"Twenty-one Cross-type AF points, with any lens f/5.6 or faster
The central 21 AF points in the new system provide cross-type coverage, with separate horizontal and vertical line sensors, regardless of the lens in use (as long as the lens – or lens plus tele extender combination, if applicable – has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster). This is especially useful to pros and serious enthusiasts who prefer to use central AF points. And, it extends beyond the center-most AF point, as indicated on the adjacent diagram. Any and all of these points provide cross-type AF coverage, even with lenses such as the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, or the EF 800mm f/5.6L IS."
Grabbed these in the fairly dimly lit store from 1600 to 25600. Will do a more involved test against my 5D2 later tonight. First impressions are amazing. Clean ISO 6400? Usable ISO 25600? What? Is this a dream?
As soon as I saw the photo (and before I even looked at your location), I thought I recognized the store you were in. You are definitely right about the dim lighting in that place! Combine the plethora of "stuff" in there with the poor lighting and you definitely have a good place to test out the higher ISO capabilities!
As soon as I saw the photo (and before I even looked at your location), I thought I recognized the store you were in. You are definitely right about the dim lighting in that place! Combine the plethora of "stuff" in there with the poor lighting and you definitely have a good place to test out the higher ISO capabilities!
Haha, yep! What an... interesting store!
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
"Twenty-one Cross-type AF points, with any lens f/5.6 or faster
The central 21 AF points in the new system provide cross-type coverage, with separate horizontal and vertical line sensors, regardless of the lens in use (as long as the lens – or lens plus tele extender combination, if applicable – has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster). This is especially useful to pros and serious enthusiasts who prefer to use central AF points. And, it extends beyond the center-most AF point, as indicated on the adjacent diagram. Any and all of these points provide cross-type AF coverage, even with lenses such as the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, or the EF 800mm f/5.6L IS."
Good spot Ziggy. Lots of consequences. Perhaps the only place we see high end glass in the future is in a museum.
Interesting would be right. It's a great place to go if you want something that hasn't been manufactured in a bazillion years though as long as you are willing to dig.
It's awesome. I have that feeling I used to get as a kid when I unwrapped the top item on my Christmas list. For a little taste, see post 108 in this thread of the boy doing a ski jump, and here is an ISO test I did: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=217519
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Go shoot RAW+ JPG, and do the dynamic range thing you do with your normal Picture styles etc. Find something nice and contrasty. Then, turn ADL / DLO / ALO all the way to the max, and re-judge your exposure if necessary... Make sure your picture style has relatively normal or conservative colors and sharpening, of course, so that the JPG isn't a totally useless acid trip of an image. ;-)
Then, when you get back on the computer, take that JPG with the ALO etc. and try to match / beat it with the RAW file. You'll be VERY surprised, especially if you nail your white balance, just how awesome the in-camera JPG is. Or at least, you'll spend a good 5-15 minutes trying to make the RAW file look the same. It is NOT easy. I dunno what it is, but at least on Nikon and I'm sure now on Canon judging by the images I'm seeing; ...it is voodoo magic.
Hi Matt,
I know this is going down a bit of a rat hole, but I found this discussion re ALO etc very interesting, so I had a go at your challenge. At 11pm I had few obvious subjects, so I just took a snap of the fish in their tank.
What I found was that the JPEG version was more contrasty, and that a lot of shadow detail was lost, in other words it had less dynamic range that the RAW, even before using curves etc.
The picture style was set to normal, not sure if that was an issue. Also, my camera is a Mk2, so maybe that's the problem?
TBH, I'm starting to think that Josh's images look great because of how he takes them, and maybe other work he does in post, and it probably has little at all to do with these DR stretching tools. In other words, the results would have been the same if he hadn't used Canon's software and he went straight to LR/aperture etc.?
I know this is going down a bit of a rat hole, but I found this discussion re ALO etc very interesting, so I had a go at your challenge. At 11pm I had few obvious subjects, so I just took a snap of the fish in their tank.
What I found was that the JPEG version was more contrasty, and that a lot of shadow detail was lost, in other words it had less dynamic range that the RAW, even before using curves etc.
The picture style was set to normal, not sure if that was an issue. Also, my camera is a Mk2, so maybe that's the problem?
TBH, I'm starting to think that Josh's images look great because of how he takes them, and maybe other work he does in post, and it probably has little at all to do with these DR stretching tools. In other words, the results would have been the same if he hadn't used Canon's software and he went straight to LR/aperture etc.?
