I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather have that amazing focus point spread that the D300 / D7000 has; focus points practically blanket the viewfinder on those cameras. Love it.
5D3 is the same now. There are AF points on the thirds.
Agreed, Matt, but those aren't the kinds of shots I'm talking about. I'm talking about much closer, much shallower portraits. And yes, you can do something which gets *close* to the look on a crop camera, but every single time I've seen a shot like that which makes me gasp, it was taken on a FF camera. It's probably my 2nd reason for wanting to move to FF, first being... HIGHER ISOs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The new 61 point AF system has slightly wider spread than the previous 45 point AF, indeed, but it's still practically the same as Nikon's 51 point AF. Focus points roughly at the rule of thirds; more importnatly USABLE focus points at the rule of thirds lol...
But the Nikon crop sensor still wins on AF point spread. The D300 viewfinder is almost entirely COVERED in AF points, even to past the rule of thirds areas. Here's an article I wrote with some rough approximations:
...Or, just toss the D800 in DX crop mode, and focus points get even closer to the edges.
I know it's a quirky, obscure reason to prefer DX crop sensors, but I just wanted to point out that, on average, full-frame camera bodies have almost zero advantage other than their sheer image quality.
Agreed, Matt, but those aren't the kinds of shots I'm talking about. I'm talking about much closer, much shallower portraits. And yes, you can do something which gets *close* to the look on a crop camera, but every single time I've seen a shot like that which makes me gasp, it was taken on a FF camera. It's probably my 2nd reason for wanting to move to FF, first being... HIGHER ISOs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yep, that's what 50mm and 35mm do for you on full-frame. Again, you CAN get nearly identical results on a crop sensor using a 24mm f/1.4 or a 35mm f/1.4, but yeah, I know what you mean. However, my crop sensor camera is still slightly insulted that it has never made you gasp at an image. :-P
Agreed, Matt, but those aren't the kinds of shots I'm talking about. I'm talking about much closer, much shallower portraits. And yes, you can do something which gets *close* to the look on a crop camera, but every single time I've seen a shot like that which makes me gasp, it was taken on a FF camera. It's probably my 2nd reason for wanting to move to FF, first being... HIGHER ISOs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'd like to see an example of this kind of portrait. Because beyond a certain, um, shallowness of field, the subject's face needs to be square to the camera if both eyes are to be in focus.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
...full-frame camera bodies have almost zero advantage other than their sheer image quality.
=Matt=
Bloomphotog beat me to it but I have to say that the difference between the 50D and 5DmkII was eye-opening/jaw-dropping when I shot some quick landscape and portrait shots the other day. Just about every aspect of the image was improved. So much so that I'm ready to plunk down $3500 on the mkIII.
I'd like to see an example of this kind of portrait. Because beyond a certain, um, shallowness of field, the subject's face needs to be square to the camera if both eyes are to be in focus.
Or you only have the leading eye in focus - it's a look some people HATE, but some (like me) love. Next time I find one, I'll try to remember to post it. ETA: See below.
Understand guys, I know exactly what you mean and I have even managed to approximate what I'm talking about on a 1.6x. But I remember one set of portraits which were actually done on a 1.3x (yes, not FF, but more FF than 1.6x ) with the 85 1.2 AT 1.2 which were kind of "HOLY #&*(!@!" to me. I luuurrvee that look, and it is EASIER to get with the larger sensor. What can I say - I'm a shallow DOF junkie. It's not to everbody's taste (and it's a pain in the butt to shoot because it's so easy to miss focus), but I still like it. YMMV.
However, my crop sensor camera is still slightly insulted that it has never made you gasp at an image. :-P
It has..... just other types of images ~speaks in virtual soothing tones to Matt's crop camera, lest it be offended~
Bloomphotog beat me to it but I have to say that the difference between the 50D and 5DmkII was eye-opening/jaw-dropping when I shot some quick landscape and portrait shots the other day. Just about every aspect of the image was improved. So much so that I'm ready to plunk down $3500 on the mkIII.
Well I guess this ends the debate. Back to topic now.
Sure, full-frame is amazingly stunningly gorgeously better. But that doesn't stop crop sensors from still delivering amazing results, if you say within their means. And if your image quality "needs" fit within the capabilities of a crop sensor, then you get to enjoy many advantages. That's all I'm saying. The thing is just that, WE are mostly a different class of photographer here, and the 5D mk3 is indeed ridiculously desirable. So yeah. If you have the $$, buy and enjoy one. Money is for spending. But even if I had all sorts of money (and therefore a 5D mk3) ...I'd still also have a 60D or 7D that I'd use VERY often for casual shooting. But that's just my style. I appreciate weight & size savings, and I appreciate some of the more obscure features like focus point spread and pop-up flash commanders.
