This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 20095D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
p.1 #15D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Sadly I have just sold my 1Ds3. I say sadly because I did not expect my new 5D2 to have significantly worse performance at low ISOs, but it does seem to. I was skeptical about reports of this, as the sensor is the same, and Canon has said that the 5D2 has even better IQ than the 1Ds3. They lied. This is only 200 ISO:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/snowythames_lowrez.jpg
top left crop
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/snowythames_topleft.jpg
bottom crop
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/snowythames_bottom.jpg
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.
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/snowythames_lowrez.jpg
top left crop
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/snowythames_topleft.jpg
bottom crop
http://cyberphotographer.com/5d2/snowythames_bottom.jpg
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.
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:17 PM
p.1 #25D2 low ISO poor v 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.
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:39 PM
p.1 #45D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
I guess it's time for me to put them side by side for the same shot, then!
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:44 PM
p.1 #55D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Geeze, now I am having second thoughts about purchasing this camera.
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:44 PM
p.1 #65D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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.
Thanks!
Edited on Feb 03, 2009 at 02:52 PM · View previous versions
Thanks!
Edited on Feb 03, 2009 at 02:52 PM · View previous versions
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:46 PM
p.1 #75D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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.
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.
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:48 PM
p.1 #85D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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 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.
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:49 PM
p.1 #95D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
Wow...the power one post....
I'm surprised that people with both cameras haven't tested this yet.
I thought about replacing my 1DsMkII with 5DII, but I'll sit tight for now....
I'm surprised that people with both cameras haven't tested this yet.
I thought about replacing my 1DsMkII with 5DII, but I'll sit tight for now....
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:50 PM
p.1 #115D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
WilliamG wrote:
The 1Ds3 is not a 10mp camera. You're thinking of the 1D3.
Did you actually read my message?
I know. I was referring to the other poster (2nd) above.
Edited on Feb 03, 2009 at 02:54 PM · View previous versions
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.Did you actually read my message?
I know. I was referring to the other poster (2nd) above.
Edited on Feb 03, 2009 at 02:54 PM · View previous versions
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:53 PM
p.1 #125D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
wonder how low iso of the 5D II compares with the 5d...
Feb 03, 2009 at 02:54 PM
p.1 #135D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
apdieb wrote:
The 1Ds3 is not a 10mp camera. You're thinking of the 1D3.Did you actually read my message?
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!
WilliamG wrote
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.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!
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:01 PM
p.1 #145D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
try turning off Highlight Tone Priority and test again, also might want to try a manual exposure...
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:05 PM
p.1 #155D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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.
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.
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:08 PM
p.1 #165D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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 
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:16 PM
p.1 #175D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
noise will always be bad if the wrong techniques are used. Looks pretty under exposed imo.
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:27 PM
p.1 #185D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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.
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:36 PM
p.1 #195D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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.
Edited on Feb 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Feb 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM · View previous versions
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:41 PM
p.1 #205D2 low ISO poor v 1Ds3
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?
Feb 03, 2009 at 03:44 PM