Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Thread started 11 Jan 2013 (Friday) 01:06
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1DX vs. 5D3 (High ISO Comparison)

 
jwcdds
Cream of the Crop
jwcdds's Avatar
Joined Aug 2004
Santa Monica, CA
Jan 11, 2013 01:06 |  #1

So this might be comparing organic apple vs. regular apple. And bear in mind that this is merely one aspect being compared, which is high ISO.

For those curious as to how the two cameras stack up against one another from iso 6400 and up, I'm providing a small sample of comparison photos. iso 6400, 12800, 25600 & 51200 were compared.

(Note that these are screenshots of my LR4. They were captured at 1920x1200 and then uploaded to my smugmug account. Obviously staying within the resolution rule here at POTN, the images below are then resized from 1920 wide down to 1024 pixels wide.)

On the 5D3 images, I had to reduce the exposure by ~1/3 of a stop. It seems that (at least for my copies), the sensitivity of the sensor for the 1DX is ~1/3 stop lower than the 5D3. I also noticed that the red channel was also brighter, but also noisier for the 5D3 as well.

Full image comparison: (1DX left, 5D3 right)

IMAGE: http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/1DX-vs-5D3/i-sm5r32P/0/XL/1dx%20vs%205d3%206400%20full-XL.jpg



iso6400 crop: 1/800s, f/4.0 (5D3 also reduced exposure by -0.3 in LR)

IMAGE: http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/1DX-vs-5D3/i-CHsdscP/0/XL/1dx%20vs%205d3%206400%20crop-XL.jpg



iso 12800 crop: 1/1600s, f/4.0 (5D3 also reduced exposure by -0.3 in LR)

IMAGE: http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/1DX-vs-5D3/i-ZDPs84G/0/XL/1dx%20vs%205d3%2012800%20crop-XL.jpg



iso 25600 crop: 1/3200s, f/4.0 (5D3 also reduced exposure by -0.3 in LR)

IMAGE: http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/1DX-vs-5D3/i-bqH4wfn/0/XL/1dx%20vs%205d3%2025600%20crop-XL.jpg



iso 51200 crop: 1/6400s, f/4.0 (5D3 also reduced exposure by -0.3 in LR)

IMAGE: http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/1DX-vs-5D3/i-X5Vr5JG/0/XL/1dx%20vs%205d3%2051200%20crop-XL.jpg

Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Review | "The Mighty One" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Joined Dec 2012
Jan 11, 2013 03:53 |  #2

the 1dx is superb camera. 25600 still usable is quite amazing.


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
Joined Aug 2010
Toronto, Canada
Jan 11, 2013 06:25 |  #3

Thanks for doing this comparison Julian. Perhaps it's because I got into photography at the right time, but I have never felt that high ISO noise was disruptive enough in my images to make it an issue. These all look great to me.




LOG IN TO REPLY
jase1125
Goldmember
jase1125's Avatar
Joined May 2010
Lewisville, TX (DFW)
Jan 11, 2013 06:47 |  #4

Thanks for doing the comparison. Can someone volunteer to buy me a 1dx so I can validate the findings? :)


Jason

LOG IN TO REPLY
BrandonSi
Nevermind.. I'm silly.
BrandonSi's Avatar
Joined Sep 2004
Chicago
Jan 11, 2013 08:04 |  #5

Nice job! Good idea with the 100% crops in LR, I was wondering how you would accurately represent noise given the size limitations here at the forum. Looks like 1DX has a slight edge there.

I wonder how high they compare in low-light though.. I think that's the real test, as opposed to high iso in a properly lit environment.


[ www (external link)ยท flickr (external link)]

LOG IN TO REPLY
remotehuman
I'm not into that
remotehuman's Avatar
Joined Nov 2010
Quincy, MA
Jan 11, 2013 08:23 |  #6

Great comparison! I'm wondering though, on a professional level how often do photojournalists or concert photographers or other types of photographers use high ISO in their field?


