Canon EOS 5D Mark III

[Octane]

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Unsurpassed Image Quality

* 22.3 Megapixel Full Frame CMOS sensor
* DiG!C 5+ Image Processor
* ISO 100-25600 (expandable to L:50 H1:51200, H2: 102400
* Full HD Movie (ISO 100-12800 (H:25600)

High Performance Operation

* 61-point high-density reticular AF (up to 41 crosstype points)
* 6.0 fps for high continuous shooting
* Intelligent viewfinder with approx. 100% coverage
* 3.2-type, approx.1.04m dot (3:2 wide) Clear View LCD II
* iFCL metering with 63-zone dual-layer sensor
* Shutter durability of 150,000 cycles

High end features

* Silent & low vibration modes
* Dual card slots (CF & SD)
* High Dynamic Range (HDR) Mode
* Multiple Exposures
* Comparative Playback function
* Improved durability & water and dust resistance

--

ISO 25,600 NATIVE! The D800 tops out at that in H1 mode.

Do we have the new low light king here? :D

I'll be placing an order; it will play alongside its older siblings. :D

HAPPY H!

[Chancellor]

LOL. I was wondering how long it would take you to post :)

I'm very much looking forward to seeing how it performs.. Now to find the money to buy one....

[astro_south]

Poop - have been dreaming about the 1Dx ever since it was announced. Now this appears and has enough qualities (and in some ways overlap) that I need to seriously consider this and some nice glass for around the same cost as the 1Dx ... :shrug:

[iceman]

What's the body cost going to be?

[Octane]

About $3,500-$4,200.

H

[Octane]

It's official.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii

H

[Octane]

ISO-6400 now gives the same performance as ISO-1600 on the Mark II.

Oh, boy.

H

[CometGuy]

H,

You must be elated...improved sensor, 61 point AF, etc, etc!

Terry

[jenchris]

don't suppose it needs a flash now - with that sort of ISO depth

[Octane]

I am over the moon, Terry!

Jen, as it is predominantly a studio/landscape system, flash is still required for non-natural light portraiture/photography.

Where it will excel is in shooting weddings in low light (think dark churches with very minimial natural light; I can get away with ISO-3200 now and it's clean, but, the ability to now push to ISO-12,800 (equivalent) is just sensational).

H

[gregbradley]

It looks to be a nice improvement over the 5D 2.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57388948-1/the-long-wait-ends-canon-5d-mark-iii-hands-on/

The wireless flash you mentioned though is not in this one but a $499 accessory. D800 has one built in. Also no flash but then I suppose a lot of pros would use an external flash unit. Amateurs like me want a built in flash.

Its as you would expect, a good number of mp and improved processor allowing better high ISO performance versus D800 with high mp and still good high ISO but no match for this.

The inevitable shootouts and comparisons will be interesting.

Gotta say it seems not as good bang for your buck as the Nikon on the surface at least. AUD$935 more for the 5D mark iii ($3465 versus $4400 http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/03/canons-eos-5d-mark-iii-will-cost-from-4399/) , no flash, no wireless flash unit, high ISO is a plus but less mp, less rugged body, both processors I am assuming are probably similar in performance, both dual memory, video seems similar - not sure about the ability to change settings mid-recording the 5D mark iii can do if the D800 can do that - not sure. Builit in HDR I think both can do, D800 has a time lapse function, menus etc is probably a user preferred thing for either.
D800 also has autofocus for video - perhaps not important to some.

If you are already using a 5D and want an upgrade and have lots of Canon lenses it seems a worthwhile upgrade but I don't see anything there that is too exciting for my uses. Although it would seem on paper this new 5D mark 111 would be the camera of choice for astroimaging or night time lapse. Until a Nikon D400 comes out at least.

I wonder if the rumours about a 45mp 5DX have any merit or if there
is any mention about this in the media coverage of this release.

Oh and another good thing, Canon is retaining the mark ii and dropping its price much like Nikon keeping the D700 and dropping its price. Competition is a good thing!

For what its worth a Ken Rockwell quick evaluation of the camera:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5d-mk-iii.htm

Greg.

[CometGuy]

A couple of full size shots of aurora taken with the 5D mk3 + 24 f1.4 lens at f2.8:

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/01.jpg

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/02.jpg

The processing and noise reduction look a bit heavy handed to me, but it is interesting to note the second hand shot is just 0.6 of a second.

Terry

[Atlantis69]

I'm doubting a 5Dx but willing to put money on the 1 series splitting back to a 1Dxs with higher MP count.

[Octane]

Canon has a history of putting fairly average images online to showcase their new systems. I honestly don't understand why.

But, I'm excited, nonetheless. :)

Simon, that's quite interesting. I've read nothing about the potential/rumoured split of the 1DX.

H

[gregbradley]

Those 2 aurora shots are terrible. Noisy, coma in stars, chromatic aberration uncorrected. There are any number of people on this site who could've done a far better job than that. Perhaps we should offer our services to the Canon marketing Dept.:rofl: And I think they were trying to showcase the low light performance of the mark iii. Fail. I'm sure its better than that.

Low light ISO is more for indoors type night shots without a flash or perhaps early evening like weddings or dinners/parties. Otherwise a flash. So I am not sure what all the fuss is about high ISO performance in the camera forums as if its the be all end all. For astronomy I think its pretty meaningless as these shots show.

Unless you have a lens that does not give coma in the corners and chromatic aberration at the edges then you need to stop down. You need to track the camera and do longer exposures at modest ISO to avoid star trails and get some sharpness and signal.

This came home to me imaging comet Lovejoy over Christmas. The only shots I got that I was happy with were tracked.

I think for your work Humi this camera would be awesome, everything upgraded on a camera you were already really happy with.

Greg.

[luigi]

For landscape/astro shooters the new camera should be a huge dissapointment. It certainly is to me.

The examples look really bad. They have blotchy patches of NR where chrominance noise was. It seems they put a heavy AA filter on the 5DIII as they did on the 7D to help video. This goes in detriment of IQ for photography. Nikon noticed this effect and released two versions of the D800.

The 5DIII is a fantastic camera for JPG shooters of sports & events. For reporters and for videographers but for Studio, Landscape and Astro it's not good. Not good at all.

Nikon made the logical evolution of the 5DII and now Canon makes the logical evolution of the D700. Oh the Irony!

[gregbradley]

Just saw this preproduction high ISO test of 5D mark iii.

The high ISO performance is unreal:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples

Definitely this will be the main strength of this camera.

Greg.

[leon]

It all sounds great, BUT, if one has a Canon 5D original, or maybe a Mark11, and it serves one well and produces the goods so to speak, why up grade at all, but rather stick to what one has.:shrug:

As the saying goes, (if it aint broke don't fix it) :shrug:

Leon :thumbsup:

[Octane]

Luis,

I am pretty certain that those samples are JPGs straight from the camera, and, not RAW. I wish they didn't do this. My understanding from what I've read is they show these samples to indicate what the "average" user can expect. I don't understand why they do this on their prosumer and professional lines. Surely, they should show the best that is achievable by the system in the hands of one who is skilled enough to make art. Example: in your hands -- you make wonderful images.

