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

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 25 May 2012 (Friday) 07:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5DIII - Performance at ISO3200 in very low light

 
pasm365
Member
Avatar
164 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
May 26, 2012 17:13 |  #46

Eastport wrote in post #14482870 (external link)
...
In the past I have used my 5D and 5DII and can't really push the ISO beyond 1600.

How much better will the 5DIII do? Is its capability at 3200 equal to 1600 on the 5DII?
....

5d3 is about 1/2 stop better than 5D2. The 3200 on 5D3 is probably as good as 2400 on the 5D2. Not a game changer yet.


40D 70-200 f/4LIS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tom ­ W
Canon Fanosapien
Avatar
12,747 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
     
May 26, 2012 17:24 |  #47

I should have done more comparing before I sold my 5D2, but as soon as I experienced the AF on the new 5D3, I put my Mk II on the market. From what I'm gathering on the internet, they're similar at lower ISO settings (though the Mk III has considerably less banding if you try to pull up shadows a great deal), but at 3200, the Mk III has a noticeable advantage in noise performance, and at 6400 and 12,800, the difference grows larger. I know that on my Mk II, ISO 12,800 was a bit of a "crap-shoot" with shadow banding noise messing up quite a few pictures. I realize, of course, that 12,800 is a bit extreme, but if you need it, you use it.

I would say that for low-light shooting at 3200 and up, the Mk III is considerably better, both in terms of noise and how well it will focus.


Tom
5D IV, M5, RP, & various lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jlbrach
Member
219 posts
Joined Jul 2006
     
May 26, 2012 17:26 |  #48

I had no problem going up to 6400 on my 5d2 but my 5d3 is even better and the AF is fantastic...great camera


canon 5d3,,1d4
85L,35L,,200 2.8,135L,70-200 2.8 ISv2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elrey2375
Thinks it's irresponsible
Avatar
4,992 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 276
Joined Nov 2011
     
May 26, 2012 17:49 |  #49

bobbyz wrote in post #14488698 (external link)
fair point but would be nice if these folks posted side by side examples showing the improvement they getting with their new camera.:D If someone else does for them then they say "noise is all personal thing". To me it is easily measureable thing and quite fixed from one camera model to the other. To me AF is more subjective thing and harder to measure.

The noise might be measurable but the acceptability of the noise is still subjective.


http://emjfotografi.co​m/ (external link)
http://500px.com/EMJFo​tografi (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
90c4
Goldmember
1,271 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2007
     
May 26, 2012 19:34 |  #50

Says the guy with a 40D. All I know is that I had 2 5D2 bodies since they came out, and bought the 5D3 as soon as it came out and it's significantly more than a stop better than the 5D2. I'd say the 5D3 is to the 5D2 what the 5D2 is to the 40D. Major performance increase. But the low light capabilities are just the tip of the iceberg - it's an all around better camera and indeed a game changer. BTW, there's a forum here that deals just with performance photography https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=81

pasm365 wrote in post #14488837 (external link)
5d3 is about 1/2 stop better than 5D2. The 3200 on 5D3 is probably as good as 2400 on the 5D2. Not a game changer yet.


www.facebook.com/stage​shooter (external link)http://www.facebook.co​m/stageshooter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
May 26, 2012 19:36 |  #51

elrey2375 wrote in post #14488960 (external link)
The noise might be measurable but the acceptability of the noise is still subjective.

Yes, but in this case we're talking about two cameras compared with each other. That means if someone finds the noise from one camera unacceptable but finds the noise from the other acceptable, there had better be a measurable difference between the two, because otherwise it means the person in question is seeing things that aren't there!


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pasm365
Member
Avatar
164 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
May 26, 2012 21:03 |  #52

90c4 wrote in post #14489317 (external link)
Says the guy with a 40D. All I know is that I had 2 5D2 bodies since they came out, and bought the 5D3 as soon as it came out and it's significantly more than a stop better than the 5D2. I'd say the 5D3 is to the 5D2 what the 5D2 is to the 40D. Major performance increase. But the low light capabilities are just the tip of the iceberg - it's an all around better camera and indeed a game changer. BTW, there's a forum here that deals just with performance photography https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=81

Wow! this guy has a 5D3, I'm impressed.

According to DXOmark,
5D3 2293
5D2 1815
40D 703

5D3 is less than 1/2 stops better than 5D2.
5D2 is more than 1.5 stops better than 40D.


"I'd say the 5D3 is to the 5D2 what the 5D2 is to the 40D." says a grasshopper.


40D 70-200 f/4LIS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
39,213 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7691
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
May 26, 2012 21:06 |  #53

pasm365 wrote in post #14489595 (external link)
Wow! this guy has a 5D3, I'm impressed.

According to DXOmark,
5D3 2293
5D2 1815
40D 703

5D3 is less than 1/2 stops better than 5D2.
5D2 is more than 1.5 stops better than 40D.


"I'd say the 5D3 is to the 5D2 what the 5D2 is to the 40D." says a grasshopper.

