The 5D3 has banding issues. (pattern noise)

KJacques wrote in post #14074067
In fact, I've decided to give up all photography until such a time as when both Nikon and Canon solve these problems and deliver me a camera that operates properly.

It takes a bit of skill to play with irony.

Your failure here is that you pretend that no camera in existence can manage this feat. When that assumption was wrong, your above attempt at irony just made you run very quickly straight into a concrete wall.

Poe wrote in post #14073599
So if we stop talking about the issue, it will go away?

I'll turn that around, and ask "Is talking about an "issue" of a camera that has not been released yet, that has not had thousands of highly critical pro owners looking carefully at the output, going to change anything?"

Canon gave 5D2 owners EXACTLY what they asked for.....improved AF, improved weather sealing, improved handling and control layout, and more capable AEB bracketing for HR scenes."

No-one asked for more DR from the camera. Whether you like it or not....DR is not an "issue."

Is the Sony/Nikon D800 better in low-ISO DR? Yes, it looks that way. Is THAT an issue for Canon with the 5D3? Look above for your answer. Buy something else if the 5D3 performance bias is not to your liking. Simple.

Old Baldy wrote in post #14074745
No-one asked for more DR from the camera. Whether you like it or not....DR is not an "issue."

There are two things here.

1) It's still irrelevant to debate the 5D3 until we have real, released, cameras in the hands of real photographers.

2) You are wrong converting from "pattern noise" into DR. The DR of the 5D2 is quote good - for the pixels not suffering from the pattern noise.

3) You are wrong that no one wanted Canon to release a camera without this pattern problem.

[Yawn] These people really need to get a life and quit pixel-peeping.

joedlh wrote in post #14074850
[Yawn] These people really need to get a life and quit pixel-peeping.

yea

Old Baldy wrote in post #14074745
I'll turn that around, and ask "Is talking about an "issue" of a camera that has not been released yet, that has not had thousands of highly critical pro owners looking carefully at the output, going to change anything?"

Where are the highly critical pro owners of the 5D2? The only thing that actually made headlines of significant proportion was the great black dot disaster. After all that was said about the banding in the 5D2, nothing changed. And I don't expect anything to change for the 5D3 either because Canon is marketing to the High ISO crowd, not to the High DR crowd.

It appears there was some attempt at correcting the horizontal banding, but the vertical banding is still as bad as in the 5D2. There are enough RAW shots floating on the internet to draw on for initial impressions.

Old Baldy wrote in post #14074745
Canon gave 5D2 owners EXACTLY what they asked for.....improved AF, improved weather sealing, improved handling and control layout, and more capable AEB bracketing for HR scenes."

So all 5D2 owners got exactly what they asked for? What about potential 5D-series owners?

Old Baldy wrote in post #14074745
No-one asked for more DR from the camera. Whether you like it or not....DR is not an "issue."

Really?! No-one asked for more DR?! Is that an opinion or have you conducted marketing surveys regarding this aspect?

Old Baldy wrote in post #14074745
Is the Sony/Nikon D800 better in low-ISO DR? Yes, it looks that way. Is THAT an issue for Canon with the 5D3? Look above for your answer. Buy something else if the 5D3 performance bias is not to your liking. Simple.

Which Canon camera is it an issue for? Certainly seems to be all of them. Or is no one is shooting below ISO 1600 nowadays?

pwm2 wrote in post #14074804
There are two things here.

1) It's still irrelevant to debate the 5D3 until we have real, released, cameras in the hands of real photographers.

"Two things" or three?

Regardless, you're preaching to the choir here...exactly what I've been saying all along.

pwm2 wrote in post #14074804
2) You are wrong converting from "pattern noise" into DR. The DR of the 5D2 is quote good - for the pixels not suffering from the pattern noise.

No, you're wrong in that the context of my post was in reply to this...
https://photography-on-the.net …?p=14073504&pos​tcount=226
which was related to DR.

pwm2 wrote in post #14074804
3) You are wrong that no one wanted Canon to release a camera without this pattern problem.

See (2) above. I'm not responding to any pattern noise issue....but I'll say that "pattern noise" was, IMHO, ALSO not a highly publicized or discussed "shortcoming" of the 5D2....certainly, I never saw it mentioned in any significant volume during the MANY discussions on what Canon could improve upon the 5D2, until the whole discussion on the as-yet-to-be-released 5D3 came up....

Shadowblade wrote in post #14074178
Yes - I showed them earlier in the thread.

All involve subjects that are moving in some way (whether swaying slightly in a breeze, or actively moving), which don't have a straight-line transition zone for a GND and aren't amenable to fill flash.

And, of course, there are other shots which I just couldn't adequately capture, due to these limitations.