JPEG
Yeah the previous generations of Canons just don't have the same abilities for in-camera dynamic range maximizing. I've tested all the different modes on the mk2 and the 7D; highlight priority, lighting optimizer, etc. ...it just didn't seem to make much difference. My challenge was intended for anyone with a Nikon, or the 5D mk3.
It will also certainly depend on the scene. You'll want to shoot something that is a truly gorgeous scene, but with difficult dynamic range.
And yes, you can get pretty much the same results, or better, processing a RAW image in Lightroom. But it takes a lot of finesse in processing, and honestly I just don't have that kind of time for EVERY last casual photo I snap.
It is certainly more of a personal artistic pursuit than professional work tool, but here is an example of how I do use it (even while shooting RAW) ...to give myself a rough idea of how my images will turn out, and to give myself acceptable SOOC images in case I want to do an on-site or quick slideshow:
Yeah the previous generations of Canons just don't have the same abilities for in-camera dynamic range maximizing. I've tested all the different modes on the mk2 and the 7D; highlight priority, lighting optimizer, etc. ...it just didn't seem to make much difference. My challenge was intended for anyone with a Nikon, or the 5D mk3.
It will also certainly depend on the scene. You'll want to shoot something that is a truly gorgeous scene, but with difficult dynamic range.
And yes, you can get pretty much the same results, or better, processing a RAW image in Lightroom. But it takes a lot of finesse in processing, and honestly I just don't have that kind of time for EVERY last casual photo I snap.
It is certainly more of a personal artistic pursuit than professional work tool, but here is an example of how I do use it (even while shooting RAW) ...to give myself a rough idea of how my images will turn out, and to give myself acceptable SOOC images in case I want to do an on-site or quick slideshow:
Yes, that's definitely a lot different to the 5d2. For me at least it's much more efficient to do everything in one program, and Aperture fits the bill for that, I might have another look at it when I eventually get a 5D3 though.
I find Nikolai's imaged to be lacking in IQ. based on these images I would chuck the 5D II down a rat hole. Sorry Nikolai.......cry I really do know you can create fine images.
jmphotocraft, Your image with the sharp detailed 100% crop is motivating me to move up my kidney removal surgery in order to afford this camera.
I find Nikolai's imaged to be lacking in IQ. based on these images I would chuck the 5D II down a rat hole. Sorry Nikolai.......cry I really do know you can create fine images.
Sam
Patience, Sam! There was really nothing for me to shoot last night and I had to comply with 24 hr rule. I hope to provide something with more IQ this weekend... albeit most likely in GF, but I'll put a link, too ;-)
I'm sure Jack's shots could have been this good if he'd have had the great light I had for these,
or if he'd have been using a great lens like the 100-400.
1) I hope the high iso's turn out to be as good in real life as they look like they are in the samples shown around the web.
2) The faster shutter rate would be a huge plus to me.
3) I hope the AF is better than what the 7D offered. I had less keepers with my 7D than any other DSLR that I've owned.
4) I am so disappointed that Canon won't give you AF at F8 with a $3500 camera.
5) Lastly, how long before someone finds the flaw that the firmware needs to be upgraded.
I was one of the ones that bit on the 5DMKII early, and waited for Canon to fix the "Black Dot" issue.
Enjoy your new cams everyone, I'll probably join in at some point, but this time I'm waiting for the bugs to be worked out.
BTW, I do agree that Jacks photos turned out well, I'm not quite buying that a 5DMKII couldn't have gotten the same shots.
...
4) I am so disappointed that Canon won't give you AF at F8 with a $3500 camera.
...
+1. I don't really want to use my Tamron 1.4x TC because it wrecks the resolution IQ. But if that's the long term solution, then that sucks. I'd rather use my Canon 1.4 TC and have it focus properly.
...
5) Lastly, how long before someone finds the flaw that the firmware needs to be upgraded.
I was one of the ones that bit on the 5DMKII early, and waited for Canon to fix the "Black Dot" issue.
...
Not long. Already documented:
Pocket Wizard problems with faster than 1/160th flash sync.
Won't work with a 200 f/2 L IS.
