Rincon wrote:
As I stated in my original post, I am a center-poiint focus kind of guy. I started shooting 35mm in 1972 with a Canon FT and I have never really become comfortable with moving the focus point around. Center-point on the 6D worked very well for me at this wedding, even during the dancing at the reception where the only light ws the DJ lights. I shot some with high ISO for atmosphere, but most were shot with off camera flash.
So because you started 40 years ago on a manual focus camera you "have never really become comfortable with moving the focus point around"? I started in 1968 with a Kodak Retinette 1B and I love being able to move the focus point around on the 5D3. Ever tried to learn anything new?
Rincon wrote:
This weekend I shot a wedding for the first time with my new 6D, upgrading from a 5Dclassic. As requested, here are a few observations: 1) much lighter, easier to carry for long hours 2) IQ is fantastic 3) high ISO is very good - I was able to hand hold shoot intro of bridal party without flash at ISO 25600. As always, overexpose by half a stop and the IQ is very useable 4) the "silent shutter" takes some getting used to - it has kind of a mushy sound and initially, I wasn't sure that it was really working 5) most controls that I use are readily available in very close to the same location, however I had to keep looking at them - more experience with the body should take care of that 6) I use the Yongnuo 565EX flash and camera control of that flash unit worked as advertised (in particular, I like to use 2nd curtain sync at various times.
Overall, my first wedding experience with this camera is very positive and it is a huge upgrade from the 5Dc that I have been using. I have never used a 5D III, but I am quite happy with my decision to save a lot of $$ and go with the 6D ...Show more →
Yongnuo flashes work on the 6D - thx for the observations
Joshua Gull wrote:
Nope. Like I said, drives me batty. It's a MAJOR problem for me, so much so that using the 5D2 and 5D3 back to back I ended up having a lot more in focus shots with the 5D2 because I'd want to use outer points with the 5D3 to use it's strengths but I can't see the damn focus point. I certainly wish the 5D2 had the ISO performance of the 5D3 but I need in focus shots first and foremost.
It's the same sensor!!!!! Same RAW ISO performance. Only difference is that the 5d3 has a very aggressive JPEG noise reduction default setting. You people really need to see past the LIE canon told you all about the ISO performance of the 5d3 to make it sound like they significantly changed anything other than the AF module...
jamesmorophoto wrote:
It's the same sensor!!!!! Same RAW ISO performance. Only difference is that the 5d3 has a very aggressive JPEG noise reduction default setting. You people really need to see past the LIE canon told you all about the ISO performance of the 5d3 to make it sound like they significantly changed anything other than the AF module...
Are you saying the 5d2 and 5d3 have the same sensor? I cannot believe that for a moment. The difference in images from the 5d2 and 5d3 are substantial...not even factoring in high iso. But, at high iso's the 5d2 iamges are so bad with shadow noise that no amount of in-camera jpg noise reduction is going to save it and make them look like 5d3 files. We still have a 5d2 in use along with our 3's, and I am regularly editing images of the exact same setup from both camera...totally different results. I cannot stand the 5d2 images any more. I am about to drop it for (most likely) a 6d
joelconner wrote:
Are you saying the 5d2 and 5d3 have the same sensor? I cannot believe that for a moment. The difference in images from the 5d2 and 5d3 are substantial...not even factoring in high iso. But, at high iso's the 5d2 iamges are so bad that no amount of jpg noise reduction is going to save it. We still have a 5d2 in use along with our 3's, and I am regularly editing images of the exact same setup from both camera...totally different results. I cannot stand the 5d2 images any more. I am about to drop it for (most likely) a 6d ...Show more →
wow, I must like sucky images because I love my 2 5DII
maybe my assessment came off as rather harsh...I can go into more specific details as to why I dislike the files that the 5dII puts out, but I suppose some of it is just a matter of my personal opinion.