Leon,

For high ISO performance.

ISO-3200 is as far as I'd push the Mark II for low light weddings. With the Mark III, ISO-6400 is the new ISO-1600. That is, an extra two stops of usability. That is an enormous bonus for those who do low light work.

In regular sized wedding albums, ISO-1600 from the original, ISO-3200 from the Mark II, and, now, ISO-6400 images from the Mark III will be more than useable in print.

You're right, though, the original and the Mark II do an amazing job already. The 61-point autofocus and tracking addition on the Mark III, though, is very welcome.

I'm off to Fyshwick to see if I can place a deposit on one. :)

H

[Omaroo]

D-D-P have just sent out their pre-order announcement (mine received by email):

http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/products/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-Digital-SLR-Camera-Body.html?utm_source=MailingList&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=5D+III

AUD $3,739.00

Stock expected "March/April" (whatever that means).

[gregbradley]

That's a good price Chris. It didn't take long for the price to come down!
Teds wants $4200 or more. But you have to pay in full in advance and wait.

That's a bit rich. I put my name down for a D800 with no deposit required from anothe
dealer.

Greg.

[Bassnut]

The high iOS performance is killer for time lapse , allows shorter exposures for a given apature and therefore shorter period and faster Fps for a smoother video, I'll be ordering one.

[gregbradley]

Good point Fred.

Greg.

[iceman]

LOL I love how autocorrect turned ISO into iOS :)

[Bassnut]

Thats the ipad :P (lets face it, iOS is a FAR more popular term than meer camera ISO). I dont mind though, the spell correct is pretty usefull after a few too many Guiness:D.

Oh, and, not that it matters much or many ppl care,. Nikon is woefull for serious timelapse, they cant handle bulb ramping or lens twist, that pretty much wipes them out for that. Canon is the king there.

[Octane]

When are you getting yours, Fred? :)

H

[Bassnut]

What, an iPad, a canon or a Nikon ?

[Bassnut]

Mmm, I'll answer that. I'm stuck with an iPad already , I'll get a 5d mk3 ASAP and I woulnt buy a Nikon anything in a mad fit, it's the devils scheme to extract money from suckers.

[Octane]

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/15_cinc_big.jpg

H

[Atlantis69]

I usually hang out on this site for rumours... take anything you read with a grain (or sack) of salt though.
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_1D_Xs.html

[Atlantis69]

The 1D to 1Ds gap is generally 6-9 months, so I doubt we'd see anything until the end of the year at least. I'm happy enough to wait. My 1Ds3 is still going very strong after 4 years and my new 1D4 is still an amazing piece of machinery.

[Octane]

Ah, yep. I try and avoid NI and CR like the plague. :P

Though, admittedly, I do digest second-hand information on DPR.

No doubt, the 1Ds systems and the 1D Mark IV are beautiful machines. I've seen some absolutely astounding wildlife/BIF stuff with the 1D Mark IV. Unreal.

The 1DX promises another stop of cleanliness over the 5D Mark III. That will be insane to see.

Cheers!

H

[skysurfer]

When it is really 2 stops better than the 5d2 it is at least three stops better than the 40d, so I can take deep sky pics @ 6400 or even 12500 which I now do @ 1600.
That means that using the EF 85mm 1.8 I can expose 4 seconds without tracking and still stars till mag 12 on the photo !

[gregbradley]

"Oh, and, not that it matters much or many ppl care,. Nikon is woefull for serious timelapse, they cant handle bulb ramping or lens twist, that pretty much wipes them out for that. Canon is the king there.[/QUOTE]"


I didn't understand this. What is bulb ramping and lens twist? Never heard of that before?

I just looked up bulb ramping so its being able to change settings midstream in a time lapse. Yes that could be handy.

The only reference for lens twisting is to lenses unscrewing. Is that what you mean?

Or do you mean full aperture control with this lens twist trick:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonysphotographs/3094873460/

That's pretty funny that Nikon is useless for time lapse though.

Alex won the Canary Island International astro competition with a time lapse with a Nikon D700 with a Nikon 14-24mm lens. Also the Malin awards the year before last. He gets regular APODs with it.

Last I checked the earlier Nikon models have the superior high ISO low light performance for a long time and its something Canon obviously have worked towards improving with the 5D3 whilst Nikon has chased Canon's resolution advantage. Its funny really.

I checked the specs for the Nikon D800 and time lapse and video and it appears (its not totally clear) that you have full manual control over aperture and exposure.


"full manual control of shutter speed/aperture/ISO, smooth aperture changes (when using HDMI out), built-in time lapse movie making, and index marking. The D800 allows FX or DX crop video, but not the 2.7x crop that the D4 does. You can capture 1920x1080 stills while shooting video. "

The time lapse function is part of the video mode of the camera. I wonder though if this is the same thing or if the outputs would be acceptable as some shoot time lapse night shots in RAW. So if the time lapse of the Nikon is part of the video mode then Nikon RAW file output may not be available. But it doesn't need an intervalvometer which is a plus. As no cameras are out in the public yet these sorts of details are not 100% clear.

Here's an example:

http://vimeo.com/36360872

I just read more - time lapse is limited to 20 minutes. That's no good for astro. Hmmm. Maybe you have a point there Fred.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features02.htm

This time lapse clearly shows no change in aperture or exposure control as the sun sets the very thing that Fred is referring to.



Greg.

[gregbradley]

I'd say a high MP Canon would definitely be on the cards now. There is no way Canon is going to idly by and lose a significant amount of sales to Nikon with its D800.

I don't see a 1DXs competing though because it would be twice the price. It would have to be closer in price to work for them.

Greg.

[Bassnut]

Greg. That comment was a bit tongue in cheek ;)

I don't mean any sort of movie mode, just manual bulb mode for full control.And always in RAW, that a given for best results.

You can take time lapse with any camera, is just harder with some, and with serious post processing anything is possible.

Ye, the lens twist locks aperture down to stop flickering. Nikons can't do this although it appears some sort of lens adaptor may make it possible. The little bumper is one of very few ways of doing TL with ap/Iso control, and it's spec says it won't work with Nikon because of the way it handles bulb mode. I think that means flash feedback can't be used to stop flickering at short exposures, or it can't be exposure ramped reliably in small time steps.

All these limitations just mean more post processing to eliminate flicker. As you say, Alex has produced award winning TL so it's obviously possible, just harder.

There's good reasons for most timelapsers to use Canon, particularly the 5Dmk2.

[rogerg]

This camera looks awesome. I'd love to have one. Enormous potential for night/astro photography. Doing the cost analysis I don't think I'll be able to justify it though, need to be able to pay for it some how :( ... we'll see.

[gregbradley]

Thanks for the explanation Fred. But a good post as it opened up new techniques I was not aware of.

I did see a thread on the net where a guy developed a similar thing for Nikons. I don't think it is available as a buyable item just yet.

