5d2 vs 5d3 iso performance?

So now that the 5d3 has been out in the hands of everyday shooters what has been the verdict in iso capabilities? And hopefully people who have shot both will chime in.

Depend on shooting situation, new 5D is only little better or waaay better than markII. Samples from 5D's. First one from 5DmkIII ISO12800, second from 5DmkII ISO3200, both from RAW. Overal I think it's big difference between them. There is no banding, pleasant structure of noise, no colour cast and noise is easier to remove.

5DmkIII ISO12800
http://dl.dropbox.com/​u/16954130/AI6C0627.JP​G

5DmkII ISO3200
http://dl.dropbox.com/​u/16954130/IMG_2484.JP​G

bonus: ISO12800 from 5DmarkII
http://dl.dropbox.com/​u/16954130/IMG_2485.JP​G

We don't have either, but DxO mark's testing suggests the 5D3 is about .3 f-stops better in noise than the 5D2. It's not much of a difference (much like the D800 vs D700 difference).

There is no difference. The sensor is just as good, or as bad. They didnt change anything in over three years.
The only difference is that the Digic 5+ processor uses a new software to reduce the noise.
If they released a firmware update to the 5d Mark II I am sure it could be just as good.
And that would mean of course 0.3 stops better iso performance.

Camera_User87 wrote in post #14325337
There is no difference. The sensor is just as good, or as bad. They didnt change anything in over three years.
The only difference is that the Digic 5+ processor uses a new software to reduce the noise.
If they released a firmware update to the 5d Mark II I am sure it could be just as good.
And that would mean of course 0.3 stops better iso performance.

Did you test it on your own? Look at files above. I did test and there is difference. And yes, Digic5+ do a good job but in jpg.

Never had a 50D- although I did have the T1i (500D- same sensor ? ) . Never had the 5D II either. I do have the 5D3- and it's low light focusing capabilities is unreal- even with the 24-105L f/4 lens- it still focuses on stuff that I have a difficult time making out. It's unreal. I am not sure how good the 5D II was- just what I've heard- but I also heard, and believed, that its AF was kind of lackluster- unless you were using center point- heresay- but I didn't want problems from an aging design either- not if I am putting 2K or more into a camera.. To the OP, going from a 50D to a 5D3, if that is what you are contemplating- should be day and night.. [or the difference between 8PM and maybe 11 PM]

Matsunami.. I can see the difference in your shots- and that is what counts.. People can spout out all kinds of numbers - but it's the difference you can and will see in pics that is what makes a difference.

Camera_user87: what do you mean- "The sensor is just as good, or as bad."? Couldn't figure it out- so I tried to look at your previous posts to figure out whether or not you liked your 5D3, and gosh, your posts are all over the map.. Not going to get a 5DIII- getting a 24-70 II instead.. 5D3's IQ superior to 5DII... Getting a 5DIII .. Disappointed in the 5D3 ... Jumping ship for a D800 instead! Now the only difference between a 5DIII and a 5DII is the Digic 5 processor ? Did you ever get the 5DIII? Handle one ? Just curious..

By the way- the SX40 HS and the S100 both use the Digic 5 processors.. While I would say that it processes nicer JPG's- I am sure that their lenses and their sensors also have something to do with it. If you were dealing with raw only- then there would be no real advantage - if I read some of these posts correctly, right ?

elitejp wrote in post #14324959
So now that the 5d3 has been out in the hands of everyday shooters what has been the verdict in iso capabilities? And hopefully people who have shot both will chime in.

photography can be an expensive hobby but I feel that the rewards are far worth what you put in. I moved from a 50D to a 5D3 and think the move was worth every penny spent. Yes I think that the photo's from my new 5D3 are better than the 50D. But I am sure that I there are many newer bodies that give better photo's too.

But the part that you can't get off a review is how it feels in your hand. I find the 5D3 just feels more comfortable. it's like a part of your hand and everything is just in the right spot. I can take more interesting shots with the better focus system. How do you put a price on a smile?