Max | Gear | flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
umphotography's Avatar
Joined Oct 2007
Gig Harbor, Washington
Jan 11, 2013 08:31 as a reply to BrandonSi's post |  #7

I shot the 1Dx and the 5D3 side by side at a wedding reception. I would say you are accurate,, about 1/2 to possibly a bit better to 3/4 of a stop over the 5D3. What i had a problem with it how the detail fell apart after 12800 ISO. Dont get me wrong, it was usable but you would not want to blow if up big.

The testing showed me just how good the 5D3 is, so i purchased another one v/s a 1Dx:eek:

these were the results i posted in the wedding thread for the wedding photogs to evaluate.

http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​237964


Mike
www.umphotography.comexternal link
GEAR LIST
Facebookexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Snowyman
Goldmember
Snowyman's Avatar
Joined Oct 2011
Jan 11, 2013 08:48 |  #8

This isn't a fair comparison. You have reduced the exposure on the 5D3 but it is still significantly lighter than the 1Dx. There are blacks on the 1Dx and only greys on the 5d3. To make a fair comparison you would really need a properly metered 5D3 image, would you not?


Snowy's Gear
Deviant Artexternal link
Flickrexternal link
Blogexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
18,301 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Bay Area, CA
Jan 11, 2013 08:51 |  #9

I think I have noticed is that high ISO shots look quite good at good light. They look much worse when light is bad. In your test, light levels are very very good IMHO. Try that ISO12800 at f4, 1/10sec.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
EL_PIC
Goldmember
EL_PIC's Avatar
2,028 posts
Joined Dec 2009
Austin Texas - Lucca Italy
Jan 11, 2013 08:59 |  #10
banned

It is a fair and valued comparison.
The only thing I would ask of the OP is ..
take the hi iso images and adjust with exp and noise reduction to each best effect
then publish in this thread as a follow up.
Also note things like shadow, flair, banding, and highlight detail.
You might try this with another subject.
Would also like to see a Nikon 800 etc in there.


EL_PIC - RIT BS Photo '78 - Photomask Engineering Mgr
Canon DSLR - Nikon SLR - Phase One 60MP MFDSLR
http://www.Photo-Image-Creations.comexternal link
http://www.musecube.co​m/el_pic/external link
http://www.facebook.co​m/PhotoImageCreationsexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon_Doh
Senior Member
Jon_Doh's Avatar
Joined Apr 2007
Area 51
Jan 11, 2013 09:07 |  #11

1dx all the way. The color doesn't look right on the 5dIII.

Thanks for doing this comparison. It helps a lot.


Canon 1D Mark III, 70-200 L IS F4, 17-40 L, 50 1.8, Kenko Pro 1.4x teleconverter
Leica V-Lux 4
Sony NEX 3 used only for astrophotography with Meade LX 90 ACF SCT and Skywatcher 120 ED telescopes
Canon A2 (film), 24-50 Sigma, 70-210 Sigma

LOG IN TO REPLY
jwcdds
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
jwcdds's Avatar
Joined Aug 2004
Santa Monica, CA
Jan 11, 2013 10:04 |  #12

BrandonSi wrote in post #15474376external link
Nice job! Good idea with the 100% crops in LR, I was wondering how you would accurately represent noise given the size limitations here at the forum. Looks like 1DX has a slight edge there.

I wonder how high they compare in low-light though.. I think that's the real test, as opposed to high iso in a properly lit environment.

If I get the chance, I'll find a darker spot in my office to repeat the test and post my results. :)

Snowyman wrote in post #15474517external link
This isn't a fair comparison. You have reduced the exposure on the 5D3 but it is still significantly lighter than the 1Dx. There are blacks on the 1Dx and only greys on the 5d3. To make a fair comparison you would really need a properly metered 5D3 image, would you not?

Well, I don't know if it's fair or not. Seeing how the 5D3 is at least 1/3 stop more sensitive, one could also argue that it was over-exposed and by bringing the exposure back down in post, it would/should have given the 5D3 a slight advantage in noise. If you're familiar with "ETTR" (exposing to the right), it's one way to cheat and reduce noise.