Can you adjust these things with software on the fly or once a sequence has started that's it?

I guess D800 files would be large too for several hours of time lapse at full frame at 100mb each.

D800 site says you can control aperture and exposure manually in video but we are talking about RAW exposures. Is RAW that important after all you shrink it down to HD at the end?

It may be a good time to buy a 5D mark ii or perhaps I'll simply buy both as both cameras are sufficiently different to be useful for different purposes (I put my name down for notification for a 5d Mk iii already).

Also wouldn't an astro camera be better than either for that matter. My Proline 16803 with a Pentax 6 x 7 55mm F4 lens is very very wide probably the equivalent of 28mm 35mm lens. There is a Pentax 6 x 7 45mm lens as well. Bin it 2x2. It might be worth an experiment
and you could pan slowly with the mount. The PMX has a great joystick that you can turn down the rate of slew to really really slow so that could be handy. Or do you slew between exposures so you don't get streaky shots? That could be tricky.

Greg.

[Octane]

Greg, I know nothing about timelapses, but, I would imagine that RAW is important in order to be able to set white balance correctly.

Unless, you're the type that sets it to daylight and forgets it. I could never do that. Too much of a stickler!

H

[Phil Hart]

i'm going to be a little controversial and say that i think the hype about improved high ISO performance with each new DSLR released (whether Canon/Nikon) is a little misplaced.

most of the gains are in noise smoothing algorithms applied to the JPGs only and which can be applied to files from any camera in post-processing anyway. there may be incremental (very small) gains in reduction of read noise and with the 5DIII a claimed increase in photoelectric conversion rate (which I'm betting is small) but i really don't think it is at all possible to increase the physical noise performance by two stops.

as i understand it, shot noise totally dominates most low light exposures, until you're shooting quite long exposures and thermal noise becomes significant.

i tested a 10MP 5D original against my 21MP 5DII and aside from a few more hot pixels which are easily handled (and not really *noise* in the true sense of the word), the noise performance of the original looks better to me.. not all that surprising given the much larger pixel size and therefore lower shot noise (gapless microlenses on the 5DII making the difference much smaller than the pure arithmetic of the pixel count would suggest). but the gapless microlens card has already been played now so little to gain on that front.

i expect the 5DIII will be *very* similar in RAW performance to the 5DII, as pixel size is almost identical. the noise i see in my images is not originating in the camera.. it is purely a statistical function of sampling low light levels with a given pixel size.

am i missing something.. do people really think there is scope to improve the noise performance significantly.. what source of noise is being reduced or how is the signal collection improved??

cheers
Phil

[Phil Hart]

and don't get me wrong.. of course i will be getting myself one of these too :-)

[Octane]

Hey Phil,

I'm not down on the science behind it all.

I just know that if I can shoot at ISO-6400 to ISO-25,600 during weddings, I couldn't ask for anything more.

Some more ISO-6400 JPGs (straight out of camera) have surfaced today, and, aside from the model being slight out of focus, the images are clean.

Excited. :D

H

[Phil Hart]

but does the 6400 JPG look any better than a 5DII 6400 after noise reduction in lightroom? the high ISO JPGs i've seen look like they've had heavy noise reduction applied to them.. which is exactly what is happening..

Phil

[gregbradley]

You bring up an interesting point Phil.

I take it that the gains both Nikon and Canon are achieving in noise control come more from improvements in the supporting processing electronics and chips.

For example not to pick on SBIG but it serves as an example - the STL11 is very very noisy compared to identically chipped FLI Proline 11002. Why? Better A/D conversion probably. Now you are seeing ST8300F models with these improved electronics and SBIG is now acknowledging these available improvements and incorporating them into their newer models. No doubt STX has these improvements.

Same I suspect with DSLRs. Expeed 3 for Nikon and Digic 5+ for Canon have way more processing power. So there would be a gain there.
Plus they must be able to process perhaps more advanced noise suppression using the extra computing power available than earlier models.

There is also optimising the antialiasing filter. These filters are pretty harsh. I have changed a few over on EOS20D and also Nikon D70. They must cut down QE a lot. So optimising them must have a gain at the expense of flirting with moire.

But I know what you mean. I have a 20D and a 40D and I shot a 5D mark ii and the 40D seemed to have same or better noise performance as the 5D mark ii or at minimum it was similar. I was surprised I expected the 5D mark ii to be a lot cleaner. Both used under near identical conditions.

I guess in that case it comes down to pixel size.

Surely 36mp though must be some sort of ceiling or close to the theoretical limit. Geez, that same sized sensor in an astro camera is the Kodak KAI11002 chip and that is a mere 11mp (probably a tad less). My 16803 chipped camera is twice the sensor size of these chips and its only 16.8mp so that would be 8.3mp if it were full frame!

Yet when Kodak brought out the KAI16000 which is 16mp full frame size it seems to have been hugely unpopular in the astro world. Noone really uses it.

Greg.

[Octane]

Dunno, don't use LightRoom. Only DPP for me. The one and only Canon RAW converter. :P

The ISO-6400 JPGs I saw today have had absolutely nothing done to them. They're straight out of camera and look incredible.

Cheers.

H

[gregbradley]

Isn't there an update to Photoshop that has Canon RAW conversion? I thought I saw one.

Greg.

[QUOTE=Octane;826657]Dunno, don't use LightRoom. Only DPP for me. The one and only Canon RAW converter. :P

[Octane]

Greg,

If you do a search on my posting history, you'll see my thoughts on LR/ACR/PS when it comes to Canon RAW conversion.

Just on my way to work, hence brevity.

Cheers.

H

[gregbradley]

I see, so the Canon one works much better. Fair enough.

Greg.

If you do a search on my posting history, you'll see my thoughts on LR/ACR/PS when it comes to Canon RAW conversion.

Just on my way to work, hence brevity.

Cheers.

H[/QUOTE]

[Octane]

http://216.18.212.226/PRODS/canon-5d-mkiii/FULLRES/E5D3hSLI025600.JPG

ISO-25,600.

Wee!

H

[Octane]

Canon 1Dx ISO-12,800 SOOC JPG sample: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dx/downloads/009.jpg

:eyepop:

H

[iceman]

It's sideways :P

[Octane]

Yeah, I know. :)

H

[Poita]

The MKIII is a nice piece of kit. Embedded timecode would make me happy for video, and the depth of field preview is now where my finger expects to find it. No real bump in resolution over the MKII but the high ISO looks great.

Though I can't believe Canon *still* doesn't have full colour metering or decent flash metering, this should have been fixed 10 years ago. They did finally put fringe correction in. We will be upgrading our MKIIs at work, hocking them while the price is still good.

[Poita]

As long as they are clean due to a great sensor and electronics (they probably are) rather than noise reduction/smoothing in camera (let's hope not).

