Would you prefer advancements in IS or ISO??

Definetely ISO. Thats the reason i bought the 6D

Scatterbrained wrote in post #15934528
Buy a flash.

If only churches would allow flash! had one the other day where the church is only lit by candles and some small stained glass windows, 5D3 was on 12800iso 85L was at f1.2 shutter was 1/60sec, I had to turn the LCD light on to see the settings!!

murkeywaters wrote in post #15934553
If only churches would allow flash! had one the other day where the church is only lit by candles and some small stained glass windows, 5D3 was on 12800iso 85L was at f1.2 shutter was 1/60sec, I had to turn the LCD light on to see the settings!!

But dont tell me your disappointet by the 5dmark3's iso performance??!?

The 5Dm3 should behave like the 6d when it comes to low light performance, and i found my 6d working pretty noiseless for 12600, sure there is noise but at 12600 i expect something really noisy, pretty unuseful...

davidfarina wrote in post #15934566
But dont tell me your disappointet by the 5dmark3's iso performance??!?

The 5Dm3 should behave like the 6d when it comes to low light performance, and i found my 6d working pretty noiseless for 12600, sure there is noise but at 12600 i expect something really noisy, pretty unuseful...

No disappointment here regarding the 5D3 at all, its a great body, just that wedding couples do expect results even under such adverse light, its amazing really when I think back to using a 5D1, maxed out usability was 1600iso in yet I regularly shoot 6400iso on 5D3...how did I get by.

murkeywaters wrote in post #15934532
Only shoot RAW but Canon tones are a lot warmer from AWB in general and editing 700+ images a day in various light gets a bit tiring, hence would like like Canon to improve the AWB

I don't think WB settings matter when shooting RAW, do they?

ISO and shutterspeed aren't exactly interchangable , and its somewhat of an invalid question.

There are creative and technical reasons to prefer one over the other, depending on what you shoot.

dalto wrote in post #15934601
I don't think WB settings matter when shooting RAW, do they?

Not really but I think even ARC will use the camera's WB as a starting point. DPP definitely will.

For me, I prefer advances in ISO. Though I have many IS lenses, I don't use IS all that much.

mystik610 wrote in post #15934620
ISO and shutterspeed aren't exactly interchangable , and its somewhat of an invalid question...

They are not interchangeable, but they are closely linked along with aperture. Double the ISO = double the shutter speed for the same aperture. Quadruple the ISO, quadruple the shutter speed for the same ISO.

dalto wrote in post #15934601
I don't think WB settings matter when shooting RAW, do they?

Most of my wedding images all shot in RAW AWB do need some correction in Lightroom but the whites never look purelike this, he shoots Nikon and edits in Nikon's version of DPP.

Have you considered and expodisk or colorchecker?

ISO

Scatterbrained wrote in post #15934681
Have you considered and expodisk or colorchecker?

Not really feasible on a fast moving wedding in lots of different lighting conditions especially when I might have 3000 images and 2 of us shooting over a day.

Wear the expodisk around your neck, take a shot, set CWB. Takes 5 seconds. Less time than correcting all the shots in post.

Scatterbrained wrote in post #15934726
Wear the expodisk around your neck, take a shot, set CWB. Takes 5 seconds. Less time than correcting all the shots in post.

If I don't have time to use my WB doohickey before I grab a shot, I take the shot then scoot in and take a CWB frame after the fact and apply it in post. No excuse not to use a CWB doohickey.

PS - Give me improved ISO 100 performance. All the improvements to ISO 100 plz

And leaf shutter EF lenses, why not Canon? Y u make me wanna buy a Phase One?