The fastidious way in which he tested the cameras together at iso 12800 assures me that he is 100% correct.
Seriously, this looks like a 1Ds3 sensor with Digic4 noise reduction, which seems to be a bit disappointing compared to Nikon's, and compared to using NeatImage appropriately. It's great to be able to shoot jpegs at high iso, when absolutely necessary, but I haven't seen anything yet that suggests that there is any clear water between this new camera and the 1Ds3 at very high isos. And I've seen some pretty appalling examples that are going to make the Nikonians laugh, like the one I linked to just now. Even the camera jpegs are going to need a low frequency chroma NR by a package like NeatImage before they are handed over to the client. Otherwise clients will not like the 32 pixel wide purple and green patches all over their clothes and faces. We shall see.
Quote from the same juza link: "I'd say the 5D2 is 1 stop better than 1Ds3, maybe even 1.5 stop (but I think that 1 stop is the more accurate estimate), so it is on par with the 1D3 and with the previous 5D"
It is funny, but is he saying that the 5D2 is on par with the previous 5D regarding noise?
Also, I did some comparisons between a 5D and 1Ds3 and noise was about the same.
Rick Krejci wrote:
The pixel density is like that of a 30D/350D/20D, so in the center at least, the lenses should act like a review site like PhotoZone (which uses a 350D). Many lenses can outresolve the sensor, particularly stopped down.
And diffraction doesn't start to affect things until beyond f8.
CKeiser wrote:
Wow, my jaw is on the desk.
First for the amazing 5DII that Canon just announced.
Second for the disappointment vocalized by some people. {shakes head in bewilderment}
-Christopher
Ben Horne wrote:
You keep stating that the 50DII is rated for "heavy rain." Where do you see this claim. My statements are based on the fact that the 5D appears to be using the SAME general sort of weather sealing as the 40D. Canon claims that the 40D is weather sealed. The FACT is that the 40D's weather sealing is no-where near that of the 1 series.
Canon states the 5DMK2 can handle rain @ 10 mm (.4 in )/3 minutes. Other people has written the 1D can handle 10 inch / 1 hr (60 min) = .5in /3 min. So the numbers are very close. Also, 10 or 9 inches of rain per hour is a major downpour. Better start building the Ark if that keeps up.
brainiac wrote:
The fastidious way in which he tested the cameras together at iso 12800 assures me that he is 100% correct.
Seriously, this looks like a 1Ds3 sensor with Digic4 noise reduction, which seems to be a bit disappointing compared to Nikon's, and compared to using NeatImage appropriately. It's great to be able to shoot jpegs at high iso, when absolutely necessary, but I haven't seen anything yet that suggests that there is any clear water between this new camera and the 1Ds3 at very high isos. And I've seen some pretty appalling examples that are going to make the Nikonians laugh, like the one I linked to just now. We shall see....Show more →
Makes me wonder how the RAW files will look... I am afraid that over agressive in-camera NR will destroy much detail. In that case I'd rather prefer the film-like noise of the 1Ds3...
brainiac wrote:
Seriously, this looks like a 1Ds3 sensor with Digic4 noise reduction, which seems to be a bit disappointing compared to Nikon's, and compared to using NeatImage appropriately. It's great to be able to shoot jpegs at high iso, when absolutely necessary, but I haven't seen anything yet that suggests that there is any clear water between this new camera and the 1Ds3 at very high isos. And I've seen some pretty appalling examples that are going to make the Nikonians laugh, like the one I linked to just now. We shall see.
Canon leaves in more luminosity noise than Nikon. These files print better than shots sandblasted to look good at 100%. Plus 21 v, 12 mp is significant for high ISO files when printing.
But Nikon is clearly the choice for anyone shooting for 100% crops online.
Daan B wrote:
Makes me wonder how the RAW files will look... I am afraid that over agressive in-camera NR will destroy much detail. In that case I'd rather prefer the film-like noise of the 1Ds3...
I agree. But you get to control NR. Look at the options on dpreview.
Me, I like some noise and vignetting. Like a women with a little attitude.
Thinking about it, it would be nice if women had optional settings..........
Ben Horne wrote:
You keep stating that the 50DII is rated for "heavy rain." Where do you see this claim. My statements are based on the fact that the 5D appears to be using the SAME general sort of weather sealing as the 40D. Canon claims that the 40D is weather sealed. The FACT is that the 40D's weather sealing is no-where near that of the 1 series.
The 5D MKII is sealed better than the 40D/50D
From DPR:
Canon's description: "The battery compartment, memory card door, LCD and the camera buttons are all fitted with sealing materials (indicated in red). In addition the adoption of high precision split-level alignment of the magnesium-alloy external covers, high precision dial construction and external rubber grip covers (indicated in green), has improved the camera's dust and water resistance."
jerrykur wrote:
Canon states the 5DMK2 can handle rain @ 10 mm (.4 in )/3 minutes. Other people has written the 1D can handle 10 inch / 1 hr (60 min) = .5in /3 min. So the numbers are very close. Also, 10 or 9 inches of rain per hour is a major downpour. Better start building the Ark if that keeps up.
I don't see how any of these manufacturers can claim this based on how the CF compartment is done. It simply does not provide a strong seal. In order to have full weather sealing, they need to design a door like the Nikon D3 series cameras, or the 1 series where it locks in place, and compression is applied to the seals. I was just taking a good look at the 40D and the D700's sealing, and either method is flawed. The 5DII should have the same degree of sealing. I don't see how it can possibly be better.