[gregbradley]

Though I can't believe Canon *still* doesn't have full colour metering or decent flash metering, this should have been fixed 10 years ago. They did finally put fringe correction in. We will be upgrading our MKIIs at work, hocking them while the price is still good.[/QUOTE]

Per a video I watched the 5D mark iii does have exposure metering based on RGB now. It was B and W before.

Greg.

[Phil Hart]

Here's a sample at ISO25,600 from my 5DmkII, with noise reduction applied in Lightroom:

http://philhart.com/files/_MG_7741.jpg

Is it really that much worse than the 5DIII example above? Look particularly at the colour chart and around the wine bottles in your sample. It's also not true that the mkIII sample JPGs have had nothing done to them.. they've had heavy noise reduction applied in camera.. you can see it clearly.

The reason '6400 is the new 1600' is that greater processing power allows much more sophisticated noise smoothing to be applied in camera than what the mkII could do. But you can apply that with software yourself as you have to with RAW anyway.

I'll bet a new 1DX *and* a 5DMKIII that RAW 6400 from the mkIII does not look like 1600 on the MKII. a small gain for sure.. but no way two stops. it's simply not possible to have improved the efficiency of the mkII sensor that much (whoever the manufacturer is) since it was already so good. quantum mechanics says so.

if you're disappointed when your new camera arrives, i'll happily take it off your hands.. i'll appreciate the 10% improvement a lot more! ;)

cheers
Phil

[Peter Ward]

Nice try :)

I'm not convinced absolute QE is the problem with CMOS chips. By their intrinsic design you have pixel to pixel variation in the (on chip) read-up electronics.

A bit like weighing yourself many times on one set of bathroom scales (al la CCD..same result every time) as opposed to weighing yourself with different scales (al la CMOS, this scale says I've put on weight! )

Canon may have discovered a method to make their "scales" more consistent. In which case the S/N will have improved and you can push the signal harder before the noise becomes offensive.

[Octane]

Phil,

I've never been disappointed with /any/ of the Canon gear that I have bought or owned. I don't think this baby is going to disappoint, either.

I take my gear for what it is; a tool designed to do a job. Ilike having the latest and greatest, though. Will it make me abetter photographer? I doubt it. Will it allow me to make better photographs? Possibly. Will ISO-6400 or ISO-25,600 allow me to get shots that I previously would not have dreamed of taking, even if I end up converting them to black and white? You bet!

DPP now has a state of the art Digital Lens Optimizer module, too, by the way. :D

H

[Phil Hart]

thanks Peter! :thumbsup: i've been digging for people to describe ways the sensor may have actually improved to deliver real change.. that sounds like a plausible area of improvement. i bet you don't expect a gain of two stops though! canon do claim a slight improvement in 'photoelectric conversion rate' but it's clearly an incremental rather than revolutionary step even the way they phrase it. they also claim better 'on-chip' noise reduction which may be their way of saying what you are without revealing too much?

Phil

[Peter Ward]

:lol: No problem Phil....I gave a presentation on CMOS vs CCD at CWAS
(now there's a few acronyms :) ) a few years ago.

There are a few other hallmarks of CMOS design...their complex architecture often shows us as weird off-axis diffraction spikes with point sources (i.e. stars)...& I see back illuminated CMOS are now coming on line to mittigate this as well as improve QE ;)

However, pixel to pixel read-up variation has always been the bane of CMOS design.

Canon may now have tackled this at a wafer fabrication level, rather than calibration look-up tables, as well as using a full field micro-lens to achieve a few Db gain with similar noise reduction.

In short, I don't think it's all smoke and mirrors.

[Phil Hart]

H.. i know for sure you know how to use your gear (and DPP)! and i know we'll both be *very* happy with our mkIIIs when we get them.

i'm just getting frustrated by an astrophotography community that knows a heck of a lot about sensor performance placing so much importance on what ISO settings the manufacturers (any of them) claim their cameras are capable of without any reference to what's going on under the hood to support their claims.

to improve the real performance of the sensor.. you've got to improve the signal or the noise. compared to the 10Ds and the STL11000s of ten years ago, sensors have come a long way. but there's so little left to gain now.. in the current crop of cameras most of the apparent gain is in clever noise smoothing algorithms. canon specifically only make the two stop claim about the JPGs for that reason.

for anybody interested in low light performance above all else.. look up 'shot noise' and buy your camera based on pixel size not ISO ratings..

Phil

[Phil Hart]

I remember the presentation.. I was there ;). Really appreciate the insights though.. it's exactly the kind of information/discussion i was looking for. it's more than smoke and mirrors, but my bet is still on though.. it's not two stops of improved sensor performance either!

Phil

[Peter Ward]

Oh dear.... now you've awakened the nerd in me.:lol:

Shot noise is but one of many noise sources :)

Janesick (2001) lists many sources of on chip noise, and in rough order of importance they are:

Dark Current


Electon and hole combinations
Generation/recombination
Depletion dark current
Diffusion dark current
Substrate dark current
Surface dark current
Backside dark current


Dark Shot noise

Spurious charge

Fat-Zero

Transfer noise

Residual image etc. etc.

Shot noise is important, but dark current mitigation is paramount. Who knows? One day we may see cooled DSLR's ! (but I think we'll see a second Sydney airport first) :)

Will this inhibit me from getting a MKIII ? Hahhh! Picking one up at the end of the month :thumbsup:

[gregbradley]

You would think these camera makers must be close to hitting a wall. But they do seem to improve with each model mostly.
Mirrorless models seem to be taking a chunk out of DSLR sales so I hope this style of camera has a long term future.
Perhaps we are seeing the golden years of the DSLR with the 5D mark iii and the Nikon D800, both seem to be superlative cameras.
There may not be a lot of room left in developing the same approach without going larger and larger and take over the medium format market and make it mainstream. It happened in astrophotography with the 16803 chip its almost medium format size. Chip prices will no doubt become lower and what is a huge expensive chip today may end up the focuser sensor in 15 years time!

Either way it seems to be an exciting time for regular photography with these 2 awesome cameras.

The other easy improvement would be to do what Kodak did with creating their own matrix based on LRGB rather than Bayer RGGB.
Those Kodak CCDs using that matrix seem to have almost double the QE of Bayer matrix type one shot colour sensors.

But I suppose Kodak owns that patent. Its pretty likely though that they would sell it!

Another point with these high ISO sample images, not that I doubt the cameras are good, but I wonder how many are taken on a cold winters day?

As many here would know DSLRs are much cleaner in winter than in summer as typically in CCDs dark current doubles with every 6C increase in temp and vice versa. Its northern hemisphere winter at the moment. They don't list the ambient air temp at the time of the shot.

Greg.

[Octane]

Hi Greg,

The EXIF information in the official samples is still in tact (at least in the Canon ones I've pored over). You can check out when the images were made. A lot of them were late taken in 2011.

H

[Phil Hart]

I realised after my post that I should have clarified that I am primarily interested in and talking about short exposure night sky scene images.. ie. images up to about 30 seconds long, both as stand alone images and for timelapse sequences. I think shot noise then dominates in single short exposures right?

