What ISO improvement is likely to be expected in an upcoming 5D3?

[pedro]

Sorry, don't want you to get bored. Just a question. In a post here I read this:
5D2 is about 2 stops better in High Iso than 60D, and about 1 stop compared to a 7D

So, shooting a 30D I will wait out the new body. What are your expectations? Will 25600 by its native ISO? Will it go up till 204k or what do you think?

Cheers, Pedro

 

[handsomerob]

Sorry, don't want you to get bored. Just a question. In a post here I read this:
5D2 is about 2 stops better in High Iso than 60D, and about 1 stop compared to a 7D

so the same comment suggests that there is 1 stop difference between 60D and 7D, while they both feature exactly the same sensor?

no way

 

[AndersBorg]

The 7D and the 60D are equal in terms of high ISO noise. They both use the same 18 megapixel sensor.

I dont know how much better the 5Dmk2 are, but we can expect the mk3 to be even better at high ISO.

 

[JR]

Well that is the question that veryone wants to know. At this point I am not sure we can assess what kind of ISO improvement will there be for the 5D3 if any!

The D800 might be a good indication when it come out. My point is if Canon decide to make the 5D3 the high MP cameras in the 28-36MP range everyone wants, I am not sure about the technology to make such sensor better at ISO then the current one. The 1DX is supposed to be the ISO king hopefully.

I say this with reserve of course. If for example the D800 has similar ISO performance then the D700 which only has 12MP and is currently the best in class, then yes Canon better bring on ISO improvement or loose market share...Many of us would like to see a high MP cameras with amazing ISO for low light, but we might have to get two different camera to get both worlds...

Very speculative at this point...

 

[Edwin Herdman]

All previous models have had improvements in high ISO capability, so it seems likely that the 5DIII will as well. It certainly shouldn't perform any worse, with three years' development (or more!) over the 5DII.

 

[AJ]

My prediction for noise improvement of 5D3 over 5D2, on a pixel-by-pixel basis: there will be none.

1Dx will be the high iso cam. 5D3 will be the high mpix cam.

 

[handsomerob]

As someone already pointed out in another thread, if Canon/Nikon can manage to keep similar low-light performance (of the 5DII/D700) with 36MP, it will be a breakthrough. I would rate this highly unlikely.

If Canon keeps the pixel count rather 'low', say in the 24-28MP range, it is very likely that we will get the same low-light abilities of the 5DII, if not better. That could be the sweet spot for Canon, offering the perfect balance between excellent IQ and great low-light performance. Add it a new, decent AF system and voila! That would be a worthy successor to the mighty 5DII and the perfect camera for many of us. But not for all of us, there are a lot of people hoping for much more pixels, say 36MP

I believe that Canon will be able to match whatever Nikon brings to the table with this new generation of DSLRs. 1Dx seems very promising and D4 won't be too far behind/ahead. It would simply be amazing if they can offer better low-light performance than the D3s with 50% more pixels. Interesting times ahead, I should keep on saving for it!!

 

[pwp]

With the Nikon D800 checking in at 36MP, I'd be very surprised if the 5DIII was anything less than this. The Canon marketing dept would insist.

With 36MP it's doubtful there would be anything more than a very modest improvement in high iso performance over the very respectable 5DII. But hey, the 5DIII may be a game changer yet again for Canon and stun us with specs that will keep 5D series shooters happy for years.

The big winners with the emerging 36MP cameras will be Sandisk & Lexar...they'll be ramping up production of their 64Gb CF cards in keen anticipation of a sales spike. I'm gobsmacked how fast I can fill 32Gb on the 1DIV!

Paul Wright

 

[JR]

My prediction for noise improvement of 5D3 over 5D2, on a pixel-by-pixel basis: there will be none.

1Dx will be the high iso cam. 5D3 will be the high mpix cam.

+1

I saw somewhere in one of the post here today that the 1DX will have 2 stop better ISO then the 1D mk IV. Not sure if this was for JPEG or RAW but I beleive the 5D mk II is slightly better then the 1D mk IV for ISO performance by about ~1/2 stop or so. So if the 1DX is ~1 1/2 stop better ISO then the curent 5DII, where does this leave us for the 5DIII. Surely it cannot be better then the 1DX, so maybe we will get 1/2 stop ISO improvement?

Does this make sense? Hope I got the math right! ???

 

[briansquibb]

My prediction for noise improvement of 5D3 over 5D2, on a pixel-by-pixel basis: there will be none.

1Dx will be the high iso cam. 5D3 will be the high mpix cam.

+1

I saw somewhere in one of the post here today that the 1DX will have 2 stop better ISO then the 1D mk IV. Not sure if this was for JPEG or RAW but I beleive the 5D mk II is slightly better then the 1D mk IV for ISO performance by about ~1/2 stop or so. So if the 1DX is ~1 1/2 stop better ISO then the curent 5DII, where does this leave us for the 5DIII. Surely it cannot be better then the 1DX, so maybe we will get 1/2 stop ISO improvement?

Does this make sense? Hope I got the math right! ???

A 5DII is fine to 3200 and OKish at 6400

Posted this in another thread too - look at the exif of this picture that I took this evening in a dull hall and come to your own conclusions

http://www.squibb.org.uk/pictures/b09g8538x.JPG

 

[JR]

Nice...since you have both the 5DII and a 1D4, you feel your 1D4 has better ISO performance then?

