What is 5D3 maximum optimal ISO ??

[dirtcastle]

When does the ISO noise start to get noticeable on the 5D3 ?

I'm also curious from the standpoint of using fill light and recovery in post.

 

[wockawocka]

For me, about 6400. I wouldn't want to go past that for my wedding work but thankfully I don't need to. I only really need ISO 3200 at most.

Highlight recovery is excellent, the RAW files are very good to manipulate.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

Up to 1600 it's crystal clear. 3200 the noise starts to stand out but it is a non-issue. 6400 seems about the upper limit for easy, even batch processed NR. It still holds a lot of details and the noise cleans up easily. 12800 is more challenging and each image starts to really require personal attention in terms of balancing noise, details and output size. But if the output is typical web use or not too large prints, it also cleans up nicely.

 

[SeanNY]

It depends on what you plan to use the images for. Someone's wedding album? Maybe 3200 ... or 6400 in a pinch.

But for cool concert photos intended to be seen on the web, I think 12800 is AOK.

Here is one at 12800 I took at a concert on Friday night:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/edwinland/6886762262/#in/photostream

Shot in RAW, processed in CS5.

 

[JR]

It depends on what you plan to use the images for. Someone's wedding album? Maybe 3200 ... or 6400 in a pinch.

But for cool concert photos intended to be seen on the web, I think 12800 is AOK.

Here is one at 12800 I took at a concert on Friday night:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/edwinland/6886762262/#in/photostream

Shot in RAW, processed in CS5.

Wow pretty cool ISO 12,800 shot!

For me anwsering the origainl post I would say ISO 3200 in general based on the sample shot I did with the mkIII but again it does depends on what you plan to use the shot for...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

For ordinary printed images, I'd have no problem at any setting, I've printed some up to ISO 102000 and they look sharp clear and no visible noise printed at 8.5 X 11.

Looking at Raws with no NR at 100%, you definitely notice noise creeping in at ISO 3200, but its generally not a issue even at 6400 as long as you have a perfect exposure. Underexpose at high ISO's and it falls apart.

With Lightroom 4, there is no more fill light, which is a good thing. You can be much more precise about pulling up dark areas with the new controls.

 

[dirtcastle]

Thanks for all the detailed replies!

Wow. This is very exciting. It sounds like I'll be able to push the ISO up into 4000+ terriroty, no problem. Amazing!

I asked this question because I want to know if my 24-105mm will have new potential for indoor, medium-lit people shots. I know the 24-70mm is the best zoom for this kinda thing. But I can't stand the thought of buying anything but a prime lens.

For the price of a 24-70mm II, I could get a very exciting prime lense.

 

[wockawocka]

TBH you have to ask yourself what ISO do you need.

Myself, I shoot lots of weddings, the challenging situations are Castles, Churches and evening receptions.
I'm usually sat at F/2.8 and the slowest I'll go is 1/60. In the past I couldn't go past ISO1600 but now I can it solves all my low light issues. But I still won't go past ISO6400

I think there will come a point, much like the megapixel race when Canon says, 'Hey, lets just work on the noise betwenn 1600 and 6400' rather than push the sensor higher.

 

[prestonpalmer]

As a professional wedding photograph, I wouldn't push the 5D3 past 6400iso. And try to stay below 3200, 95% of the time.

 

[aZhu]

Here are some ISO tests at night

 

[Sean Nel]

This camera is really good...


I have come to the conclusion that I can do ISO1600 RAW files for my commercial work, ISO3200 commercial if I am willing to spend a bit of time. ISO6400 at a push...


HOWEVER....


If you really need to get the light in, there is no reason not to shoot at ISO12,800... simply do an in camera RAW conversion to JPEG and you will be amazed at how clean the file comes out (some luminance noise, almost zero chroma noise). Critical though... your dynamic range is not so wide, so exposure and focus must be perfect to get the best out of the shot...


I have finally found a reason for JPEG