Once you start talking long, multiple exposures then for sure everything else becomes far more significant and cooling the DSLR becomes hugely important.

Phil

[gregbradley]

I am sure Nikon is the same. They both want to put their best foot forward. Later 2011 would be cold in a lot of northern hemisphere locations.

So don't expect the same results in a hot Aussie summer but then you already know that. If the starting point is higher to start with you're still better off.

Greg.

[Octane]

Admittedly, I don't do long exposure timelapse stuff so it really isn't going to be an issue for me.

Furthermore, I've had in-camera noise reduction and high ISO noise reduction enabled since day dot. It makes a massive difference.

H

[gregbradley]

Here is a good comparison. It doesn't have the Nikon D800 though.

Scroll down about halfway down for the comparison images.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5d-mkiii/canon-5d-mkiiiA.HTM

More importantly it shows 5D mark ii versus 5D mark iii up to ISO3200.

It makes it seem though that there isn't a massive difference whereas I saw another high ISO comparison where the 5D mark iii had clean images at ISO12600 which would be extremely useful for astro landscapes/time lapse.

Whatever the improvement in noise, its still going to be the better camera against the earlier model. Just how much better is for you to decide based on your needs for a camera.

Greg.

[Octane]

It's been an expensive week. iPad 3 + 4G, and, the 5D Mark III. eep.

I can't wait, though. :)

H

[Atlantis69]

I thought the iPad 3 was incompatible with our 4G network?

[Octane]

Simon,

It is incompatible. But, should still be able to use 3G. I don't have an existing iPad and have been waiting for the retina display to make its way to the device. It's now there. Yay. :)

H

[Mighty_oz]

That's what was said on the tv so far.

[Atlantis69]

Yeah, of course it'll work on 3G. Just annoying to have the capability and not be able to use it to its potential I guess.

[Octane]

On DLO:

"EOS 5D Mark III: Digital Lens Optimizer in DPP v3.11
The EOS 5D Mark III comes with Canon Digital Photo Professional (DPP) v3.11 software to enable high-speed, high quality processing of RAW images. DPP v3.11 includes a new Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO) tool that is designed to improve image resolution. DLO imitates lens performance, with a series of mathematical functions replicating each stage of the journey of light through the optical path. Using this information DLO can correct a range of typical optical aberrations and loss of resolution caused by a camera’s low pass filter, by applying an inverse function to each shot to take the image nearer to how the scene appears to the naked eye. This creates detailed, high-quality images with manageable file sizes, providing photographers with maximum image quality and greater flexibility."

w00t w00t. 3.11.4 is current; I'm assuming it will ship in 3.11.5.

Making the best, even better. :)

H

[Mighty_oz]

Your not a Canon fanboy are u H ? :)
Think i'll just wait till u test it before i tread these waters, but it does sound good for our canon stuff hey.

[Octane]

I guess I am a fanboy. I don't mind admitting it. :P

I'm getting more and more excited at the possibilities. While the simple 9-point AF system has done me well for over 3 years, now, the new pro 1DX AF system (in a cheaper body) really has me chomping at the bit. And, the extra high ISO performance (even if it is a single stop) is very welcome.

If you go through my threads started/posting history in the terrestrial forum, you'll see that every single one of those landscape images was made with the 5D Mark II. I feel that if I was getting those types of results with that camera, then, this one will deliver as equally as well. :D

As photographers, on either side of the brand divide, I don't think we've ever had it so good.

H

[gregbradley]

I agree H. I wonder if these 2 new high end cameras 5D mark iii and Nikon D800 have hit a pinacle of development of the DSLR in its current format and to improve significantly rather than meaningless little tartups it will need to go into the Medium Format territory.

Some reviews pit the Nikon D800 as close to medium format quality. At least the lower end of that category. The 5D mark iii main improvement would appear to be low light capability and autofocus. How good the D800 low light ability performance is yet to be confirmed but appears to be no slouch either. So either will be awesome.

If the 5D mk 3 is as good as it sounds I may end up getting both! But the D800 for sure. 36mp for $3000 is a no brainer. Low light performance is also very appealling for our type of photography.

Greg.

[Bassnut]

Pinnacle?, really?? isn't QE on DSLRs still woefull? (something like 15%).I would have thought the pinnacle would be something close to 100%. Now that would be a serious improvement.

[Phil Hart]

now then Fred.. are you falling for the mono sensor propaganda!? :lol:

it's only 15% after some fairly pointless geometric scaling factors used in this highly referenced article: http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/50d/test.htm (which otherwise has some nice test data).

real QE is not so bad at all compared to other (CMOS) colour sensors.

Phi

[Bassnut]

I'm talking pinnacle, not relative goodness. Maybe in the future they will be able measure the frequency of a photon as it bounces around in a well when it's received or something, without filters. Then res and qe will rocket.

[Phil Hart]

aye.. but it's not 'woeful' already!

Phil

[gregbradley]

What is geometric QE? Never heard of anyone else using that measure.
I think the 30% QE figure is more correct for a 5D mark iii. That would be in line with colour CCDs using Bayer matrix. 15% would indeed be woeful but as we know that is not the case. I see about 1/2 the light sensitivity
60% QE ML8300 or PL16803 in my Canon 40D.

Are there low light high ISO samples of 5D mark iii done in RAW anywhere or are the only examples just jpegs?

I saw some samples showing low noise in jpeg form but obvious heavy noise reduction reducing detail quite a lot. A bit of a scary thought.

I hope the claims of low light high ISO performance isn't only in camera noise reduction performance. Posted RAW images are what are needed to confirm this aspect of the camera.

Greg.

[avandonk]

This is worth a read, a whitepaper from Canon.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_Full-Frame_CMOS_White_Paper.pdf


I do not know if there is an update.

I do know that Canon is the only manufacturer that does not fiddle with the RAW data like some others to reduce noise. This inevitably results in faint detail being lost such as faint stars that look like noise.

Canon also makes sure that the Silicon is ultra pure so minimising hot and warm pixels. They control all stages of the fabrication of their chips.

Where do the other manufacturers get theirs from?

Bert

[bratislav]

Mainly Sony. Except Sigma Foveon (which seems to be more or less dead anyway). Same Sony chips get into quite respectable astro OSC CCDs (QHY, StarlightExpress, Atik and even heavy hitters like FLI and Apogee).
Shame Canon won't give their CMOS' to anyone. Both Canon and Sony have superior noise characteristics to Kodak chips. If they would just strip the Bayer filter and cool them, THAT would be a significant step forward!!!

[Octane]

Greg,

There are some RAWs floating around the web, but, you can't open them with Digital Photo Professional, yet. This means, that any attempts at viewing the files in third party viewers will not show you the true output from the camera.

It won't be long until Canon releases an update to DPP, and, then, we can see what the thing can really do.

H

[gregbradley]

There are too many variables comparing these output images posted on the net.

There are jpegs with their incamera noise reduction routines.