I definitely would NOT take any of these cameras into a situation with rain.
Daan B wrote:
Also, I did some comparisons between a 5D and 1Ds3 and noise was about the same.
I didn't do that. I used both cameras professionally in very low light since September '05 and December '07 respectively, and found that the 1Ds3 is at least a stop better than the 5D, and pretty much on a par with the D700. I also presented quite a few examples on this forum to show that the 1Ds3 can perform at ISO 12800 in a way that my 5D's never could. Here's an example: http://cyberphotographer.com/1ds3/vampire2_lowrez.jpg
Based on this material, and terabytes more just like it, I can tell you that in very low light and at high iso
a) the 1Ds3 is much better than the 5D
b) the 1Ds3 is as good as the 1D3
c) the 1Ds3 is very very very nearly as good as the D700
d) the 1Ds3 can provide image quality at least as good as any of the 5D2 high iso samples we have been shown so far
It looks to me as though the 5D2's in-built noise reduction processing is not as good as can be done if you shoot raw, and not as good as Nikon's. Maybe the production camera will be better optimised, but I'm not exactly champing at the bit to produce results like the one above.
Remember: this message contains a 12800 ISO image taken with the 1Ds3 which looks great, and a 12800 ISO image taken with the 5D's in-built processing which looks poor. I'm not making this up. I have every confidence that the 5D2 will be as good as the 1Ds3, but as yet I see no reason to believe that it will be substantially better, and for JPEG, probably less good than a 1Ds3 raw file. At ISO 12800.
Ben Horne wrote:
I don't see how any of these manufacturers can claim this based on how the CF compartment is done. It simply does not provide a strong seal. In order to have full weather sealing, they need to design a door like the Nikon D3 series cameras, or the 1 series where it locks in place, and compression is applied to the seals. I was just taking a good look at the 40D and the D700's sealing, and either method is flawed. The 5DII should have the same degree of sealing. I don't see how it can possibly be better.
I definitely would NOT take any of these cameras into a situation with rain. ...Show more →
Ben, what are you talking about? This is not the same sealing as the 40D. Period. It's much better gasketed, with sealing on all the buttons, dials, LCD and doors. It's not a strip of foam. If Canon says it can operate in a 7 inch / hour downpour, then it can withstand that. If it can't, they'll be doing a lot of warranty repairs. Why do you insist on arguing this when your only point is "the 40D's sealing sucks."? This isn't sealed like the 40D!
Terrific .... and that is exactly what we need .... some weather sealing - it doesn't have to be fully weather-sealed. There are other priorities and feature set that we want, and we don't want to have to pay for something we don't need.
Shame about the AF though .... but heck, if all 9 points are cross-type and the center focus point is multi-cross-type, I am real happy with that, as I appreciate that everything is a compromise and I cannot have a 1Ds Mk III for the price of a D700.
timnosenzo wrote:
The 5D MKII is sealed better than the 40D/50D
From DPR:
Canon's description: "The battery compartment, memory card door, LCD and the camera buttons are all fitted with sealing materials (indicated in red). In addition the adoption of high precision split-level alignment of the magnesium-alloy external covers, high precision dial construction and external rubber grip covers (indicated in green), has improved the camera's dust and water resistance."
While its still not the same as a 1-series, Canon has rated it for a specific water/time, which is more than they ever said for the 40D.
I will still be more wiling to use my 1DIII in bad weather than the 5DII I will buy. But I've used all my cameras in the rain.
I have no idea what the 40D has to do with 5DII weather sealing either.
brainiac wrote:
I didn't do that. I used both cameras professionally in very low light since September '05 and December '07 respectively, and found that the 1Ds3 is at least a stop better than the 5D, and pretty much on a par with the D700. I also presented quite a few examples on this forum to show that the 1Ds3 can perform at ISO 12800 in a way that my 5D's never could. Here's an example:
...and here's my comparison of D700 v 1Ds3 at ISO 12800 using the very same lens, aperture, and shutter speed:
Based on this material, and terabytes more just like it, I can tell you that in very low light and at high iso
a) the 1Ds3 is much better than the 5D
b) the 1Ds3 is as good as the 1D3
c) the 1Ds3 is very very very nearly as good as the D700
d) the 1Ds3 can provide image quality at least as good as any of the 5D2 high iso samples we have been shown so far
On that last point I would say this: I expect my 1Ds3 to do better than the shot below at ISO 12800, and that expectation is based on extended use.
It looks to me as though the 5D2's in-built noise reduction processing is not as good as can be done if you shoot raw, and not as good as Nikon's. Maybe the production camera will be better optimised, but I'm not exactly champing at the bit to produce results like the one above....Show more →
In all fairness, I equalized the 1Ds3 and 5D files and didn't test past ISO3200. I used LR for my conversions. I wouldn't say they looked exactly the same, but more or less the same. At that time enough for me to warrant selling off my 5D. I have seen the comparisons between the 1D3 and 1Ds3 on this forum. Equal performance I would say. The 1Ds3 seems to be a close call to the D700 too.
I sense you are a bit disappointed by the NR of the 5D2 Richard? Still determined to sell off your 1Ds3? That D700 is looking mighty interesting, doesn't it?
I wonder if and how in-camera high ISO NR will affect 5D2 RAW files...
dcmiller wrote:
Other than the guy looking like he needs a new liver, I see no problems.
I don't see any problems either, the faces are all exposed right, but in order to do so the photographer overexposed for 1 stop (as I see in the exif). Most likely because of the backlit subject. Of course this is beneficiary for the high iso noise.