I have seen back to back raw images shot identically, and this seems to be a pretty fair assessment. If you compare jpg output, the results are different, but that just means that the JPG engine in the 5D3 is better, at the expense of wiping detail though. DPReview found the same thing. There has been little improvement to the sensor tech from Canon over the past 2, possibly 3 generations. They have gone to less deep and less gap between sensels, but the basic sensor design is fairly unchanged.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elrey2375
Thinks it's irresponsible
Avatar
4,992 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 276
Joined Nov 2011
     
May 26, 2012 21:43 |  #54

TeamSpeed wrote in post #14489609 (external link)
I have seen back to back raw images shot identically, and this seems to be a pretty fair assessment. If you compare jpg output, the results are different, but that just means that the JPG engine in the 5D3 is better, at the expense of wiping detail though. DPReview found the same thing. There has been little improvement to the sensor tech from Canon over the past 2, possibly 3 generations. They have gone to less deep and less gap between sensels, but the basic sensor design is fairly unchanged.

That's a sweeping dismissal, especially to people who don't mess with RAW. The JPEG output being better might matter to them?


http://emjfotografi.co​m/ (external link)
http://500px.com/EMJFo​tografi (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
90c4
Goldmember
1,271 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2007
     
May 26, 2012 21:46 |  #55

Guys, instead of reading studies on the interweb, try the camera. It's fantastic and in another league from the 5D2.

elrey2375 wrote in post #14489726 (external link)
That's a sweeping dismissal, especially to people who don't mess with RAW. The JPEG output being better might matter to them?


www.facebook.com/stage​shooter (external link)http://www.facebook.co​m/stageshooter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elrey2375
Thinks it's irresponsible
Avatar
4,992 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 276
Joined Nov 2011
     
May 26, 2012 22:28 |  #56

90c4 wrote in post #14489739 (external link)
Guys, instead of reading studies on the interweb, try the camera. It's fantastic and in another league from the 5D2.

This.


http://emjfotografi.co​m/ (external link)
http://500px.com/EMJFo​tografi (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pasm365
Member
Avatar
164 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
May 26, 2012 23:13 |  #57

elrey2375 wrote in post #14489726 (external link)
That's a sweeping dismissal, especially to people who don't mess with RAW. The JPEG output being better might matter to them?

That's not exactly a dismissal. 5D3 over 5D2 is a huge improvement in terms of focusing system, frame rate. It's obviously a better camera. But in terms of ISO performance, it's not a drastic improvement. In that regard, SONY/Nikon have the upper hand.


40D 70-200 f/4LIS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spear
Senior Member
559 posts
Joined Dec 2007
     
May 27, 2012 00:10 as a reply to  @ pasm365's post |  #58

I don't know, I see a hell of a lot of difference in ISO performance between the 5DII and the 5DIII. ISO 6400 seems almost the same as ISO 1600 of the 5DII. I think what is not often mentioned is that the 5DIII is also incredibly good at focusing in low light ... dramatically better than the 5DII. This allows you to take pictures wide open and not have to fiddle with a higher f stop to improve your focusing margin of safety. That probably has to do with why it seems the ISO divide is much greater than it is sensor wise. I would never even dream of using ISO 6400 on the 5DII except for extreme cases, but really on the 5DIII I would have no problems at all. Even by just using jpeg and no noise reduction, results are very pleasing and the grain very smooth. Here is one of the first pictures I took with the 5DIII as soon as I opened the package at ISO 6400 jpeg and lens wide open and absolutely no post processing except for WB. Although the picture looks like the room was well lit, I assure you it was not ... the down lights were dimmed down and the bar table lights were 7 watt CF lamps.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 40D, 5DII, 5DIII, G9,G11,S100,G1X, Canon lenses 600mmL f/4 ,24mm-105L f/4, 16-35L II f/2.8, 70-200L II f/2.8, EF 100mm f/2.8, EF 50 f/1.4,17-85 EFS, 10-22 EFS, 580 EX, 2x 580 EXII, 270EX,STE2, 1. 4x Converter, 2.0x Converter. Nikon 800E w/Nikkor 24-70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
arentol
Goldmember
1,305 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Seattle WA
     
May 27, 2012 02:31 |  #59

If you take the same shot with the 5d2 and the 5d3, both at ISO 6400, then zoom in to 100% and look at the noise characteristics they will be very similar....There honestly is only about 1/2 stop difference at ISO 6400, which is a small enough difference to be extremely difficult to see with the naked eye.

However, if you zoom back out and just look at the photo in total you will realize it looks considerably better coming from the 5d3 than the 5d2. So why is that?

It's because Chroma Noise is only one part of the picture when it comes to sensor performance at high ISOs. Color accuracy and depth, dynamic range, tonal range, etc. are just as important as noise handling itself. The 5d3 is better at high ISO's in every possible way, and in total it makes considerably more than a 1/2 stop difference in the final images.


5D3 | Rokinon 14 f/2.8 | 16-35L II | TS-E 24L | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | Voigtlander 40 f/2.0 | Σ 50 f/1.4 | MP-E 65 | 70-200 2.8L IS II | Σ 85 f/1.4 | Zeiss 100 f/2 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | 580 EX II | 430 EX II | Fuji X10 | OM-D E-M5 | http://www.mikehjphoto​.com/ (external link)
*****Lenses For Sale (external link)*****

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Saxi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,781 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: NH, USA
     
May 27, 2012 09:30 |  #60

3200 on the 5D III is child's play.


5D III, 24-105mm f/4 L, 135mm f/2 L, 70-200mm f/4 IS L, 580EX II
Full Gear List
Flickr Photostream (external link)

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

16,711 views & 0 likes for this thread
5DIII - Performance at ISO3200 in very low light
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is elkaboing
876 guests, 213 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.