5Diii landscape with pattern noise? Say what?

ready for some low ISO patterned noise?

Gee...another pixel peeping thread....with photos that are WAY TOO HUGE.

Yep, it's there. Thanks for sharing.
Real question is - how hard is it to clean in post? There have been reports that it's rather easy. I hope so, then again, I never had to push files hard enough for it to become a problem.

bomzai wrote in post #14157604
Real question is - how hard is it to clean in post? There have been reports that it's rather easy.

I read a post about that as well but lost their technique... I'd love to try it. But nik define does NOT help, it almost makes it worse because it cleans up the rest of the noise leaving the banding more obvious....

and I'll say, with my 5Dii, I've seen this in my images maybe 5 times?

Cool photo! Did you have Highlight Tone Priority enabled? (D+)

DaaamnGina wrote in post #14157828
Cool photo! Did you have Highlight Tone Priority enabled? (D+)

Nevermind. ISO 100 so it was off.

I don't see that noise in the first pic? why?

Mastamarek wrote in post #14157842
I don't see that noise in the first pic? why?

Because the first picture is the original where Ben didn't go out of his way to mess the photo up.

The reason I didn't respond to this when I first saw it earlier today is because after reading the original post in detail I realized that this didn't need to be posted at all, let alone discussed.

This is strictly a test. It isn't a case of an accidentally underexposed photo needing help, the photographer noticing banding after correcting, and then coming here to show us. This is a case of someone taking a perfectly good photo, going WAY out of his way to force visible banding, then coming here to ask about it. Ben has been on these forums fairly regularly the last week. I can't imagine he didn't know already that the 5d3 exhibits low-ISO banding when pushed, just like the 5d2. It is very old news around here.

So what does this post offer? As far as I can tell nothing. It is a test that didn't even need to be done by Ben, as he should have known what the result would be, let alone displayed for us here, where we all already knew what the result would be.

Also: Shadows 99, +44 Blacks, and +1.7EV? That isn't a test, that is just needless torture! I don't care what camera you are using that would fark up the photo somehow.

Of course I could be wrong. Maybe Ben didn't know this was fairly common knowledge. If Ben comes here and posts that he didn't know then I will of course accept him at his word and apologize, but I certainly assumed he knew what with the many other posts I have seen from him recently.

Mastamarek wrote in post #14157842
I don't see that noise in the first pic? why?

exactly, it's just a torture test to show what would happen if you blew the exposure and needed to fill to an insane level. When you do these tests, the first thing that people will say in response is to NOT blow the exposure. So you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.....

arentol wrote in post #14157952
This is strictly a test. It isn't a case of an accidentally underexposed photo needing help, the photographer noticing banding after correcting, and then coming here to show us. This is a case of someone taking a perfectly good photo, going WAY out of his way to force visible banding, then coming here to ask about it. Ben has been on these forums fairly regularly the last week.

it hasn't been just last week, I've just been posting more with the 5Diii release. I took a real life landscape shot to post as an example because I was specifically asked to do so by a few members. I then tortured it to prove the banding was there and to compare it to the same banding on the 5D2 (as asked). I also wasn't asking about it, those question marks were rhetorical...

and yes, I knew about the banding, but most of the examples either didn't have direct 5D2 comparisons or weren't at base/low ISOs...

jacobsen1 wrote in post #14158668
exactly, it's just a torture test to show what would happen if you blew the exposure and needed to fill to an insane level. When you do these tests, the first thing that people will say in response is to NOT blow the exposure. So you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.....

I for one found Ben's image examples of the "torture test" interesting and thanks for posting it. I was hoping Canon had cleaned that up a bit more as compared to the 5d2.

I don't really understand why some folks take pointing out the noise patterns in the Canons so personal, like a religious attack. It's just data, one can just ignore it if displeased them.

If all cameras/sensors showed this same degree of issue then one could argue it was unavoidable. But that isn't the case. It's not a problem for many folks, but we are free to use/enjoy our cameras any way we want.

Guess what, I can over rev a Ferrari V12 just as good as I can a Chevy 4 banger..... I can even make them both fail/explode miserably.

I can accelerate in 6th gear and complain about a lack of acceleration.

I can put water in the gas tank and complain it doesn't run.

I can call all of the activities a test if I want to.

But no matter how you slice it, I'm DOING IT WRONG.

If you take a picture that needs +2 stops of EV AND fill AND Blacks, etc then you have just failed as a photographer. Also, that's why you can do an HDR.....

I realize this is "just a test" but what's the point in testing a brain surgeon on his knowledge of geology and making assumptions about his intellect based on the outcome?

lol, you're getting way to angry - he's seen an issue for the type of images he does (by the way check out his images here - https://photography-on-the.net …ad.php?t=116154​2&page=196) and give the guy a break.

Why all the anger?

John_N wrote in post #14225545
lol, you're getting way to angry - he's seen an issue for the type of images he does (by the way check out his images here - https://photography-on-the.net …ad.php?t=116154​2&page=196) and give the guy a break.

Why all the anger?

I'm angry? Lol, I am laughing over here!

I thought my examples were pretty funny, maybe you should try the bright side once in a while.

I understand, though, it's probably raining over there....

Actually it was

Sorry, you're right they were funny, in fact isn't usually American's that are accused of not getting sarcasm... I hang my head in shame!

John_N wrote in post #14225614
Actually it was

Sorry, you're right they were funny, in fact isn't usually American's that are accused of not getting sarcasm... I hang my head in shame!

bahaha. true statement. no shame!