These problems won't affect me, but I do use DPP as my front end RAW processor, and that's also buggy with the III and will wait for a fix with the camera firmware and software before I bite.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Touché, Dave! Indeed the 5D2's center point gets less credit than it deserves. However I was not using the center point for my skiing shots. This is more obvious in the pic of the boy with the yellow pants. No way my old 5D2's outer points could get a good servo shot other than by sheer luck.
But center point or not, I can assure you the 5D3 is faster to acquire and more consistent with tracking.
I hope the AF is better than what the 7D offered. I had less keepers with my 7D than any other DSLR that I've owned.
Should have sent it in to Canon then. I sent my 7D in, and it came back utterly transformed.
5D3 seems a bit better though.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Here's some 5D3 photos from a snow-machining trip in Alaska. The autofocus tracking did quite well. I tried most of the different modes and would average 6-7 out of 10 shots in perfect focus. But keep in mind, there's lots of room for operator error here. I haven't mastered the rather complicated AF/Focus Point Selection system quite yet. I full expect to be able to get 8-9 out of 10 once I know the right AF system recipes for different situations.
Here's some 5D3 photos from a snow-machining trip in Alaska. The autofocus tracking did quite well. I tried most of the different modes and would average 6-7 out of 10 shots in perfect focus. But keep in mind, there's lots of room for operator error here. I haven't mastered the rather complicated AF/Focus Point Selection system quite yet. I full expect to be able to get 8-9 out of 10 once I know the right AF system recipes for different situations. ...
That's a very realistic attitude regarding the technology. Many people expect perfection from autofocus technology, but the reality is that the user technique and user abilities play a lot into the symbiotic success of the person and the camera/lens.
I can guarantee you that this latest Canon AF system, the "reticular" AF module plus coupled exposure module and Digic V+ processor, is unlike anything we've seen before. It's a whole new ballgame and previous settings and techniques, that worked for previous cameras, are just starting points for this system.
Feel free to start a new thread to discuss just the AF system and settings, if you wish.
Hi Folks,
Looking for your thoughts on the following photos. I am only a photo enthusiast but upgraded last week from the rebel T2i to the Mark III. I bought the kit with 28-105 and also have a 70-200 2.8 IS Version I lens I bought a few months ago. I love taking event photos (my wife works for an opera company and my daughter loves acting so love these types of events) and have been learning about the fast lenses needed in these low light situations. I was thinking about a move to full frame and the 5DIII seemed to fit what I wanted so I took the plunge.
Was dying for a chance to test the new baby out and found out that a small venue in town was having a concert with Jim Weider, former guitarist for "The Band" so I called up to see if I could take photos for fun. As usual, the owners were cool with it as long as they got copies. Fine with me!
Photos below were taken with the 5DIII at ISO 3200 with 70-200L IS 2.8 in aperture priority, f2.8, 1/80 second shutter, 153 mm zoom. I used center-weighted average metering as I found on the T2i this mode tended to not overexpose the faces as badly with the dark background of most concerts. I also used center focus points only so focused and recomposed shot instead of using the 61 point AF. First one is uncropped. 2nd is about 25% crop. Workflow was RAW to DNG using DNG converter 6.7, export to JPEG. I honestly don't know what to think of the quality and was curious if the grinners thought the noise was acceptable or maybe I have just have technique mistakes, which wouldn't surprise me at all!! I guess I thought the noise was kind of high when cropped but my expectations could be too high in this sketchy light situation. I have a lot of learning to do. Thanks!
Congrats on getting the 5D3! The noise looks really good for ISO 3200. It's better than your T2i? It looks great to me. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the image quality differences between the two cameras.
If you want less noise you'd have to shoot at 1600 or so, which should be clean on the 5D3. Fast primes like the 85/1.8, 100/2, and 135L can be really good in low-light/concert shooting. That 5D3/70-200 combo looks like a winner though
Congrats on getting the 5D3! The noise looks really good for ISO 3200. It's better than your T2i? It looks great to me. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the image quality differences between the two cameras.
If you want less noise you'd have to shoot at 1600 or so, which should be clean on the 5D3. Fast primes like the 85/1.8, 100/2, and 135L can be really good in low-light/concert shooting. That 5D3/70-200 combo looks like a winner though
Thanks so much for the feedback. I wish I had brought the T2i body just for comparison. This is probably the lowest light situation I have shot in (other plays/shows had much more stage lighting) so it is really hard to compare. Overall I have been REALLY impressed with the T2i and the crop sensor certainly has advantages in terms of zoom range. I will do some side-by-side tests on both bodies with the same lens and do another post. Curious to see the extent of the difference myself.