However, the truth of the matter was that I didn't know the 5D3 was acting 1/3 stop faster until I had uploaded the images. My initial intent was simply keep all 3 settings (shutter/aperture/iso) identical so that we're comparing sensor performance (with regards to high iso).

bobbyz wrote in post #15474527external link
I think I have noticed is that high ISO shots look quite good at good light. They look much worse when light is bad. In your test, light levels are very very good IMHO. Try that ISO12800 at f4, 1/10sec.

Yep, I'll find somewhere dark to photograph. It'll have to be junk around my office since I don't have much time at home to simulate the test once I get home. (got a newborn to deal with so no time :lol:)

EL_PIC wrote in post #15474550external link
It is a fair and valued comparison.
The only thing I would ask of the OP is ..
take the hi iso images and adjust with exp and noise reduction to each best effect
then publish in this thread as a follow up.
Also note things like shadow, flair, banding, and highlight detail.
You might try this with another subject.
Would also like to see a Nikon 800 etc in there.

I think I'll push the shadows, pull the highlights to see about detail recovery, as well as look for banding. My initial results for pushing shadows by 100 (in LR) and blacks by 100 was surprisingly good. Didn't really see any banding. But then again, this image doesn't really have much shadows/dark spot so...

I'll do that with the next set of low-light images. But by low, I don't think I'll be shooting below handheld speed. I think if one can shoot with a tripod, one should probably just set it at low iso and extend the shutter in the first place. :D

Oh how I wish I had a D800 to compare. :)


Julian
Gear/Feedbacks | SmugMug (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Blog (external link) | Instagram (external link) | YouTube (external link)
My Review | "The Mighty One" (external link)
Founding member and President of the BOGUS Photo Club (Blatantly-Over-Geared & Under-Skilled)

LOG IN TO REPLY
BryantFC
Goldmember
2,606 posts
Joined Jun 2011
New Orleans, LA
Jan 11, 2013 10:07 |  #13

remotehuman wrote in post #15474443external link
Great comparison! I'm wondering though, on a professional level how often do photojournalists or concert photographers or other types of photographers use high ISO in their field?

I think they would really appreciate it! If you check out the HBO documentary series "Witness" alot of them use a 5D Mark II and they really push the ISO high. Having a 5D3 or 1Dx now with the fantastic ISO ability would surely be a positive thing for them!


Mamiya M645 1000S, Mamiya RZ67, Polaroid SX-70 Alpha, Polaroid 250 Auto Land Camera, Leica M3, Canon Elan II
www.bryantphethmanh.co​mexternal link
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/bryantphethmanh​/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Tom Reichner's Avatar
Joined Dec 2008
Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Jan 11, 2013 10:10 |  #14

Thank you for doing this comparison. I am surprised at how much better the 1Dx is. I knew it was better, but I've read so many comments on forums where people claim that the 5D3 is "just as good at high ISO" than the 1Dx. I guess I started to believe that. Now I don't anymore. The difference is significant, and would make an even bigger difference when shooting subjects that are packed with fine detail, such as hair and feathers.

When I do upgrade, I won't be able to afford a 1Dx - but at least I won't lie to myself and think that the IQ of the 5D3 is "just as good". It isn't.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "peace of mind", NOT "piece of mind".

LOG IN TO REPLY
Neilyb
Cream of the Crop
Neilyb's Avatar
Joined Sep 2005
Munich
Jan 11, 2013 10:13 |  #15

At 6400 they are very close. The 5DIII looks harper here, and on many other tests I have seen. 5D files scaled down to 18MP will also lose a touch of the noise, all be it little. All in all until 6400 the 5D holds its own, which is why I did not buy either yet, just cannot decide.


http://natureimmortal.​blogspot.comexternal link

http://www.natureimmor​tal.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

27,137 views & 1 like for this thread
1DX vs. 5D3 (High ISO Comparison)
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00096 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.16s
Latest registered member is vinodkottassery
989 guests, 434 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016