I have to say that the difference between the 50D and 5DmkII was eye-opening/jaw-dropping when I shot some quick landscape and portrait shots the other day. Just about every aspect of the image was improved.
Care to share the photos so we can see these huge differences with our own eyes?
Care to share the photos so we can see these huge differences with our own eyes?
The photos themselves (subject matter) weren't all that exciting. The differences between the 5d/24-70 and 50D/17-55 were:
At least 1/2 to 2/3 stop improved dynamic range
Clear evidence of diffraction on the 50D beginning at f/8 and becoming obvious by f/11; ugly by f/16 and f/22. The 5D shots were ridiculously sharp by comparison. At f/4, the sharpness was similar so it was very much a diffraction issue; not a lens one.
The viewfinder was bigger/brighter
A lot more 'little' differences - color, clarity that may be due to lens or body but, taken as a whole, going from one shot to another was a big difference. That plus shooting my kids inside without noise sealed the deal.
- sorry to hijack the thread - just wanted to answer the question.
Please continue with the reviews as you have my full attention :lurk
5D3 stills from assignment in Bristol Bay
On Wednesday I was on location in Bristol Bay, Alaska. My primary role was videography, but these are some stills I managed to squeeze in. Everything was shot on the 5D3 with the 16-35II & 70-200II. All shot at mRAW and processed in Canon DPP. There are a few in camera HDR's as well. The highest ISO you'll find is 12800. I shot all day on Aperture priority. The 5D3 metering is quite good. AF performance is better than any of the 1D series cameras I have used recently. You don't even think about it, which is a huge departure from the 5D2 experience.
As I have mentioned before: The 5D3 is everything I loved about my D700 plus the gorgeous sensor of the 5D series. Closest thing to a perfect camera I have ever used. The 5D2 served me well, but it will be making room for a second 5D3 in my bag very soon.
Feel free to ask questions. I am more than happy to help.
Thanks for sharing these Josh. Great to hear your thoughts andseethese images. All very well done by the way.
On the close up of the guy's face (I think the fourth) - any fill flash or did you open up the shadows on his right eye in post? Considering the direction of light, the camera seemed to do a great job with a pretty tough DR
The next shot with the fish - in camera HDR? Flash? The light on that one is awesome!
Thanks for sharing these Josh. Great to hear your thoughts andseethese images. All very well done by the way.
On the close up of the guy's face (I think the fourth) - any fill flash or did you open up the shadows on his right eye in post? Considering the direction of light, the camera seemed to do a great job with a pretty tough DR
The next shot with the fish - in camera HDR? Flash? The light on that one is awesome!
No fill flash for any of these shots. The close up of the tribal chief came out of the camera looking like that! The 5D3 has a very impressive Auto Lighting Optimizer feature. I had it set to the default level. (Note: Unless you use DPP for your image processing you wont be able to take advantage of this feature.)
The fish shot is natural light. Snow under bright sunlight works as a great reflector!
Again, awesome stuff and thanks for the quick reply. Very impressed with these shots. It's obviously not just the camera but it looks like this camera is able to do a better job capturing what was intended with far fewer compromises. I know my 50d would not have come close to matching the DR in the close up headshot.
Again, awesome stuff and thanks for the quick reply. Very impressed with these shots. It's obviously not just the camera but it looks like this camera is able to do a better job capturing what was intended with far fewer compromises. I know my 50d would not have come close to matching the DR in the close up headshot.
Your welcome! And your right, it's not all about the gear but having the best equipment sure helps! The 5D3 sensor has an impressive DR ability, which is greatly enhanced by the built in ALO system. I noticed a few of the low light shots were even using it pretty heavily. When I switched off ALO in post the difference was dramatic. Make no mistake, when sensors and software automatically work together to pick an optimized exposure, the results are far better than exposing normally then trying to mess with things later in post. But again, unless you use DPP this is all for naught. LR and Aperture are fine and dandy, I use both, but to really maximize most shots stick with manufacture software for RAW conversions.
IMO, the whole DOF issue is way overblown. DOF is actually several bullets down the list of reasons to go to FF.!
Several? Aside from generally cleaner images, especially at higher ISOs and longer exposures, I'd be interested in hearing the other advantages to FF that you rate higher than shallow DOF control.
No fill flash for any of these shots. The close up of the tribal chief came out of the camera looking like that!
:jawdrop
That's the shot that jumped out at me too - holy crap. I need to rob a bank or something, because THIS is the kind of image quality and clarity that I want in my portaits. Don't get me wrong - my 7d has been a wonderful machine and I have no complaints, but the 5dIII appears to be a significant jump forward again AND has all the 7d customization features I"ve grown to love. The only thing I'm disappointed it doesn't include is a popup flash w/commander -s ure, I use other means to trigger flashes, but occasionally have been caught short and the built-in solution has been VERY welcome.