One thing for sure . . . I need to start doing some bicep workouts because that 5DIII/70-200 2.8 combo is a BEAST. Have to throw a tube of Ben Gay in the camera bag from now on.
I think that image is remarkably noise free. But I also think that you have too low a shutter speed for the lens and probably have some shake going on, even with the IS. 1/80 is the lower limits for a non-IS at 70, but the focal length on this says 153.
I think that image is remarkably noise free. But I also think that you have too low a shutter speed for the lens and probably have some shake going on, even with the IS. 1/80 is the lower limits for a non-IS at 70, but the focal length on this says 153.
Comments
There is a very good series of articles relating to Canon camera technology here:
http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/photography/photography.shtml
In this article, some of the AF technology used in the Canon 5D MKIII and 1D X is explained:
http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/1dx_af_precision_crosstype_article.shtml?categoryId=12
In particular, this mention:
"Twenty-one Cross-type AF points, with any lens f/5.6 or faster
The central 21 AF points in the new system provide cross-type coverage, with separate horizontal and vertical line sensors, regardless of the lens in use (as long as the lens – or lens plus tele extender combination, if applicable – has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or faster). This is especially useful to pros and serious enthusiasts who prefer to use central AF points. And, it extends beyond the center-most AF point, as indicated on the adjacent diagram. Any and all of these points provide cross-type AF coverage, even with lenses such as the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, or the EF 800mm f/5.6L IS."
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Haha, yep! What an... interesting store!
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Good spot Ziggy. Lots of consequences. Perhaps the only place we see high end glass in the future is in a museum.
How are you liking the mk3 so far?
It's awesome. I have that feeling I used to get as a kid when I unwrapped the top item on my Christmas list. For a little taste, see post 108 in this thread of the boy doing a ski jump, and here is an ISO test I did: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=217519
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
pp
Flickr
Hi Matt,
I know this is going down a bit of a rat hole, but I found this discussion re ALO etc very interesting, so I had a go at your challenge. At 11pm I had few obvious subjects, so I just took a snap of the fish in their tank.
What I found was that the JPEG version was more contrasty, and that a lot of shadow detail was lost, in other words it had less dynamic range that the RAW, even before using curves etc.
The picture style was set to normal, not sure if that was an issue. Also, my camera is a Mk2, so maybe that's the problem?
TBH, I'm starting to think that Josh's images look great because of how he takes them, and maybe other work he does in post, and it probably has little at all to do with these DR stretching tools. In other words, the results would have been the same if he hadn't used Canon's software and he went straight to LR/aperture etc.?
RAW with standard aperture processing
JPEG
It will also certainly depend on the scene. You'll want to shoot something that is a truly gorgeous scene, but with difficult dynamic range.
And yes, you can get pretty much the same results, or better, processing a RAW image in Lightroom. But it takes a lot of finesse in processing, and honestly I just don't have that kind of time for EVERY last casual photo I snap.
It is certainly more of a personal artistic pursuit than professional work tool, but here is an example of how I do use it (even while shooting RAW) ...to give myself a rough idea of how my images will turn out, and to give myself acceptable SOOC images in case I want to do an on-site or quick slideshow:
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-5d-mark-iii-hands/MTM4NDQ1OTM_A
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
Yes, that's definitely a lot different to the 5d2. For me at least it's much more efficient to do everything in one program, and Aperture fits the bill for that, I might have another look at it when I eventually get a 5D3 though.
SOOC Large smooth jpeg with no post (except for 100% cropping).
#1: ISO 25600
#2: ISO 25600 100% crop
While the noise is visible, ACR can easily tackle it (I tried on other images).
This post was made with the assistance of Star*Explorer
100% crop:
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
jmphotocraft, Your image with the sharp detailed 100% crop is motivating me to move up my kidney removal surgery in order to afford this camera.
Sam
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
The 100%er
Oh wait, these were with a 5DMKII not a MKIII.
I'm sure Jack's shots could have been this good if he'd have had the great light I had for these,
or if he'd have been using a great lens like the 100-400.
1) I hope the high iso's turn out to be as good in real life as they look like they are in the samples shown around the web.
2) The faster shutter rate would be a huge plus to me.