We see so many test reports where sometime results vary (refering to size of the pixel for example) that having both camera at your disposable is probably easier for you to assess....

 

[briansquibb]

I am getting usable photos at iso12800 - and there was no noise reduction applied.

The 5D2 is about the same at iso 3200, maybe 6400 if I am lucky.

The 7D equivalent is 1600/3200

Brian

 

[JR]

...so I guess the 1DX will be an even bigger ISO improvement for me then I originally thought! Man March 2012 feels like lightyears away!

 

[Picsfor]

As a long time (Almost as long as it has been out) 5D2, owner and user, and some one who loves to push the high ISO settings, i can assure you that the 1DX is far far superior to the 5D2 with its high ISO capabilities.

Forget the numbers that a played out, the 1DX has an ISO of 51K that certainly matches the 5D2 at 6400 if not 3200.
Really - they showed a print of a scene that i have an almost identical version of taken on my old A1 with 100asa film, a tripod, cable release and several seconds of my time.

I took shots with the 1DX and compared the same shot with my 5D2 - oh no i didn't, because my 5D2 couldn't work in such low light, nor could it focus in such low light. The 1DX really is on a different planet from the 5D2 where low light is concerned, and my 5D2's frequently see 6400 (even in daylight) and are no strangers to 25600, which always needs a bit of treatment.

I fully expect the 5D3 to make 12800 a working ISO, if not 25600...

 

[willrobb]

I am getting usable photos at iso12800 - and there was no noise reduction applied.

The 5D2 is about the same at iso 3200, maybe 6400 if I am lucky.

The 7D equivalent is 1600/3200

Brian

I agree with Brian about the 5DmkII. I often used it for magazine spreads at 3200 no problems, at 6400 I'm happy with it for the web.

For the 7D though, I found it excellent up to ISO 640, good at 800, 1000 was pushing it a bit and by 1600 I found it to not be so good, sometimes fine, bit more often than not way too noisy for me. Maybe I just had a dud, I know a lot of people were very happy with the 7D, but I found the images too noisy, even at low ISO with the images from the 5DmkII and 7D at full size, I found a lot of noise in the shadows for the 7D and the images were overall quite soft.

 

[Loswr]

I saw somewhere in one of the post here today that the 1DX will have 2 stop better ISO then the 1D mk IV. Not sure if this was for JPEG or RAW but I beleive the 5D mk II is slightly better then the 1D mk IV for ISO performance by about ~1/2 stop or so. So if the 1DX is ~1 1/2 stop better ISO then the curent 5DII, where does this leave us for the 5DIII. Surely it cannot be better then the 1DX, so maybe we will get 1/2 stop ISO improvement?

The 2-stop improvement touted by Canon for the 1D X compared to the 1D IV is not all it's cracked up to be, or put another way, it's a clever marketing ploy. First off, Chuck Westfall stated that to get that 2-stop improvement, you must be shooting jpg. Also, it's comparing an APS-H sensor to FF - that difference is about 2/3 of a stop. I'd estimate that the jpg engine improvements are on the order of a full stop.

So, that means that comparing the 1D X to 5DII (FF to FF) and comparing RAW image (which we haven't yet seen from the 1D X), I'd guess we can expect somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 stop improvement, partly from improved on-sensor NR (pre-RAW) and partly from the gapless microlenses. I'll certainly take 1/3 to 1/2 stop...but that doesn't sound nearly as good as 2 stops, and Canon's marketing department knows that, which is why they use the 1D IV jpg as a baseline.

 

[briansquibb]

For the 7D though, I found it excellent up to ISO 640, good at 800, 1000 was pushing it a bit and by 1600 I found it to not be so good, sometimes fine, bit more often than not way too noisy for me. Maybe I just had a dud, I know a lot of people were very happy with the 7D, but I found the images too noisy, even at low ISO with the images from the 5DmkII and 7D at full size, I found a lot of noise in the shadows for the 7D and the images were overall quite soft.

I use my 7D for wildlife so I am shooting in reasonable light - just high shutter speeds. My 7Ds give very sharp images so perhaps there is something wrong with yours?

 

[briansquibb]

So, that means that comparing the 1D X to 5DII (FF to FF) and comparing RAW image (which we haven't yet seen from the 1D X), I'd guess we can expect somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 stop improvement, partly from improved on-sensor NR (pre-RAW) and partly from the gapless microlenses. I'll certainly take 1/3 to 1/2 stop...but that doesn't sound nearly as good as 2 stops, and Canon's marketing department knows that, which is why they use the 1D IV jpg as a baseline.

Are you ignoring the real life evidence that the 1D4 is giving at least 1 stop over the 5DII or are you saying that the 1DX will give 1/2 stop less than the 1D4?

 

[pwp]

since you have both the 5DII and a 1D4, you feel your 1D4 has better ISO performance then?

When the light is low, where do I go? It's the 1DIV every time.

5DII is very good but the MkIV keeps delivering the goods when the 5DII is struggling.

This is my experience. YMMV.

Paul Wright

 

[JR]

...So, that means that comparing the 1D X to 5DII (FF to FF) and comparing RAW image (which we haven't yet seen from the 1D X), ...

Indeed I cant wait to see RAW files comparison from the 1DX. Unfortunately I suspect this will not happen until it is released, unless dpReview or someone else gets an early copy and doing some test now due to be publish with the release in March 2012...