Canon 5Diii - image quality?

Hi all, I've recently picked up a Canon 5diii but I've not been blown away by the image quality straight out of the camera. I previously shot with a 550D as my first ever DSLR and expected a big jump in performance moving up to the 5diii. A prime example is the image attached to this thread, where the horizon is clearly skewed... This can obviously be fixed post production, but wouldn't expect such a big horizon curve straight from RAW... This is only one example where the 5diii hasn't quite lived up to my expectations. The camera was bought online from an Importer, and I'm slightly concerned that it's a 'grey' import, potentially re-furbed etc... I've taken about 1000 shots so far. Would be great to hear of anyone else's experiences, or thoughts on the Camera etc based on the image shown. The picture was taken with the standard EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM Lens Kit. Happy to share others straight from the camera, without any post-production. Thanks for any feedback !

The sea being curved is a lens issue, nothing to do with the camera ( wide angle 24mm so slight distortion, cracking lens for the money but not great at the extremes ) , I'd say it was a trifle over exposed too, that may be a camera issue, what metering setting did you use? Chances are, the wrong one from the looks of it, so nowt wrong with the camera. For this shot all easily fixed if shot in RAW, adjust PP for the lens distortion, increase saturation and contrast, thrown in a grad filter, voila......

At ISO 125 shooting at f/8 in bright noon sun while your subject is stationary, there is not going to be a lot of difference in image quality. In those conditions you could have taken the image with your phone camera and it would be hard to tell the difference. The pin cushioning looks about normal for the 24-105 at 24mm.

Thanks for the comments guys - sounds like everything is OK in the Hardware world. Will keep an eye on future images, and compensate for conditions slightly more while taking shots, and in post-production! I'll jump back on here with any future questions - useful, and quick responses - cheers !

Wms160985 wrote in post #18432562
Hi all, I've recently picked up a Canon 5diii but I've not been blown away by the image quality straight out of the camera. I previously shot with a 550D as my first ever DSLR and expected a big jump in performance moving up to the 5diii. A prime example is the image attached to this thread, where the horizon is clearly skewed... This can obviously be fixed post production, but wouldn't expect such a big horizon curve straight from RAW... This is only one example where the 5diii hasn't quite lived up to my expectations. The camera was bought online from an Importer, and I'm slightly concerned that it's a 'grey' import, potentially re-furbed etc... I've taken about 1000 shots so far. Would be great to hear of anyone else's experiences, or thoughts on the Camera etc based on the image shown. The picture was taken with the standard EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM Lens Kit. Happy to share others straight from the camera, without any post-production. Thanks for any feedback !

Hosted photo: posted by Wms160985 in
./showthread.php?p=184​32562&i=i11523807
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

Crickey!!! You're not a member of the Flat Earth Society are you?

gjl711 wrote in post #18432576
At ISO 125 shooting at f/8 in bright noon sun while your subject is stationary, there is not going to be a lot of difference in image quality. In those conditions you could have taken the image with your phone camera and it would be hard to tell the difference. The pin cushioning looks about normal for the 24-105 at 24mm.

Pretty sure that is barrel distortion. Nonetheless, it is distortion. The 24-105 may or may not be a good lens, that is debatable. It is surely one of Canon's worst distortion lenses at 24mm. The shooter aggravates the distortion by not shooting level. If your lens is pointed either up or down, the shooter is adding to the distortion. I have 12mm and 15mm FE lenses. Reasonably level horizons are possible with those, if the lens is level with the horizon.

To my mind, it makes no sense to pay big $$ for a 5D3, and shoot it JPG. That is just throwing away 80% of the data your camera is capturing. Shooting raw gives you a lot more processing latitude. In some software, raw is the only way to get lens profiles to help you.

One last point. The 5D3 is geared for a more advanced shooter than is the T2i/550D. The 550D will by default produce more saturated, more contrasty, consumer type images. Canon assumes someone shooting a top-tier camera like the 5D3 will want a more 'natural' image with which to work. I think most manufacturers do this.

Whoops, yes, I always get barrel and pincushion mixed up.

Um, the Earth is a sphere. The horizon is mostly perceived as flat, but it's not. A wide angle lens will make the curvature more apparent.

joedlh wrote in post #18432765
Um, the Earth is a sphere. The horizon is mostly perceived as flat, but it's not. A wide angle lens will make the curvature more apparent.

Actually, a wide angle with barrel distortion will make a perfectly straight line curved. It's an artifact of the lens, not the curvature of the earth.

It will also exaggerate the curve of the earth if the horizon is placed near the top of the frame, or appear to reduce it if this horizon is placed near the bottom.

The 24-105mm f4 lens is supposed to have a bit more barrel distortion at 24mm then some other lenses (and would especially be highlighted in a FF framing). Welcome to the world of FF: where you might need a more expensive lens to take full advantage of the FF features.

Lens Distortion Comparison

The photozone.de testing shows just how bad the barrel distortion is, with the 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens at 24mm..."barrel distortion of 4.3% at 24mm ", which is more than most zooms at widest FL.

http://www.photozone.d​e …-canon_24105_4_5d?start​=1

shows how much bowing of lines that ought to be straight, in the Distortion characteristic. Zooms are generally worse than fixed FL lenses for barrel distortion at WA FL.

haha definitely not! Although, wouldn't that be interesting ?!

Hi Bassat, thanks for your response. Fair comments! I only posted in .jpg to show the horizon concern I had. Definitely shoot all my images in RAW, would be foolish not to cheers

Where full frames shine are high ISO performance and shallow Depth of Field for portraits.
There is not going to be an astronomical jump for image quality even in that scenarios but the difference is there.