Btw, are these features/results true of ALL DPP software, or just the current version for the III? I've only occasionally used it to check focus point location - other than that, I stick with LR. You're making me wonder if there's a case to import through Canon first.... I've also never used the lighting optimizer settings on my 7d - you're making me think I should check them out!
Very impressive. While of course YOUR skill is the driving force behind these images (kudos), it's clear the camera was an extremely capable tool and really delivered. I'm extremely impressed
No fill flash for any of these shots. The close up of the tribal chief came out of the camera looking like that! The 5D3 has a very impressive Auto Lighting Optimizer feature. I had it set to the default level. (Note: Unless you use DPP for your image processing you wont be able to take advantage of this feature.)
The fish shot is natural light. Snow under bright sunlight works as a great reflector!
What about the shot of the guy sitting inside the cabin? HDR or DLO? Either way, gorgeous capture.
I've also never used the lighting optimizer settings on my 7d - you're making me think I should check them out!
If you started using ALO you'd be very, very surprised. To make things simple in photos with high dynamic ranges, its very necessary for this type of thing.
Got to read them camera manuals front to back cause you find stuff like this!
DLO is making me think about buying an SD card and saving DLO-processed JPGs there while the RAWs go to CF. Only problem is I think DLO will end up messing up my exposure for the RAW file if I understand it correctly (it underexposes the raw then boosts according to an algorithm)
Folks, you can use ALO & RAW, if you use DPP. The Canon software is the only RAW converter that will retain any in camera setting besides white balance. ALO, DLO and highlight tone priority are just some of the great features can take advantage of by using DPP for your RAW conversions.
My post production workflow begins in the field. I am keeping an eye on WB, Picture Style, Saturation, Black & Whites, etc. Shooting in such a way that your in camera RAW's look great means that you can save a ton of time in post by using DPP. Everything gets carried over, what you see on your camera screen is what you get in DPP. And if you still don't like the look, DPP has a bunch if powerful RAW adjustment tools you can use to tweak the shot before going to JPG.
My workflow summary: Shoot stuff that looks great on my camera screen, tweak and convert in DPP, import into LR catalog for archiving.
Comments
5D3 is the same now. There are AF points on the thirds.
By the way 5D3/DPP users... make sure you see this: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=217561
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
The new 61 point AF system has slightly wider spread than the previous 45 point AF, indeed, but it's still practically the same as Nikon's 51 point AF. Focus points roughly at the rule of thirds; more importnatly USABLE focus points at the rule of thirds lol...
But the Nikon crop sensor still wins on AF point spread. The D300 viewfinder is almost entirely COVERED in AF points, even to past the rule of thirds areas. Here's an article I wrote with some rough approximations:
http://cameratalk.xanga.com/723666199/focus-point-spread-revisited/
...Or, just toss the D800 in DX crop mode, and focus points get even closer to the edges.
I know it's a quirky, obscure reason to prefer DX crop sensors, but I just wanted to point out that, on average, full-frame camera bodies have almost zero advantage other than their sheer image quality.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Yep, that's what 50mm and 35mm do for you on full-frame. Again, you CAN get nearly identical results on a crop sensor using a 24mm f/1.4 or a 35mm f/1.4, but yeah, I know what you mean. However, my crop sensor camera is still slightly insulted that it has never made you gasp at an image. :-P
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Well I guess this ends the debate.
I'd like to see an example of this kind of portrait. Because beyond a certain, um, shallowness of field, the subject's face needs to be square to the camera if both eyes are to be in focus.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Bloomphotog beat me to it but I have to say that the difference between the 50D and 5DmkII was eye-opening/jaw-dropping when I shot some quick landscape and portrait shots the other day. Just about every aspect of the image was improved. So much so that I'm ready to plunk down $3500 on the mkIII.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
Or you only have the leading eye in focus - it's a look some people HATE, but some (like me) love. Next time I find one, I'll try to remember to post it. ETA: See below.
Understand guys, I know exactly what you mean and I have even managed to approximate what I'm talking about on a 1.6x. But I remember one set of portraits which were actually done on a 1.3x (yes, not FF, but more FF than 1.6x
It has..... just other types of images ~speaks in virtual soothing tones to Matt's crop camera, lest it be offended~
ETA: Here's one of the images I was talking about. YES it can be achieved on less than FF, but it's easier (and maximises lense) if you have the larger sensor
5D3 14L
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I found this review with great photos! ~ http://www.ardenprucha.com/2012/03/5d-markiii/
I think a 14L evaluation loan from CPS is in order...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Care to share the photos so we can see these huge differences with our own eyes?
