Which is better for high ISO, 6D or 5D Mk III?

[ewg963]

Isn't it awesome that we can actually be having this discussion?! Usable iso 6400 pictures? I remember the first time I heard of iso 1000 film

+10000000000000000

 

[GMCPhotographics]

From my observations, the 6D is about 1/3rd of a stop better in it's iso handling. The 1DX is about a 1/3rd of a stop better than the 6D or 2/3rds of a stop better than the 5DIII. Not killer but noticable on a like for like basis. But all three camera's tend to meter scenes slightly differently, so the results will be obviscated by the different metering and rendering values. But in an identially lit scene and all three cams on a tripod, set to M and manually dialled in settings, my above results will be apparent.

 

[Marsu42]

I have a 6D, which I've been using in low light situations. In recent months I've found myself frequently exploring the limits I can go and still come up with what I consider successful photos. I've very happy with the results I've been getting up to ISO6400 or so.

After downsizing 22mp 5d3 -> 20mp 6d and adjusting for slight sharpness differences it's a wash, this is the same sensor generation. However the 6d has significantly less banding, i.e. higher dynamic range which *does* make a difference if your shots require it - it even tops 1dx on low iso. You can boost the dr on 6d even higher with Magic Lantern, nearly up to 15ev.

Having said that, no nice noise performance makes up for dodgy metering or getting out of focus shots with the ancient 6d af unless you're mf'ing (like with ML's focus peaking).

Even what I've shot at 12800 pleasantly surprises me.

ISO 12800 is just a digital push (on 6d, actually even 6400 is) - no need to use it unless you shoot jpeg or do video, otherwise underexpose a lower iso and keep the higher dynamic range of the lower setting.

The main positive about the 6D is the centre point is rated to -3ev whereas the 5DMKIII is -2EV.

Well, yes, it's "nice to have" esp. with slower lenses like f4+. *But* af'ing @-3lv is so slow that you could also just switch to live view and contrast af or mf with a boosted lv (ML again) which works far below -3lv.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I have a 6D, which I've been using in low light situations. In recent months I've found myself frequently exploring the limits I can go and still come up with what I consider successful photos. I've very happy with the results I've been getting up to ISO6400 or so.

After downsizing 22mp 5d3 -> 20mp 6d and adjusting for slight sharpness differences it's a wash, this is the same sensor generation. However the 6d has significantly less banding, i.e. higher dynamic range which *does* make a difference if your shots require it - it even tops 1dx on low iso. You can boost the dr on 6d even higher with Magic Lantern, nearly up to 15ev.

Having said that, no nice noise performance makes up for dodgy metering or getting out of focus shots with the ancient 6d af unless you're mf'ing (like with ML's focus peaking).

Even what I've shot at 12800 pleasantly surprises me.

ISO 12800 is just a digital push (on 6d, actually even 6400 is) - no need to use it unless you shoot jpeg or do video, otherwise underexpose a lower iso and keep the higher dynamic range of the lower setting.

The main positive about the 6D is the centre point is rated to -3ev whereas the 5DMKIII is -2EV.

Well, yes, it's "nice to have" esp. with slower lenses like f4+. *But* af'ing @-3lv is so slow that you could also just switch to live view and contrast af or mf with a boosted lv (ML again) which works far below -3lv.

Which is why I prefer fast primes over f4 or f2.8 zooms. I gain a far lower iso value or a higher shutter speed.
If I gain 2 stops advantage, I can double my shutter speed and halve my iso value. If I dump my entire advantage into the iso value, it will fall by a factor of 4. That's a big difference and far more than any camera can provide regardless of how good the iso handling or on chip noise reduction is.

 

[Marsu42]

Which is why I prefer fast primes over f4 or f2.8 zooms. I gain a far lower iso value or a higher shutter speed.

Well, but lower than "100" is "screw on nd filter" and the iq of 1600 on the 6d is so good I seldom feel the necessity for a really fast prime. You can post-process push a bad exposure, but cropping from 20mp (too wide prime) is tricky, and adding image data in post (too long prime) is impossible.

And I already raved about how damn difficult it is to af with the 6d in enough threads, and even with a better af system the dof of f4 on longer focal lengths is already very thin @100% crop. Not that I'd dismiss fast primes as you get thin dof @small export/print sizes, but I guess I'm the "zoom flexibility" type of photog.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Which is why I prefer fast primes over f4 or f2.8 zooms. I gain a far lower iso value or a higher shutter speed.

Well, but lower than "100" is "screw on nd filter" and the iq of 1600 on the 6d is so good I seldom feel the necessity for a really fast prime. You can post-process push a bad exposure, but cropping from 20mp (too wide prime) is tricky, and adding image data in post (too long prime) is impossible.

And I already raved about how damn difficult it is to af with the 6d in enough threads, and even with a better af system the dof of f4 on longer focal lengths is already very thin @100% crop. Not that I'd dismiss fast primes as you get thin dof @small export/print sizes, but I guess I'm the "zoom flexibility" type of photog.

Yep, I got by with my 5D and then 5DII for many years using fast primes. It was hard, but I used the single centre point and recompose technique and One shot setting. But I fitted a Eg-s fine focus screen so I could see if my 85 f1.2 IIL was in focus. I was a tricky technique but once mastered, I could shoot weddings all day at f1.2 as close to MFD as i liked and get sharp in focus image.

 

[JohnDizzo15]

I have a 6D, which I've been using in low light situations. In recent months I've found myself frequently exploring the limits I can go and still come up with what I consider successful photos. I've very happy with the results I've been getting up to ISO6400 or so. Even what I've shot at 12800 pleasantly surprises me.
But, I got talking with a couple people who suggested I might be better off with a 5D Mk III. I'm not so concerned about its performance at lower ISOs, as I've got three 1DS Mk III bodies that I use in most all situations, but I want to get the best results when I shoot in "available darkness".
What would you suggest I do?

Depends on what you are shooting I suppose. But if the question is purely centered on which one produces cleaner images at higher ISOs, the answer is the 6D.

I had the 5D3 for a year and a half and decided to go with the 6D to pocket some cash as I didn't need the additional features of the former.

An unforeseen benefit of the swap was in fact cleaner images at varying ISOs. The difference is not significant enough for you to notice in all situations. But the 6D is better in some instances and definitely at least equal to the 5D3 in all others. So if your concern is simply noise when moving into higher ISO ranges, you already have the better body.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I have a 6D, which I've been using in low light situations. In recent months I've found myself frequently exploring the limits I can go and still come up with what I consider successful photos. I've very happy with the results I've been getting up to ISO6400 or so. Even what I've shot at 12800 pleasantly surprises me.
But, I got talking with a couple people who suggested I might be better off with a 5D Mk III. I'm not so concerned about its performance at lower ISOs, as I've got three 1DS Mk III bodies that I use in most all situations, but I want to get the best results when I shoot in "available darkness".
What would you suggest I do?

weird advice
The 6D is as good a sensor as Canon makes across all ISOs for both SNR and DR.

 

[MichaelHodges]

The difference between the 6D and 5DIII in long exposure high ISO is enormous.

http://petapixel.com/2012/12/13/canon-6d-and-5dmk3-noise-comparison-for-high-iso-long-exposures/

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

However, DxoMark specs showed the 6d and 5d3 very close (~2300), the 1Dx significantly better (~2800), and the older 5d2 (~1800) lagging the 6d and 5d3 in what they term "Sports (low light ISO)". For reference, the Nikon D4 was about 2950.

Looking at the plots the SNR between the three (1DX, 5D3, 6D) is really close. DR better at high ISO for 6D and 1DX and at low ISO for 6D.