I don't know if Im misunderstanding the complaint about the AF not flashing red when locking focus, but I just checked mine to make sure I wasnt going crazy, and it definitely flashes red when it locks focus.
joelconner wrote:
Are you saying the 5d2 and 5d3 have the same sensor? I cannot believe that for a moment. The difference in images from the 5d2 and 5d3 are substantial...not even factoring in high iso. But, at high iso's the 5d2 iamges are so bad with shadow noise that no amount of in-camera jpg noise reduction is going to save it and make them look like 5d3 files. We still have a 5d2 in use along with our 3's, and I am regularly editing images of the exact same setup from both camera...totally different results. I cannot stand the 5d2 images any more. I am about to drop it for (most likely) a 6d ...Show more →
it's all marketing hype. It's practically the same sensor. same resolution. slightly lower dynamic range on the 5d3. same ISO performance. same shitty noise banding patterns, even at ISO 100. The 5d3 doesn't have some new-found high ISO improvement. canon just bumped up the jpeg noise reduction. compare the RAW files w/o noise reduction on both cameras. same exact image.
people think the 5d3 has such great ISO performance b/c of the JPEG comparisons that show the HEAVY in camera noise reduction canon applies to the images.
RAW is a different story.
this isn't me talking about of my ass. DXO mark puts the 5d3 about .3 stops better in high ISO. that's a barely noticeable improvement. hardly ground breaking.
jamesmorophoto wrote:
it's all marketing hype. It's practically the same sensor. same resolution. slightly lower dynamic range on the 5d3. same ISO performance. same shitty noise banding patterns, even at ISO 100. The 5d3 doesn't have some new-found high ISO improvement. canon just bumped up the jpeg noise reduction. compare the RAW files w/o noise reduction on both cameras. same exact image.
people think the 5d3 has such great ISO performance b/c of the JPEG comparisons that show the HEAVY in camera noise reduction canon applies to the images.
RAW is a different story.
this isn't me talking about of my ass. DXO mark puts the 5d3 about .3 stops better in high ISO. that's a barely noticeable improvement. hardly ground breaking.
5D2 is the bottom of each series. To the D800's disadvantage, they also cropped and zoomed in on the images (which reveals more noise). That all 3 cameras are barely indistinguishable in terms of high iso noise in the RAW files, especially the 5d2/5d3, is something worth paying attention to.
5D2 is the bottom of each series. To the D800's disadvantage, they also cropped and zoomed in on the images (which reveals more noise). That all 3 cameras are barely indistinguishable in terms of high iso noise in the RAW files, especially the 5d2/5d3, is something worth paying attention to.
The blacks in my 6400 iso files do not look like that at all. This is the first I've heard of a .3 stop high iso difference. This is not DXO mark. I'm not sure what site this is, never heard of it before. Not sure how I feel about the testing done on a stuffed animal and a messy shelf.
I honestly do not care what they say, that has not been my experience at all. The shadow noise from 5D2 files at 4000+ gets so terribly rough if you have to push them at all. The color becomes garbage at those settings. I can shoot at a much higher iso with my 5d3 and the files look MUCH better. I was just editing a wedding today where I was shooting at the same iso as my wife...me on 5d3's and her on a 5d2. My files look night and day better than hers do.
I had an event a few weeks ago where I stupidly forgot to bring my flashes. Not a big deal...I usually do not use them for small events. Well, it ended up being an extremely dark venue with no light coming from outside, as was expected (rainy with thick clouds). I had to shoot the entire event at iso's between 6400 and 10,000. The files are totally usable and look just fine...they would have been atrocious on the 5d2
Yeah the differences I noticed when I went from 5D2 - 5D3 is on the processing end. 1:1 they look basically the same as shot. But the 5D3 has a lot more malleability in terms of processing, especially in the shadow detail, as Joel mentioned. It's definitely not the same sensor as the 5D2.
I don't like the 5d3's AF system on account of the huge delay it has for focus locking and confirmation. My 5d2s have no such delay. If the difference between getting the shot and missing it is locking and shooting in 1/2 a second or 1 AND 1/2 seconds, I'll take the camera that does it in 1/2 second. That's NOT the 5d3.
form wrote:
I don't like the 5d3's AF system on account of the huge delay it has for focus locking and confirmation. My 5d2s have no such delay. If the difference between getting the shot and missing it is locking and shooting in 1/2 a second or 1 AND 1/2 seconds, I'll take the camera that does it in 1/2 second. That's NOT the 5d3.
Form, have you owned a 5d3? I'm fairly certain you can tweak the AF to prioritise getting the shot sooner over perfect focus.