Then there are the vagaries of which RAW converter and the differences they can create. I was reading an article about different RAW converters after you mentioned you only use the Canon one. The example photos showed quite a large variation in quality of images just from which RAW converter you used.

So until the cameras are out in the field it remains vague as to the performance of these new cameras. I think though both 5D mark iii and D800 will both perform better than their predecessors in the area of low light high ISO judging by sample images.

Nikon D800 is a Sony sensor designed by Nikon and per that article Bert mentioned Nikon obviously likes to design the sensor and get someone else to make it. Or at least have some input into the sensor process. Sony are good at making chips as all the planetary,QHY, Starlight Express imagers have proven over the years.

Again it seems to me both cameras are sensational. But I also see the mark ii as being a real bargain in that some of the new features of the iii, if you are not a professional, you could easily live without.

Greg.

[Octane]

From Chuck Westfall:

A new feature called Digital Lens Optimizer processes RAW images to achieve ideal optical characteristics for all types of optical aberration or diffraction, effects of a low-pass filter in front of a CMOS sensor, etc. This function improves image quality particularly in the image periphery in addition to the image center. This function is made possible because the entire design-through-manufacture process, for camera, CMOS sensor, EF lens, and DPP, is carried out entirely at Canon. Images are processed optimally using lens information in the image files (focal length, subject distance, and aperture) and lens data specially for the Digital Lens Optimizer. (However, the size of a .CR2 file will be two to three times larger after applying the Digital Lens Optimizer.) Adjustments are made for such aspects as spherical aberration, chromatic aberration, astigmatism, curvature of field, sagittal halo, chromatic aberration of magnification, axial chromatic aberration, diffraction, and the effects of a low-pass filter in front of the CMOS sensor. DPP’s Digital Lens Optimizer will be usable with any of 29 compatible lenses initially. It works with .CR2 files from EOS models released since 2006 (EOS 30D and forward).

w00t w00t.

H

[gregbradley]

That sounds great. I hope it works on my 40D.

Greg.

[skysurfer]

I read this :


40d better than 5d2 ??? How did you do that ?

[luigi]

Also from Chuck Westfall is
"We won't disclose that information"

When asked about the noise improvement for RAWs. For JPGs they are talking big time but the decision to avoid discussing RAWs for me is bad news.

I guess the 5DIII is very optimized for JPGs but will show little improvement over the 5DII for RAWs and the price is heavy.

It doesn't seem like a good camera for astro. It would be great instead for sports, journalism and weddings.

[skysurfer]

I think this is true for the cheaper EOS xxx series. But the 5 is a professional camera so I don't know why not optimized for RAWs.

I think only a very few cameras have less noise at high ISO than the 5Mk3, but I doubt whether the 5Mk3 is much better than the 5Mk2, but I think as an SLR the 5Mk2 or 5Mk3 are one of the best astro SLRs due to the full frame and low light performance.

[Octane]

Luis,

I'm still happy, even if it is just one stop of performance. It's one stop that wasn't there before.

Your Mark II will still take beautiful landscapes, until Canon makes a high megapixel camera. Perhaps, even a new product line. But, I won't speculate as that will make me a rumour monger! :P

H

[gregbradley]

Here is the definition of dynamic range:

http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/dynamicrange.html

Full Well depth is usually simply a function of the size of the pixel (there may be other considerations but that is what I know). 5D iii pixels are slightly smaller than Mark ii. (http://www.ptgrey.com/support/kb/index.asp?a=4&q=192 unless Canon lowered the voltage).

So assuming full wells are smaller then the only way noise is lower is if dynamic range was also larger than the mark ii - right?
Unless they managed to increase full well depth by reducing voltages.

Well per one poster on DPReview, dynamic range for the mark iii is slightly lower than for the mark ii.

So how could ISO performance in the mark iii be improved over the mark ii without some trickery (like RAWs are being smoothed first - mind you Nikon does that).

Greg.

[DavidTrap]

I think the answer to all these questions will be answered in about 6 months time, after the cameras (both 5D MkIII & D800) have been in the hands of non-factory photographers. Until then, most of these claims/postulations are based on an information flow controlled by the manufacturers.

DT

[gregbradley]

Very true David.

Here is another link that is interesting. Actual RAW photos from a 5D iii.

5D ii owners could comment if they think their Mark ii could match these.

It seems RAW up to 6400 is clean, after that around 10,000 is good, 12800 showing signs of degradation and pattern noise.

The D800 samples unfortunately are pretty small so that could hide some noise but it seems ISO6400 appears to be similar.

http://www.ceehere.com/Photography/Cameras/Canon-5D-Mark-III-Pre/21920823_Wjq8Nq#!i=1748269287&k=FpVXhcj&lb=1&s=X3 5D3 ISO 6400 Empire State Building
http://www.ceehere.com/Photography/Cameras/Canon-5D-Mark-III-Pre/21920823_Wjq8Nq#!i=1748269287&k=FpVXhcj&lb=1&s=X3 5Diii ISO 12800 Empire State Building

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features01.htm#a1 D800 Empire State Building

Probably different exposures, lenses so for comparisons assume it is the best the respective cameras are capable of considering its a kind of marketing release of sorts.

Greg.

[midnight]

Price at our local store here in Japan. Must admit not cheap but as a holder of a foreign passport, you can get an additional 5% off the price + member discount of up to 10%.

The Nikon section is always full of people here so the Japanese do love their Nikons.

BTW, they are beginning to clear out 7Ds. Don't know why but not very popular here. I asked the guys about 4 weeks ago when they started reducing prices for both 7D and 5D II and then just last week, the new 5D came out. "I know nothing - sorry" says the guy at the Canon counter.:lol:

Cheers,
Darrin...

[gregbradley]

Just in case you were considering the 5D mark iii and the Nikon D800 as your choice this link may be useful:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1032&thread=40909413

It puts to rest the notion the 5D mark iii will outperform the D800 in low light high ISO RAW images. Canon has a more aggressive Digic 5 noise reduction that seems to work very well in jpegs at the cost of some miniature details. So jpeg performance seems to favour Canon. If you shoot jpeg a lot of the time that may be a worthwhile consideration.

The D800 has higher dynamic range by 2 stops, higher sensor QE so ISO's don't quite match up in comparisons and also the ability to be downsized to 22mp from 36mp to further reduce noise in jpegs so the 5D mark iii jpeg noise advantage will not be by as much as you would think for those reasons.

So you can have your high megapixel cake and eat it too!

Either way both cameras seem to be sensational.

The real super high performance low light cameras seem to be the 1DX or the Nikon D4. Those 2 cameras are much more evenly matched and if it were my choice I'd pick the 1DX.

The choice may be more determined by how much money you have invested in lenses.

Greg.

[Octane]

I'll /still/ be happy with my purchase. The Mark II makes fantasticpictures, and, the Mark III will make just as good an image.

Re: that thread: once again, using non-Canon RAW converter on a CanonRAW file means nothing to me. I will wait and see what the results looklike when converted using DPP. I once used dcraw to convert a 5DMark II RAW on my Mac and it looked like garbage. I tried bothportraits and landscape images to see what would happen. Neveragain.

