5D Mark III - First 24 Hours Review (post yours here!)

1235714

Comments

  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,118 moderator
    edited March 26, 2012
    Does the 5d3 AF to f8 like previous 1 series bodies or 5.6 like the 1Dx?
    If so, is it also limited to centre point only?

    pp

    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."
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • ssimmonsphotossimmonsphoto Registered Users Posts: 424 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    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?

    http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/Other/5D3-quick-test

    ISO 6400:
    6M7C8824-X3.jpg
    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!
    Website (hosted by Zenfolio after 6.5 years with SmugMug) | Blog (hosted by Zenfolio) | Tave User
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    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.
  • chrisjohnsonchrisjohnson Registered Users Posts: 772 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    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."

    Good spot Ziggy. Lots of consequences. Perhaps the only place we see high end glass in the future is in a museum.
  • ssimmonsphotossimmonsphoto Registered Users Posts: 424 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    Haha, yep! What an... interesting store!
    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.

    How are you liking the mk3 so far?
    Website (hosted by Zenfolio after 6.5 years with SmugMug) | Blog (hosted by Zenfolio) | Tave User
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    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
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    Thanks for the info, ziggy - as I suspected ... 5.6

    pp
  • Stuart-MStuart-M Registered Users Posts: 157 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    Certainly. However, I would challenge you this:

    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.?

    p67289148-6.jpg
    RAW with standard aperture processing

    p235934210-6.jpg
    JPEG
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited March 26, 2012
    Stuart-M wrote: »
    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.?

    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:

    1073394248_VoPbF-L.jpg
    1073394477_dyCBH-L.jpg
    My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug PortfolioMy Astro-Landscape Photo BlogDgrin Weddings Forum
  • Dan7312Dan7312 Registered Users Posts: 1,330 Major grins
    edited March 27, 2012
  • Stuart-MStuart-M Registered Users Posts: 157 Major grins
    edited March 28, 2012
    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:

    1073394248_VoPbF-L.jpg
    1073394477_dyCBH-L.jpg

    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.
  • bloomphotogbloomphotog Registered Users Posts: 582 Major grins
    edited March 28, 2012
    Just posted a review of the 600EX-RT Speedlight as used with a 5D Mark III. http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=1758111
  • NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    Nothing as spectacular as Josh's and Jack's stuff, simply a late night house shot at ISO 25600 f/5.0 1/30s.

    SOOC Large smooth jpeg with no post (except for 100% cropping).

    #1: ISO 25600

    1770428609_NgZjmcG-X3.jpg

    #2: ISO 25600 100% crop

    1770428309_5RN3Rx6-X3.jpg

    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
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    Another skiing pic from my previous shoot, showing the power of the AF at f/2.8:

    instructor.JPG

    100% crop:
    instructor_crop.JPG
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • cmasoncmason Registered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    Those 100% crops are explicative inducing!
  • SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    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:cry I really do know you can create fine images. :D

    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. :D

    Sam
  • NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    Sam wrote: »
    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:cry I really do know you can create fine images. :D
    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 ;-)
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • eoren1eoren1 Registered Users Posts: 2,391 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    Can any of you 5DmkIII owners comment on how well LR 4.1 does with the files?
  • davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    I agree, this 5DMKIII is fantastic.

    IMG3861-X2.jpg

    The 100%er

    IMG3861-crop-XL.jpg

    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. :D


    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.
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,244 moderator
    edited March 29, 2012
    davev wrote: »
    ...
    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.

    davev wrote: »
    ...
    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
  • davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    In a kind of related note, a quick look at my shot done up in CS6 Beta.

    From the camera.
    IMG3861-XL.jpg

    After a few minutes in CS6.
    IMG3861-cs6-1-XL.jpg

    I'm thinking a couple hundred dollars for software make make a bigger difference for me than $3500 in hardware. (remember, I shoot JPGs)
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited March 29, 2012
    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.
  • bloomphotogbloomphotog Registered Users Posts: 582 Major grins
    edited March 31, 2012
    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.


    JMP1093-XL.jpg

    JMP1080-XL.jpg
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,118 moderator
    edited March 31, 2012
    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.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited March 31, 2012
    LR4 RC available from Adobe Labs, 5DIII support
    http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom4-1/?tabID=details#tabTop
  • CoveShooterCoveShooter Registered Users Posts: 9 Beginner grinner
    edited March 31, 2012
    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!

    8Z2C0248-1-XL.jpg

    8Z2C0248-crop-XL.jpg
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited March 31, 2012
    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 :D
  • CoveShooterCoveShooter Registered Users Posts: 9 Beginner grinner
    edited March 31, 2012
    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 :D

    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.
  • cmasoncmason Registered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited March 31, 2012
    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 would have no complaints on this one.
  • OverfocusedOverfocused Registered Users Posts: 1,068 Major grins
    edited March 31, 2012
    cmason wrote: »
    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 would have no complaints on this one.

    Its focused on the guitar and chest, not his face
Sign In or Register to comment.