the 5DIII. Which fits my own expiriance as well (never saw any banding myself and being a long time 5DII owner I sure know what banding looks like).

I won't get back that 30 seconds of my life that it took me to find it, so here you go: commenting on DR ... "And it's not just landscapes that suffer: the shot below contained an impossible-to-control background scene of high contrast, and exposing to retain the sky meant that shadow brightening to make the foreground anything but a sea of black resulted in noise and banding, which you can see even in the 50% crop below."

Here, I'll save you the 30 seconds : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/12

Thanks, saved me 30s as well.
I don't really understand that photo with the 50% crop showing banding. Do they mean that the little box that they pull up is a 50% crop of that whole picture or do they mean that that picture is itself a 50% crop of another picture?
In either scenario I don't see how that enlarged box to show banding is a 50% crop?

There's something very strange about that picture of the girl, lit from the side with the post sunset sky behind. According to DPR it was shot at EV 7 and they had to lift the shadows. For a sky like that, just after the sun has set you'd normally be in the region of EV10, that's three stops faster, and you'd still be able to lift the shadows. So if I'd shot this kind of scene at EV 7 I'd be expecting to have to bring the highlights down and leave the shadows alone.

Is it possible to download the raw file off DPR ?

 

[privatebydesign]

Of course you can't get the RAW, but if you look at the preceding image in the gallery you can see how much lifting he has done :

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/12

Just like i said, the whole thing stinks.

 

[privatebydesign]

This is an illustration of what Sporgon and I are talking about so it doesn't sound like a conspiracy theory.

This shot has more DR than the DPR image, how do we know that? The sun is still above the horizon.

First image is as shot. Second it as adjusted, dropped highlights and lifted shadows, the greenery is now much lighter than the DPR image. Third is 100% crop of lifted shadow area as marked in shot two. Same for four and five. Zero banding!

To me it seems DPR have severely under exposed the background and then made a big deal of the fact they can't lift it, my point is that the 5DSR is more than capable of taking that shot if it had been exposed properly. I am not saying for one second more DR is not a good thing, but to manipulate a severely underexposed image like that and then hold it up as an example of failed image quality is disingenuous at best. It stinks.