H

[gregbradley]

You'd have to ask why Canon hasn't released the RAW converter at the same time as the camera? If you ask me its deliberate to prevent comparisons so they can claim things that only an educated public would see as being misled. Like posting only jpeg examples of low light performance and not RAW. I find that very off-putting.

I am not neccessarily a Nikon fanboy either as their smoothing of RAW data (I assume they are still doing that) is not good either.

Its funny in a way because Nikon has been the one for years arguing the benefits of low light performance and low megapixels, now the roles are reversed not that 22mp is low megapixels.

One thing I think anyone can agree with here is the new Sony Exmor sensor is an amazing engineering feat and it would appear Sony are ahead of the rest at this point. 5 years from now they may be the main DSLR everyone compares against at this rate.

Greg.

[Octane]

They're doing what they've always done. They show average samples on their web site (have a look at the original 5D and 5D Mark II samples, they were also garbage), yet, people have used both those cameras to make iconic images. If people were to make their minds up about Canon's prosumer range judging by the samples on their web site, they wouldn't have sold any. I don't agree with this, entirely; they should show what a professional can do. But, I guess, they want to show what is possible, straight out of camera, without any /further/ image processing.

The RAW converter will ship in the box with the camera, as they have always done. A week or so later, the latest DPP will be available online to download. As they have always done. This time it is a little different in that the RAW specification has changed (likely due to DLO implementation) and the current DPP cannot read the files. This hasn't happened before.

I would still argue that Canon systems deliver colour and vibrancy straight off the sensor/out of the camera better than the Sony sensor -- particularly when it comes to skin tones. This is something that I am not willing to forego for the work I do.

If Canon releases a megapixel monster later on down the line, I will be the first in line to buy that, too.

H

[luigi]

We can chat while waiting in line H! I'll be ordering that camera without waiting for reviews.
Megapixel monster misa likes!

[gregbradley]

I think we can agree both cameras will be sensational. There is a lot of nit picking on other forums much like Holden versus Ford type conversations which I don't want to be a part of. Kind of childish really and shows the worst in some people. Thank God its civilised on this site.

We are lucky to have 2 superb choices.

Greg

[Octane]

http://g1.img-dpreview.com/091AE8145DD44D01AC1D167117B9938A.jp g

ISO-10,000.

weee.

H

[gregbradley]

When does your arrive H?

Greg.

[Octane]

No idea at the moment.

Trying not to think about it -- I've got too much on my plate already!

H

[Octane]

Check out the focusing manual for the 1D X/5D Mark III:

http://downloads.canon.com/CDLC/EOS_1DX_AF_Guide_CDLC.pdf

:eyepop:

H

[gregbradley]

That link comes up as an error.

5D mk iii new autofocus is getting some excellent reviews.

Greg.

[Octane]

http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2012/1dx_guidebook.shtml?categoryId=12

In the left-hand column.

H

[tornado33]

Look at the DP review test images (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkiii/10)
Select ISO 51200, the Canon blows the mighty Pentax K5 out of the water. Gee Canon have really raised the bar now. A modded and cooled version of this new camera would be the best one shot colour astro camera ever made.

[acropolite]

FWIW there's a mention on the No Film School website about removal of the front low pass filter to increase the resolution for video use and some test images showing the improvement. Seems that someone has already been to work taking their new toy apart.

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/03/removing-optical-low-pass-filter-5d-mark-iii/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nofilmschool+% 28NoFilmSchool%29

[g__day]

The only negative about this new uber camera is its seems to not focus quickly / correctly under some unusual conditions. I found this very surprising - but a few reviewers seem to found this and passed data and questions to Canon to ask for a firmware fix.

[Octane]

Arrives on Tuesday.

Grip arrives early May.

Can't wait.

I had a play with one on Saturday in a camera store. I pointed it at the darkest place I could find in the shop which had camera bags hanging on a wall with no contrast to speak of. The camera locked focus immediately. I was impressed.

H

[gregbradley]

Very exciting.

Expect serene beautiful landscapes soon eh?!!

Greg.

[troypiggo]

He doesn't need the Mk 3 for that. He's already been doing it for some time ;)

[gregbradley]

Yes that's right. I should've said more serene terrestial shots!

Greg.

[iceman]

Interesting!!

http://gizmodo.com/5901975/the-5d-mark-iiis-light-leak-issue-is-confirmed-by-canon

Light leak issue affecting the AE sensor.

[jamiep]

ouch! ... that's a nasty little 'feature' ... be interesting to see how canon deal with it (sounds like a hardware fix and not a firmware one to me)... or if it's all cameras or just some affected.

Jamie

[acropolite]

No big deal, the problem is only apparent when the backlight is turned on, all that's needed is to turn the backlight off after use.
I would't be surprised if the same issue isn't apparent in the 5DII as well.

Storm in a teacup stuff.

[Octane]

It is a storm in a teacup.

It will effect a very, very small minority of users, if any, at all. The type of users we are talking about are those who shine flashlights on to the LCD panel while taking meter readings.

Canon has at least done the right thing and acknowledged the phenomenon, while Nikon remains tight-lipped about the D800 AF and green tint issues.

H

[Octane]

Argh. Delivery has been delayed by another day.

ETA: 18th April.

Keeping a close eye on Star Track Express Track & Trace web site. :)

H

[DavidTrap]

There's talk of a recall on the Canon rumor sites H? Any idea what that's about?

Why have you had to wait for a 5D BTW - my dealer has had them in stock? I though Canon's supply chain was leaving Nikon for dead at the moment!

My D800 is in the serial number range that might be affected by the AF issue, but touch wood, I haven't noticed anything thus far. Did some testing the other day and couldn't demonstrate any problem. My LCD doesn't appear green either. (Thanks be to what ever Deity I am can think of to worship!)

DT

[Octane]

The recall rumour is related to the light leak phenomenon. Canon USA has made no such mention, though, they've acknowledged it.

The delay is because I preordered. I should have just walked into a retailer and bought one. No biggie. I've had a lot to do and deal with recently, so, it's been on the back of my mind. But, now that I have the consignment number, I'm excited. :)

Glad to hear you're not having AF issues or green LCD.

H

[Octane]

Waiting to be picked up from depot this afternoon. :D

H

[Octane]

It's a boy! :D

I'm a happy chappy.

H

[DavidTrap]

Enjoy H!

If it's half as good as my Nikon, you'll be like a pig in mud :P

DT

[Octane]

I've been tracking my cat at f/2.8 in ISO-12,800 light. Holy crap. This camera is phenomenal.

Simply blown away.

H

[astro_south]

Good to hear H.

Got mine today as well ... loving the high ISO performance, the autofocus is a slight learning curve, but boy does it work well. I have set the DOF preview button to toggle between single shot and AI-servo autofocus modes. Slowly getting used to the zooming into shots on the LCD to check detail. I have set the magnify button to go to actual size (and I think it jumps straight to one of the focused part of the image).