I never found that the 50D didn't perform enough to take good pictures. I just find that the look from the 5D3 is more appealing. Don't by a camera by looking at the specs, buy it with emotion.

The Digital Picture just updated its review of the 5D3 with raw samples comparing the 5D2 and 3 at various ISOs.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …I-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx

brokensocial wrote in post #14325305
We don't have either, but DxO mark's testing suggests the 5D3 is about .3 f-stops better in noise than the 5D2. It's not much of a difference.

That doesn't really tell the whole story. The noise improvement depends largely on which ISO you're looking at. According to the Full SNR charts buried deep in the DxO review:

• The 5D2 at ISO 6400 is about 1/3 stop behind the 5D3.

• The 5D2 at ISO 12800 is about 1/2 stop behind the 5D3.

• The 5D2 at ISO 25600 is almost a full stop behind the 5D3.

Well (for me personally) I was contemplating just getting the 5d2 at a marked down price considering what I remember reading from other posts was that there wasnt an iso improvement. I wanted to make sure first because there has been conflicting statements as well. However the answers i have received so far in this thread reminded me of the the banding issue along with most everyone saying the noise is just more pleasant with the 5d3, of course not too mention its other improvements. Of course for me i still want to get a lens or two first before doing any body upgrade.

But for this thread i asked this Q due to hopefully being able to get a solid answer without people being emotionally invested from answering or responding to another question or point about other similar topics. And plus hopefully this is a straight forward enough question to avoid too many rabbit trails.

Just remember that a lot of the "issues", so to speak, that everyone talks about- is at the extremes of performance, even to the ridiculous. Would you take a picture with your lens cap on- typically ? Would you underexpose your shots, knowingly, by 3 or 4 stops - intentionally ? People get ridiculous in trying to find faults with new cameras- --sometimes because they bought a different model, or they prefer a different brand. Banding issues; I have a 7D and a 5D3- and like most other owners of the 7D or 5D3- they don't see the supposed banding issues that some tout.. Supposedly- it exists.. Borders on the ridiculous.

Camera_User87 wrote in post #14325337
There is no difference. The sensor is just as good, or as bad. They didnt change anything in over three years.
The only difference is that the Digic 5+ processor uses a new software to reduce the noise.
If they released a firmware update to the 5d Mark II I am sure it could be just as good.
And that would mean of course 0.3 stops better iso performance.

****ing troll

My experience has been very positive so far. Where I would be reluctant to shoot at or above ISO 3200 with my 5D2s, I was able to get really impressive results at ISO 6400 and even ISO 10,000 with my 5D3s.

So yeah, my real world experience after a couple weddings and engagement shoots has been very positive in regards to IQ - still working on getting comfortable with the AF system. And I HATE that I can't swap out the focusing screen.

Camera_User87 wrote in post #14325337
There is no difference. The sensor is just as good, or as bad. They didnt change anything in over three years.
The only difference is that the Digic 5+ processor uses a new software to reduce the noise.
If they released a firmware update to the 5d Mark II I am sure it could be just as good.
And that would mean of course 0.3 stops better iso performance.

did you use your 5diii to determine that or just your reading ability?

Higgs Boson wrote in post #14329798
did you use your 5diii to determine that or just your reading ability?

He read my report of it, then again I wrote it with crayons.

stargazer78 wrote in post #14329290
That doesn't really tell the whole story. The noise improvement depends largely on which ISO you're looking at. According to the Full SNR charts buried deep in the DxO review:

• The 5D2 at ISO 6400 is about 1/3 stop behind the 5D3.

• The 5D2 at ISO 12800 is about 1/2 stop behind the 5D3.

• The 5D2 at ISO 25600 is almost a full stop behind the 5D3.

Much of the improvement on the 5D3 is due to the lack of high ISO banding. So even when there's equal amount of noise on the two cameras, the 5D3 looks better because random noise is more pleasant than pattern noise. Also, color sensitivity on the 5D3 is much improved across the entire ISO range.

^^^^^^^^^^
This