Bear
Some of my photos on Flickr
My Facebook
Sam
The photos themselves (subject matter) weren't all that exciting. The differences between the 5d/24-70 and 50D/17-55 were:
At least 1/2 to 2/3 stop improved dynamic range
Clear evidence of diffraction on the 50D beginning at f/8 and becoming obvious by f/11; ugly by f/16 and f/22. The 5D shots were ridiculously sharp by comparison. At f/4, the sharpness was similar so it was very much a diffraction issue; not a lens one.
The viewfinder was bigger/brighter
A lot more 'little' differences - color, clarity that may be due to lens or body but, taken as a whole, going from one shot to another was a big difference. That plus shooting my kids inside without noise sealed the deal.
- sorry to hijack the thread - just wanted to answer the question.
Please continue with the reviews as you have my full attention :lurk
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
Bear
Some of my photos on Flickr
My Facebook
On Wednesday I was on location in Bristol Bay, Alaska. My primary role was videography, but these are some stills I managed to squeeze in. Everything was shot on the 5D3 with the 16-35II & 70-200II. All shot at mRAW and processed in Canon DPP. There are a few in camera HDR's as well. The highest ISO you'll find is 12800. I shot all day on Aperture priority. The 5D3 metering is quite good. AF performance is better than any of the 1D series cameras I have used recently. You don't even think about it, which is a huge departure from the 5D2 experience.
As I have mentioned before: The 5D3 is everything I loved about my D700 plus the gorgeous sensor of the 5D series. Closest thing to a perfect camera I have ever used. The 5D2 served me well, but it will be making room for a second 5D3 in my bag very soon.
Feel free to ask questions. I am more than happy to help.
On the close up of the guy's face (I think the fourth) - any fill flash or did you open up the shadows on his right eye in post? Considering the direction of light, the camera seemed to do a great job with a pretty tough DR
The next shot with the fish - in camera HDR? Flash? The light on that one is awesome!
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
No fill flash for any of these shots. The close up of the tribal chief came out of the camera looking like that! The 5D3 has a very impressive Auto Lighting Optimizer feature. I had it set to the default level. (Note: Unless you use DPP for your image processing you wont be able to take advantage of this feature.)
The fish shot is natural light. Snow under bright sunlight works as a great reflector!
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
Your welcome! And your right, it's not all about the gear but having the best equipment sure helps! The 5D3 sensor has an impressive DR ability, which is greatly enhanced by the built in ALO system. I noticed a few of the low light shots were even using it pretty heavily. When I switched off ALO in post the difference was dramatic. Make no mistake, when sensors and software automatically work together to pick an optimized exposure, the results are far better than exposing normally then trying to mess with things later in post. But again, unless you use DPP this is all for naught. LR and Aperture are fine and dandy, I use both, but to really maximize most shots stick with manufacture software for RAW conversions.
Several? Aside from generally cleaner images, especially at higher ISOs and longer exposures, I'd be interested in hearing the other advantages to FF that you rate higher than shallow DOF control.
Link to my Smugmug site
:jawdrop
That's the shot that jumped out at me too - holy crap. I need to rob a bank or something, because THIS is the kind of image quality and clarity that I want in my portaits. Don't get me wrong - my 7d has been a wonderful machine and I have no complaints, but the 5dIII appears to be a significant jump forward again AND has all the 7d customization features I"ve grown to love. The only thing I'm disappointed it doesn't include is a popup flash w/commander -s ure, I use other means to trigger flashes, but occasionally have been caught short and the built-in solution has been VERY welcome.
Btw, are these features/results true of ALL DPP software, or just the current version for the III? I've only occasionally used it to check focus point location - other than that, I stick with LR. You're making me wonder if there's a case to import through Canon first....
Very impressive. While of course YOUR skill is the driving force behind these images (kudos), it's clear the camera was an extremely capable tool and really delivered. I'm extremely impressed
Thanks for your posts and photos. I think I now officially hate you........:D
The best equipment, Alaska, the Idierrod (sp), you get paid.
Life is good for Josh!!
Sam
What about the shot of the guy sitting inside the cabin? HDR or DLO? Either way, gorgeous capture.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw6-7.html
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
If you started using ALO you'd be very, very surprised. To make things simple in photos with high dynamic ranges, its very necessary for this type of thing.
Got to read them camera manuals front to back cause you find stuff like this!
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
My post production workflow begins in the field. I am keeping an eye on WB, Picture Style, Saturation, Black & Whites, etc. Shooting in such a way that your in camera RAW's look great means that you can save a ton of time in post by using DPP. Everything gets carried over, what you see on your camera screen is what you get in DPP. And if you still don't like the look, DPP has a bunch if powerful RAW adjustment tools you can use to tweak the shot before going to JPG.
My workflow summary: Shoot stuff that looks great on my camera screen, tweak and convert in DPP, import into LR catalog for archiving.
Thanks for the kind words. I am blessed beyond what I deserve!