To me, asking, 'Why do you need more DR when you can just blend/HDR?' is just like asking, 'Why do you need full-frame/medium format when you can just use a crop body and stitch?'

And they were very nice shots too. But here is the thing.......why are you still using Canon, or more particularly 5D series if they aren't what you need out of a camera?
This is what gets me.....

pwm2 wrote in post #14074532
Your failure here is that you pretend that no camera in existence can manage this feat. When that assumption was wrong, your above attempt at irony just made you run very quickly straight into a concrete wall.

As above, buy the camera that you need then.... If another manufacturer has a better camera for what you do, then buy it.... If people like you sit here and whinge about how your camera (or worse, the next one that hasn't been released yet) doesn't do blah blah blah, yet you still continue to use it, where's the incentive for canon to do anything about it?? Buy the camera YOU need and be done with it.

There is nothing wrong with pointing out flaws in any camera, no matter how big or small they are, that's a good thing, but to sit there and whinge about it like some of you are here, yet continue to USE said camera....what does that say?

Poe wrote in post #14075013
Where are the highly critical pro owners of the 5D2? The only thing that actually made headlines of significant proportion was the great black dot disaster. After all that was said about the banding in the 5D2, nothing changed.

Exactly! Thanks for confirming my view that DR was never considered a major problem.

Poe wrote in post #14075013
And I don't expect anything to change for the 5D3 either because Canon is marketing to the High ISO crowd, not to the High DR crowd. The success or failure of the 5D3 is whether or not it matches the D800 in low ISO DR. Really?

So even if the latter is true, this makes their direction WRONG?

The high DR crowd is somehow much more important than some other crowd? (and we KNOW the 5D sells to a VERY large crowd, right?

Poe wrote in post #14075013
So all 5D2 owners got exactly what they asked for? What about potential 5D-series owners?

I'm VERY sure that potential 5D3 owners will LOVE the new camera. It's improved on the well-publicized, most critized, performance aspects of the 5D2....and caters to the same type of photographer. Why would they NOT love the 5D3?

Poe wrote in post #14075013
Really?! No-one asked for more DR?! Is that an opinion or have you conducted marketing surveys regarding this aspect?

Yes, I commissioned a multi-million dollar market research survey, just as you did when stating that the 5D3 bombs or is somehow now uncompetitive with its intended market.

Poe wrote in post #14075013
Which Canon camera is it an issue for? Certainly seems to be all of them. Or is no one is shooting below ISO 1600 nowadays?

It's clearly an issue for every owner currently using the 5D3, right? Oh yeah....little snag in THAT assumption.

OK, I'm done....this topic is repetitive and boring. Carry on....

Old Baldy wrote in post #14075107
Yes, I commissioned a multi-million dollar market research survey, just as you did when stating that the 5D3 bombs or is somehow now uncompetitive with its intended market.

It's clearly an issue for every owner currently using the 5D3, right? Oh yeah....little snag in THAT assumption.

Gold!

Old Baldy wrote in post #14075107
Exactly! Thanks for confirming my view that DR was never considered a major problem.


So even if the latter is true, this makes their direction WRONG?

The high DR crowd is somehow much more important than some other crowd? (and we KNOW the 5D sells to a VERY large crowd, right?

I'm VERY sure that potential 5D3 owners will LOVE the new camera. It's improved on the well-publicized, most critized, performance aspects of the 5D2....and caters to the same type of photographer. Why would they NOT love the 5D3?



Yes, I commissioned a multi-million dollar market research survey, just as you did when stating that the 5D3 bombs or is somehow now uncompetitive with its intended market.

It's clearly an issue for every owner currently using the 5D3, right? Oh yeah....little snag in THAT assumption.

OK, I'm done....this topic is repetitive and boring. Carry on....

DR is apparently not a problem to Canon. It is a problem for some users. So instead of providing superior electronics, Canon builds in work arounds like AEB and in-camera HDR. This is going to be a great feature for some. I happen to prefer to be the one in control of my images, not the camera, and I don't think I"m alone in that thought.

Other than size (and thus marketability to Canon), what makes the High ISO crowd more important than the High DR crowd?

Because potential landscape photographers are (or is it were?) interested in the 5D3. Shouldn't they be interested interested in how the camera performs at low ISO? Shouldn't they know what they are geting themselves into before they purchase one? Or are you saying the 5D3 is not a camera for landscape photographers? And if you are, which camera is for landscape photographers?

Never stated the 5D3 bombs or that the banding is an issue for all users--you're the only one writing in absolutes here. Please don't make up nonsense that I never wrote. If the intended market is for High ISO use, then it's a fairly competitive contender. It isn't for low ISO use.

