skibum5 wrote:
It is quite bizarre it doesn't use the 5D3 sensor. I don't think they'd use the new fab on it. 5D3+1DX would go ape if the little came out a few months later and blew those cams away for lower ISO performance I'd think. MAYBE for the 7D2?? Maybe??
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest. I bought the 5d3 to take pictures, not play "top trumps", where I compare cameras constantly.
skibum5 wrote:
well then there is this method, which takes 0.1 seconds to accomplish
snapsy wrote:
hehe. I figure Canon couldn't stomach a sensor that would outperform the 5DM3 in High ISO, let alone the 1DX. Low ISO is a tossup. I'm more interested in why they didn't use the 5DM3 sensor and whether this new sensor comes off the newer rumored fab tech that Chipworks discussed.
skibum5 wrote:
It is quite bizarre it doesn't use the 5D3 sensor. I don't think they'd use the new fab on it. 5D3+1DX would go ape if the little came out a few months later and blew those cams away for lower ISO performance I'd think. MAYBE for the 7D2?? Maybe??
PhilDrinkwater wrote:
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest. I bought the 5d3 to take pictures, not play "top trumps", where I compare cameras constantly.
It doesn't bother Canon either. The history is full of examples of sensor improvements showing up in less expensive cameras.
On of the small secrets in that reagrd was the 500D, with 15 MP sensor. It had cleaner shadows than the 50D that came just before it. Counting per sensor area, it was also better than the 5DII. The 18 MP sensors that came later, introduced a new type of vertical banding both in the deep shadows and in the higlhights (visible only after heavy post-processing). The 500D didn't have any of these faint "problems". It was really a gem in the pre- EXMOR times.
alundeb wrote:
It doesn't bother Canon either. The history is full of examples of sensor improvements showing up in less expensive cameras.
On of the small secrets in that reagrd was the 500D, with 15 MP sensor. It had cleaner shadows than the 50D that came just before it. Counting per sensor area, it was also better than the 5DII. The 18 MP sensors that came later, introduced a new type of vertical banding both in the deep shadows and in the higlhights (visible only after heavy post-processing). The 500D didn't have any of these faint "problems". It was really a gem in the pre- EXMOR times. ...Show more →
The discussion was specifically about High ISO performance.
EDIT: Thinking it over, I guess the 5DM2 vs 1DSM3 is one exception... hmm...
alundeb wrote:
On of the small secrets in that reagrd was the 500D, with 15 MP sensor. It had cleaner shadows than the 50D that came just before it. Counting per sensor area, it was also better than the 5DII. The 18 MP sensors that came later, introduced a new type of vertical banding both in the deep shadows and in the higlhights (visible only after heavy post-processing). The 500D didn't have any of these faint "problems". It was really a gem in the pre- EXMOR times.
Oh no, what are you saying? An entry level camera can actually have a better sensor than more expensive cameras? What heresy?
But yes, I agree with you: Canon does occasionally introduce better sensors in lower end cameras. There are other high ISO examples, but I shan't name them in case I get bashed by owners of more expensive cameras.
Look at 5D MK3 vs 1DX . Same noise performance ,very slightly better DR for 1DX and speed (fps ). But iti costs more than double the price. Which makes 5DMK3 -a very smart buy even for Pro photographers that do not need 12 frames/second.
I think 6D will have a slightly better noise performance because of the bigger pixel pitch and because of a newer technology (especially at high iso values).
