When I get a moment I will do a direct comparison between the two cameras at low ISO to see if I can better illustrate why this result surprises me after more than a year of using the superb 1Ds3.
It's not just me then! I love the 5D2 but overall, the 1DmkIII (I know, not the s) is way better in noise. Maybe at higher ISO's but at 100-400 the 5D isn't as good and pulling detail out of shadows is not as easy.
I have the 1DM3 and 5D2.. I haven't noticed that at all. Pixel peeping at 10mpix image and a 21mpix image is not an effective way to evaluate though. I do not own the 1DsM3 and would agree with the original poster that it should be very similar. However, isn't this example underexposed? Not that it matters... but thought it might contribute. Was this shot RAW and converted? I noticed that the EXIF shows level 6 JPG in the crop. Not exactly sure how that equates or if the noise is effected by the compression. If Raw, what processor did you use to convert? Just curious for details.
rextilleon wrote:
Geeze, now I am having second thoughts about purchasing this camera.
Really? By one post? I have been shooting with the 5D2 since early Dec. and can say it produces stunning images at most all ISOs. I would certainly check out more examples and perhaps test one 1st hand.
apdieb wrote:
I have the 1DM3 and 5D2.. I haven't noticed that at all. Pixel peeping at 10mpix image and a 21mpix image is not an effective way to evaluate though. I do not own the 1DsM3 and would agree with the original poster that it should be very similar. However, isn't this example underexposed? Not that it matters... but thought it might contribute.
The 1Ds3 is not a 10mp camera. You're thinking of the 1D3.
I know. I was referring to the other poster (2nd) above.
I wasn't comparing at 100%, I was comparing as viewed at the same size (so the 1DmkIII would be at a disadvantage?).
I also can clearly see that an under exposed image can stand more work on the 1DmkIII than the 5DmkII image but I like them both very much so I'm not trying to say the 5DmkII is rubbish!
I cannot duplicate these results. I suspect user error. There's a big difference when trying to pull under exposed detail out of shadows where none was captured than shadow noise on a correctly exposed image.
Or, maybe my 5DII is just better than yours? I've not been able to duplicate the black dot phenom either (still on original firmware). My autofocus works well, even in dim light, my battery compartment doesn't creak and the body is free of squeaks and other such. Plus, no focus point light bleed. Hmmm. Guess I'm lucky.
Since I don't have a 1Ds3, I downloaded and compared images taken by Lloyd Chambers (diglloyd.com, if you pay for the DAP you can download the full sized images) from his D3x review. I see no real difference in the deep shadows when comparing the 5D2 and the 1Ds3 and thats after some levels adjustments to bring out whatever noise was there. Now comparing the D3x to either of these bodies is an eyeopener but thats a different story
The exposure is so far off what did you expect, or where you just looking for something to post, my 5D2 looks better that that at 2500, but then it is the correct exposure.
Fanboy responses much? There's quite a few murmurs going on the web, as wells as posts on FM about the 5D2 and 1Ds3's bad low ISO performance. I was able to duplicate this easily with a 1Ds3. I'm sitting tight with my 5D.
I have and use the 40D at times but now mostly Nikon. But, my brother-in-law is professional with newspaper and uses the 5DMarkII and gets incredible results at both low and high ISO (the video is really something). Maybe specific camera problem?