Poe wrote in post #14075550
DR is apparently not a problem to Canon. It is a problem for some users. So instead of providing superior electronics, Canon builds in work arounds like AEB and in-camera HDR. This is going to be a great feature for some. I happen to prefer to be the one in control of my images, not the camera, and I don't think I"m alone in that thought.

Other than size (and thus marketability to Canon), what makes the High ISO crowd more important than the High DR crowd?

Because potential landscape photographers are (or is it were?) interested in the 5D3. Shouldn't they be interested interested in how the camera performs at low ISO? Shouldn't they know what they are geting themselves into before they purchase one? Or are you saying the 5D3 is not a camera for landscape photographers? And if you are, which camera is for landscape photographers?

Never stated the 5D3 bombs or that the banding is an issue for all users--you're the only one writing in absolutes here. Please don't make up nonsense that I never wrote. If the intended market is for High ISO use, then it's a fairly competitive contender. It isn't for low ISO use.

I haven't read the last page or so of this thread, so I don't have the complete context for Poe's reply here. I agree with everything he said, but I also agree with the bit he quoted from Old Baldy, at least the part about 5D3 owners being sure to love their new cameras. You guys are both right. The 5D Mark III is actually very exciting for those of us who shoot landscapes. It's everything the Mark II was and more. The Mark II is a terrific landscape camera, and the Mark III will continue that legacy with better weather sealing and a raft of other nice new features that we'll really enjoy having. The Mark III will be a better camera than one that was already one of the very best.

Alas, it's not a very competitive camera in the landscape market if something else can deliver far more megapixels with a much wider dynamic range. But what does that lack of competitiveness mean to me, the Canon landscape shooter? Not a whole lot. Camera sales mean the most to people who either own stock in a company or have ego invested in their brand, and I don't fall into either of those categories. I have a Mark III on order, and I am going to take some of the best landscape photos of my life with it. I guarantee you that.

Old Baldy wrote in post #14075107
I'm VERY sure that potential 5D3 owners will LOVE the new camera. It's improved on the well-publicized, most critized, performance aspects of the 5D2....and caters to the same type of photographer. Why would they NOT love the 5D3?

I couldn't disagree more with this point.

When it was 5D2 vs D700, the 5D2 was a slow, high-resolution body, with limited AF and other features, but a great sensor (for its time - the Sony Exmor hadn't been developed yet, and Canon and Nikon had comparable dynamic range). The D700 had a fast shooting rate, lower resolution and pro features. The 5D2 appealed to those who previously shot MF film and wanted to move to digital while retaining the IQ - landscapers, studio photographers, MF-film-shooting wedding photographers, architectural photographers - as well as those others for whom IQ trumped everything. And, of course, there was the video market, but that's beyond the scope of this argument. The D700, in contrast, appealed to those who needed speed and AF performance, but didn't necessarily need the resolution or image quality - photojournalists, action shooters (those who weren't shooting the 1D3, anyway), wedding photographers moving up from 35mm film.

In contrast, with 5D3 vs D800, the 5D3 is faster and lower-resolution, with seemingly poorer IQ, while the D800 is slower, higher-resolution, greater DR, with fantastic IQ. The landscape and studio photographers - the ex-MF film shooters - now view the D800 as the better camera, since they are still after high IQ, while those who needed speed now view the 5D3 as the better option, due to speed. Many others, of course, aren't really affected - they need neither the speed advantage of the 5D2, nor the DR, MP and overall IQ advantage of the D800, so either system works for them. Others, still, need both - I'm sure birders would love the increased fps for birds in flight, while needing greater DR for flying birds silhouetted against the sky, and greater resolution for cropping.

I cannot find the post you are referring to. Can you point me at it?

So Canon acknowledged the banding problem and released a firmware update (as well as fixing the black dot issue). So I gather it did not fix the problem? Canon site says:

Shadowblade wrote in post #14074178
Yes - I showed them earlier in the thread.

...

pixelbasher wrote in post #14075058
And they were very nice shots too. But here is the thing.......why are you still using Canon, or more particularly 5D series if they aren't what you need out of a camera?
This is what gets me.....

Because, when Canon came out with the 5D2 and Nikon the D700, I needed the best IQ I could get in a digital camera. Moving from MF film, the 5D2 was the obvious choice - I didn't need the speed (1fps does it just fine for me) and, while the weather sealing and AF would have been very nice to have, IQ trumps everything for me.

Now, four years later, IQ still trumps everything. Nikon has moved forward in leaps and bounds, releasing a camera that rivals some MF backs (and is capable of surpassing even the latest ones, when shooting shifted panoramas). In contrast, Canon hasn't really improved its IQ at all. But I'm stuck with a huge arsenal of Canon lenses that will be very expensive to exchange... so I'm pretty much stuck until Canon releases a competitive high-resolution, high-DR body.