small rant about the 5dii (vs 5dc).

i got a 5dii today from my buddy for a full day shoot today and realized one thing - the 5dii has a lot of COLOR noise from iso3200 onwards, whereas the 5dc's noise is 'monochrome' - could that be why people always say 5dc has the film-grain/filmic look whereas 5dii looks artificial?

another rant is about the not-so-useful 'Auto ISO' - its' algorithm is simply 1/focal length and doesn't care under what conditions u're using it (whether it's shaking badly or not) + no customizations allowed to finetune it to your preference. just a rant.

not very impressed with the 5dii and i'm glad to still be sticking to my cheapo 5dc.. just saying!

How does the 5Dc do at ISO 6400? 12,800? 25,600? Oh...right.

I've owned both and loved my 5Dc...in fact, it was one of my all-time favourite cameras. However, there's sooooooo much more to the 5D2 than the tiny little slice you're focusing on.

Sure, the 5Dc is an EXCELLENT low noise machine up to 3200. But the 5D2 is amazing all the way up to 12,800 and I've gotten usable shots out of 25,600.

And then I could give you a laundry list of stuff the 5Dc doesn't have that the 5D2 does, or that the 5D2 does better...

I'm very impressed with the 5D2 and glad I didn't stick with my 5Dc...just saying!

its very easy to transform that colored noise to monochrome or even remove it in post, especially at 3200.

The 5Dc is a very nice camera, but once you hit 3200 and beyond (you can shoot at higher ISOs, you just have to shoot raw to do it, and pull exposure), the 5D2 beats it. All things considered, the 5D2 is better in almost every single regard to the 5Dc.

Do this, take an image with both at ISO 3200, then resize the 5D2 down to the 5Dc resolution, and then compare. I assume you zoomed into the 5D2 image at 100% and ditto on the 5Dc?

Interestingly there is a very active thread on this very thing over on FM: http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/11541​37

the.forumer wrote in post #15082191
i got a 5dii today from my buddy for a full day shoot today and realized one thing - the 5dii has a lot of COLOR noise from iso3200 onwards, whereas the 5dc's noise is 'monochrome' - could that be why people always say 5dc has the film-grain/filmic look whereas 5dii looks artificial?

another rant is about the not-so-useful 'Auto ISO' - its' algorithm is simply 1/focal length and doesn't care under what conditions u're using it (whether it's shaking badly or not) + no customizations allowed to finetune it to your preference. just a rant.

not very impressed with the 5dii and i'm glad to still be sticking to my cheapo 5dc.. just saying!

i've been tempted 3-4 times to switch back to the classic but 2 things are keeping me to the Mark II for good:
low ISO performance - on the 5Dc, ISO1200 was the max I could confidently shoot with even still lots of noise already, on the 5Dii on the other hand 3200-6400 and image still looks noise free
cropping power - I honestly thought I wouldn't care much about MP but with 21MP, I can crop more

I loved the original 5D - it and my Sig85 seemed to have been made for one another....
but all the extra bells and whistles of the 5D2 made it even better!

ISO3200, go 1/3 to the right, and that really helps some of that noise issue you might be seeing

I did not like the 5Dc over ISO800, the 5DII I can use to ISo3200 happily. Maybe you need to blur the colours in PS or reduce colour noise in DPP. Colour noise is the simplist of problems. 5Dc was great at ISO100 and 200, I trusted the highlights and could pull em back. But it used alot of battery power, had no micro adjust and the screen was useless.

The newer bodies give you slightly more control over Auto-ISO.. What you really want is the 5D III.

Nobody worries about color noise because you can NR it away without loss of detail. Luminence noise is much harder to get rid of without losing detail.

The 7D, 1D4, 5D3 and 1DX are the only Canon bodies that have what I would call a 'usable' auto-ISO, and even then it doesn't work with flash and it doesn't allow exposure compensation. This is because Canon still thinks of it as "auto-ISO" which is useless. What we really need is "Shutter and Aperture Priotity Mode" which should work just like Av and Tv (with the one obvious difference that ISO becomes the dependent variable).

mike_311 wrote in post #15082701
its very easy to transform that colored noise to monochrome or even remove it in post, especially at 3200.

This. I have 5dc, had 5dmk2 and 5dmk3. 5dmk3 is so so much better. No questions.

The ISO noise is the last thing that I would complain about on the 5D2. I love the performance of it all the way up to ISO 6400!

Considering how early it gets dark nowadays, ISO 3200 is my normal ISO.

contrary to many opinions here - imo iso3200 is still very usable on the 5dc, and i wouldn't really use the 6400 on 5dii, unless we're talking about web-sized pics here.. to each his own i guess..

JeffreyG wrote in post #15084659
Nobody worries about color noise because you can NR it away without loss of detail. Luminence noise is much harder to get rid of without losing detail.

The 7D, 1D4, 5D3 and 1DX are the only Canon bodies that have what I would call a 'usable' auto-ISO, and even then it doesn't work with flash and it doesn't allow exposure compensation. This is because Canon still thinks of it as "auto-ISO" which is useless. What we really need is "Shutter and Aperture Priotity Mode" which should work just like Av and Tv (with the one obvious difference that ISO becomes the dependent variable).

curious about your first line. have not done much research on color noise yet - but if this is true.. does it mean i should just leave the color noise slider at 100 by default? since it has 0 impact on the final image?

wayne.robbins wrote in post #15084529
The newer bodies give you slightly more control over Auto-ISO.. What you really want is the 5D III.

i sure do. if i had cash to burn.. that is. hahaha