This is a marked step up from the 50D. Love the full frame viewfinder as well - very clear and usable.

I haven't tried the in camera HDR function out, but will find some time over the coming weekend to give it a whirl. Looking at your sig, that feature will be wasted on you :)

H - there is a new DPP out today. Downloaded it from Canon Asia. There are some nice improvements here including handling HDR work. This corrects issues with the original software and the 5D3 raw files looking soft.

[Octane]

Hey Andrew,

Great to hear, too.

This camera is a complete step up from the 5D Mark II. World's apart, in fact. From the ergonomics and feel of materials on the body (not to mention the sexy curvy body; it is actually a beautiful looking camera, as opposed to the competition's brick... not that it counts for anything, really... I mean, I shoot an RZ67 Pro II... but, then, I think it's beautiful), the weather sealing, to the viewfinder and that incredible focus system. I might just have to buy some f/1.2L lenses again. Focusing them will be a doddle with the new system.

I've learnt the focus modes and have settled on the 9 point floating system (centre, top, bottom, left, right and diagonals), have enabled the 3x3 grid in the viewfinder, and have set AF-On as my focusing button (just like on the Mark II; I miss this feature not being on the original). I'm also finally confident in leaving the camera in AI Focus AF mode.

The other great thing is that because it takes the same battery as the Mark II, I now have two chargers which means I can charge both batteries at once.

I don't mind the in-camera HDR, but, you're right, the feature is lost on me. I much prefer using graduated neutral density filters, or, failing that, gentle exposure blending.

Yep, I'm aware the latest DPP is up. Got it earlier today. :)

All in all, it is invigorating, and, I now feel that this camera /will/ actually let me make better photographs (a statement I made in one of my original posts in this thread). I'll shoot my next wedding gig (and, pre-wedding shoot) in a couple of week's time down on the south coast and I'm really looking forward to firing on all cylinders!

H

[Octane]

ISO-12,800:

Clicky -> Bellatrix (http://scratch.hqphotography.com.au/images/4B5C0030.JPG) <- clicky.

Straight out of DPP.

:eyepop:

I am so in love.

H

[iceman]

H, you've got an ORB (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=87912)!

LOL!

[Octane]

Yeah, I know. Was shooting without hood. All three tracked shots had 'em. :)

H

[Omaroo]

Can someone please point me to the latest DPP version (3.14)? How stupidly difficult have Canon made it for their users to keep this software up to date? No links from inside the software, no reasonable search on the Australian site reveals it - even when logged in. Canon Europe thinks that 3.4.1 dated 2008 is the latest. Sheesh! Hopeless.

A URL pretty please? :)

[koputai]

Holy Carp! That's at 12,800! Wildly impressive.

Cheers,
Jason.
Who has packed up the camera and just about to start the long trip back to Aus.......

[Omaroo]

Impressive Humayun. Knowing that place on the stairs, how dark was it? What lights were on?

[Octane]

Chris,

Go to Canon Australia; then products, support and drivers.

Choose your camera, choose your OS X Lion and it'll present you all the available downloads. Choose the latest DPP, accept terms and conditions and download. :)

The light was just the light in the wall at the top of the stairs. That's it! :)

H

[Octane]

Look forward to your pics, Jason. :)

Have a safe trip back.

H

[Lester]

Impressive high ISO shot Humayun. Although with heading of "Ballatrix" I was hoping for star field within Orion. Still nice cat.

All the best.

[Omaroo]

Yeah... nup.

What they show here is v3.11.4 (10th Feb 2012) as current. The Digital Picture dot Com site tells me that 3.11.26.0 is the latest, and has been released. :shrug:

What version did you download?

[gregbradley]

Incredible performance H. ISO12800 like it was ISO100. Extremely useful.

Greg.

[Octane]

Chris,

Try this one:

http://www.canon.ca/inetCA/serviceDetail?m=load&id=45&sid=7&mid=2200924&type=D&opt=1

Greg, yep, it is top notch!

H

[Omaroo]

Thanks Humayun. That's Canon Canada BTW. :lol: Still hopeless though... the whole mess needs a clean out and re-design. Consistency between markets would be a start... :) Great software however.

[Octane]

Sorry, yeah, I grabbed the link off DPR yesterday. The *.au site is probably a bit slow in updating.

And, you're right, the software section of Canon's site is a bit of a shambles. Although, luckily, you only have to go there once every few months, so, it's not too arduous. :)

I have been playing with the camera at work and am even more impressed than my first play last night. Fantastic!

H

[DavidTrap]

High ISO performance is impressive - certainly beats the D800 on that example.

DT

[Phil Hart]

hey H.. looking nice. guess i won't be able to put off getting one for very long :-)

any chance of a 5DII vs III comparison at max ISO on the II vs same exposure and ISO settings on the III?

Phil

[Octane]

Will see what I can do for you this weekend.

H

[CometGuy]

This looks promising:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cameralabs/6878528660/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cameralabs/7024622747/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cameralabs/6878516564/

T

[Octane]

I read a figure by Sensorgen which put the Mark III having a 49% QE figure.

I went up to take a picture of sunset this afternoon, but, the clouds went all lame.

Try again tomorrow.

H

[gregbradley]

Those images certainly show up the shortcomings of the 85mm F1.8 lens.

Wow. Check out the full size file. How much does that lens cost??

It just goes to show the standard required for telescopes and astrophotography is much higher than terrestial photos.

Greg.

[CometGuy]

Hey Greg,

Yeh there are lot of "seagulls" in that image, but its amazing what you can record with just 5 second exposures and a cheap 85 f1.8 lens (they are about $500 or so). I was looking at the LMC shot and you can see mag 13 stars even in that jpeg.

Terry

[gregbradley]

Yes good point. Incredible amout of signal recorded for 10 seconds.

I was thinking of the $2000 85mm F1.2. $500 is cheapish in the lens world.

Greg.

[gregbradley]

Great site thanks for posting that. I often wondered what the QE was for various DSLRs. Gee thats up about 50% over 5D2. They should push that more.

Also I see D800 at 57% with quite deep wells. This could be good for astrophotography as my Proline and 8300 cameras are 60% QE and I am used to that level of sensitivity.

Both these cameras should be awesome for time lapse. There's a reason for Phil Hart to get one over 5D2.

Have you taken any night shots yet H?

Imagine these cameras modified for astro?? Wow, their QE would hit much higher levels and up around or beyond normal CCD levels.

Imagine a mono 36mp Sony Exmor sensor in a cooled CCD cam. Geez I'd buy one of those. Its QE would be way over 60%. Also those read noise levels are really low.

Both those numbers are impressive. Kodak never achieved that with a Bayer matrix sensor. Have DSLRs caught up with some CCDs now??

Greg.

[Octane]

I bought my 85mm f/1.8 lens for $360.

It is a sublime portrait lens, but, would be no good for astrophotography.

Example (http://scratch.hqphotography.com.au/images/anjen/_MG_5413.JPG).

H