3) I hope the AF is better than what the 7D offered. I had less keepers with my 7D than any other DSLR that I've owned.
4) I am so disappointed that Canon won't give you AF at F8 with a $3500 camera.
5) Lastly, how long before someone finds the flaw that the firmware needs to be upgraded.
I was one of the ones that bit on the 5DMKII early, and waited for Canon to fix the "Black Dot" issue.
Enjoy your new cams everyone, I'll probably join in at some point, but this time I'm waiting for the bugs to be worked out.
BTW, I do agree that Jacks photos turned out well, I'm not quite buying that a 5DMKII couldn't have gotten the same shots.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
+1. I don't really want to use my Tamron 1.4x TC because it wrecks the resolution IQ. But if that's the long term solution, then that sucks. I'd rather use my Canon 1.4 TC and have it focus properly.
Not long. Already documented:
Pocket Wizard problems with faster than 1/160th flash sync.
Won't work with a 200 f/2 L IS.
These problems won't affect me, but I do use DPP as my front end RAW processor, and that's also buggy with the III and will wait for a fix with the camera firmware and software before I bite.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
From the camera.
After a few minutes in CS6.
I'm thinking a couple hundred dollars for software make make a bigger difference for me than $3500 in hardware. (remember, I shoot JPGs)
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
But center point or not, I can assure you the 5D3 is faster to acquire and more consistent with tracking.
Should have sent it in to Canon then. I sent my 7D in, and it came back utterly transformed.
5D3 seems a bit better though.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
That's a very realistic attitude regarding the technology. Many people expect perfection from autofocus technology, but the reality is that the user technique and user abilities play a lot into the symbiotic success of the person and the camera/lens.
I can guarantee you that this latest Canon AF system, the "reticular" AF module plus coupled exposure module and Digic V+ processor, is unlike anything we've seen before. It's a whole new ballgame and previous settings and techniques, that worked for previous cameras, are just starting points for this system.
Feel free to start a new thread to discuss just the AF system and settings, if you wish.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom4-1/?tabID=details#tabTop
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Looking for your thoughts on the following photos. I am only a photo enthusiast but upgraded last week from the rebel T2i to the Mark III. I bought the kit with 28-105 and also have a 70-200 2.8 IS Version I lens I bought a few months ago. I love taking event photos (my wife works for an opera company and my daughter loves acting so love these types of events) and have been learning about the fast lenses needed in these low light situations. I was thinking about a move to full frame and the 5DIII seemed to fit what I wanted so I took the plunge.
Was dying for a chance to test the new baby out and found out that a small venue in town was having a concert with Jim Weider, former guitarist for "The Band" so I called up to see if I could take photos for fun. As usual, the owners were cool with it as long as they got copies. Fine with me!
Photos below were taken with the 5DIII at ISO 3200 with 70-200L IS 2.8 in aperture priority, f2.8, 1/80 second shutter, 153 mm zoom. I used center-weighted average metering as I found on the T2i this mode tended to not overexpose the faces as badly with the dark background of most concerts. I also used center focus points only so focused and recomposed shot instead of using the 61 point AF. First one is uncropped. 2nd is about 25% crop. Workflow was RAW to DNG using DNG converter 6.7, export to JPEG. I honestly don't know what to think of the quality and was curious if the grinners thought the noise was acceptable or maybe I have just have technique mistakes, which wouldn't surprise me at all!! I guess I thought the noise was kind of high when cropped but my expectations could be too high in this sketchy light situation. I have a lot of learning to do. Thanks!
If you want less noise you'd have to shoot at 1600 or so, which should be clean on the 5D3. Fast primes like the 85/1.8, 100/2, and 135L can be really good in low-light/concert shooting. That 5D3/70-200 combo looks like a winner though
Thanks so much for the feedback. I wish I had brought the T2i body just for comparison. This is probably the lowest light situation I have shot in (other plays/shows had much more stage lighting) so it is really hard to compare. Overall I have been REALLY impressed with the T2i and the crop sensor certainly has advantages in terms of zoom range. I will do some side-by-side tests on both bodies with the same lens and do another post. Curious to see the extent of the difference myself.
One thing for sure . . . I need to start doing some bicep workouts because that 5DIII/70-200 2.8 combo is a BEAST. Have to throw a tube of Ben Gay in the camera bag from now on.
I would have no complaints on this one.
Its focused on the guitar and chest, not his face