Some high ISO 5D3 samples from last weekend

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the hardest I've had to push the ISO on the 5D3 so far, and I'm pleasantly impressed. This isn't meant to inspire pixel peeping (sorry, no 100% crops :) ), but rather to show what's possible with clean ISO 3200-6400 images. I know that's not that high by today's standards, but suffice it to say that I would have never attempted shots like this prior to picking up a 5D3. I f'd up and underexposed the images by 1/2 to 1 stops, but the images cleaned up nicely in Lightroom, and noise wise, are plenty nice enough for a two-page magazine spread.

ISO 3200, exposure pulled 1 stop
_L3C2399-2.jpg


ISO 6400, exposure pulled 1/2 stop. Not enough motion blur in this one for my liking. I really didn't notice much difference in noise between ISO 3200 and 6400.
_L3C2179.jpg


ISO 3200, exposure pulled 1/2 stop. Good sense of motion, but too soft to run large in print. Oh well, maybe next time.
_L3C2479.jpg


A few notes:

1) The AF system is a beast. It was very dark, and the AF locked on effortlessly in AI Servo. On the other hand, the the black AF points are invisible at night when locked onto a black subject. I had to keep hitting the AF selection button to turn the points red in order to ensure they were positioned on the subject correctly.

2) For this set, the in-camera jpeg processing was quite lacking. I shot both raw and jpeg, and the jpegs yielded more noise and less detail than the raws. That's no surprise, but it becomes very evident at 3200-plus ISO. In better-lit scenes, IMHO, the jpegs render adequate detail and quality for my needs up to 3200. For stuff like this, it's raw all the way.
 
kevl said:
V8Beast said:
ISO 3200, exposure pulled 1/2 stop. Good sense of motion, but too soft to run large in print. Oh well, maybe next time.
_L3C2479.jpg

How did you get the buildings to stay reasonably sharp in the background?

I think because how the camera was moving. If you are in the car and look out your window, things that are close to you are flying by, but things in the distance move slow. Slow things don't blur as much. :)
 
Upvote 0
Viggo said:
Thanks for posting and great work, skilled stuff.

Lens of choice here?

My trusty 24-105. Not bad for a slow kit lens, if I do say so myself :)

awinphoto said:
So just to be clear, withing 14 stops of DR, you CAN pull detail out of the shadows and get usable results? lol. ;D

Yeah, but just barely. I'm surprised the POS Canon sensor didn't break out into spontaneous self-combustion under these conditions ;D Seriously, I think the 5D3 actually has better DR than the D800 at this ISO level, but then again, everyone seems to be a landscape photographer these days, so it's an irrelevant point :)

kevl said:
How did you get the buildings to stay reasonably sharp in the background?

TCapp is spot on. The buildings are a least a mile down the road in the background, and not subject to motion blur like the rest of the image.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.