One thing to keep in mind is that he didn\'t account for differences in gain delivered by stated ISO number (for instance the 5D2 and 50D, in particular, give less gain for a given ISO than many of the others, so in reality, would look worse than shown here).
Another thing to keep in mind is that he didn\'t account for MP differences, these are all 100% crop comparisons, so the lower MP cameras here should actually look a bit worse in comparison than they do compared to high MP ones like 5D2/5D3/D800/Medium Format, in particular.
Also unless he used a true RAW examination program the results might be muddled since who knows what ACR does for each camera behind the scenes, it may do different baked in NR for each and set base levels differently, etc.
So it\'s not really quite fair test, but quite interesting all the same.
One clear thing is that Canon DSLR are simply poor at low ISO shadow noise, very poor, worse than basically any type of camera there is other than some (but not all!) point and shoots. The 5D3 did nothing at all to improve this and it\'s the one truly great disappointment about it that keeps it from being a great and fully justifying its price. Even the D4 which has no fancy Exmor patent tech did way better, proving that Canon just doesn\'t care to bother about this while Nikon was willing to spend for new fab.
ISO6400+ the 5D3 shadow quality should be better than D800 though, but then again most shots probably are taken ISO3200 and under, but for scenes with tons of near black areas at super high ISO the 5D3 definitely should be better than the D800.
It does fit expectations, such as that (going by 100% view with nothing normalized for MP count of ISO gain) the 40D/1D3 era of Canon was much more pushable than the 5D2/50D era.
That exmor sensor push great at low ISO.
The D4 looks better than expected, especially at low ISO. This also shows that Canon COULD do MUCH better for low ISO shadows even without Exmor patents since the D4 doesn\'t use any Exmor patented tech. It is just a regular sensor design. it may well be as a couple semi-insiders hinted at that Canon cheaped out with the 5D3 sensor and saved the good tech all for the 1DX. I mean even if you normalized for 22MP vs 16MP that D4 would still have heck of better low ISO shadows than the 5D3). And once again it says nobody is asking for magic or fairly land, just look at how all those Nikons, even ones without Exmor, do at low ISO. This is reality.
The 5D3 finally pulls ahead of D800 shadow quality at ISO6400 (it looks like it at ISO3200 but I think after MP and ISO gian normalization it probably won\'t happen until ISO6400, although it is hard to be 100% sure, maybe ISO4000 or 5000?).
The 5D3 is a bit of an outdated let down at low ISO, at 100% view it\'s not even quite to the 60D level even and the NON-Exmor D4 just blow it to pieces, so forget crying about not having patent access.... They didn\'t seem to want to invest in the fab that Nikon did even though Canon want to charge more (or the same if you count 6fps).
You can see the unique form of vertical banding the 7D has (it varies a fair amount copy to copy though some will have a lot of it and some much less).
You can see they did fix up the shadow noise quality ISO1600 and up compared to the 5D2 quite a bit (even more than apparent since the 5D3 appears to give more gain for a given ISO label at higher ISOs).
The below ISO800 shadow quality from Canon DSLRs really is second rate though. Nikon, even ones not even using fancy Exmor patents, are just radically better. Even Canon P&S are better shadow noise at ISO100!
The one huge let down with the 5D3 is the low ISO performance, they just didn\'t do much and the D4 proves that you CAN do more even without fancy patents if you care to bother.
One thing to keep in mind is that he didn\'t account for differences in gain delivered by stated ISO number (for instance the 5D2 and 50D, in particular, give less gain for a given ISO than many of the others, so in reality, would look worse than shown here).
Another thing to keep in mind is that he didn\'t account for MP differences, these are all 100% crop comparisons, so the lower MP cameras here should actually look a bit worse in comparison than they do compared to high MP ones like 5D2/5D3/D800/Medium Format, in particular.
So it\'s not really quite fair test, but quite interesting all the same.
One clear thing is that Canon DSLR are simply poor at low ISO shadow noise, very poor, worse than basically any type of camera there is other than some (but not all!) point and shoots. The 5D3 did nothing at all to improve this and it\'s the one truly great disappointment about it that keeps it from being a great and fully justifying its price. Even the D4 which has no fancy Exmor patent tech did way better, proving that Canon just doesn\'t care to bother about this while Nikon was willing to spend for new fab.
ISO6400+ the 5D3 shadow quality should be better than D800 though, but then again most shots probably are taken ISO3200 and under, but for scenes with tons of near black areas at super high ISO the 5D3 definitely should be better than the D800.
It does fit expectations, such as that (going by 100% view with nothing normalized for MP count of ISO gain) the 40D/1D3 era of Canon was much more pushable than the 5D2/50D era.
That exmor sensor push great at low ISO.
The D4 looks better than expected, especially at low ISO. This also shows that Canon COULD do MUCH better for low ISO shadows even without Exmor patents since the D4 doesn\'t use any Exmor patented tech. It is just a regular sensor design. it may well be as a couple semi-insiders hinted at that Canon cheaped out with the 5D3 sensor and saved the good tech all for the 1DX. I mean even if you normalized for 22MP vs 16MP that D4 would still have heck of better low ISO shadows than the 5D3). And once again it says nobody is asking for magic or fairly land, just look at how all those Nikons, even ones without Exmor, do at low ISO. This is reality.
The 5D3 finally pulls ahead of D800 shadow quality at ISO6400 (it looks like it at ISO3200 but I think after MP and ISO gian normalization it probably won\'t happen until ISO6400, although it is hard to be 100% sure, maybe ISO4000 or 5000?).
The 5D3 is a bit of an outdated let down at low ISO, at 100% view it\'s not even quite to the 60D level even and the NON-Exmor D4 just blow it to pieces, so forget crying about not having patent access.... They didn\'t seem to want to invest in the fab that Nikon did even though Canon want to charge more (or the same if you count 6fps).
You can see the unique form of vertical banding the 7D has (it varies a fair amount copy to copy though some will have a lot of it and some much less).
You can see they did fix up the shadow noise quality ISO1600 and up compared to the 5D2 quite a bit (even more than apparent since the 5D3 appears to give more gain for a given ISO label at higher ISOs).
The below ISO800 shadow quality from Canon DSLRs really is second rate though. Nikon, even ones not even using fancy Exmor patents, are just radically better. Even Canon P&S are better shadow noise at ISO100!
The one huge let down with the 5D3 is the low ISO performance, they just didn\'t do much and the D4 proves that you CAN do more even without fancy patents if you care to bother.
Apr 15, 2012 at 03:18 PM
Previous versions of skibum5's message #10545614 « visualized read noise for TONS of different cameras »
I mean even if you normalized for 22MP vs 16MP that D4 would still have heck of better low ISO shadows than the 5D3). And once again it says nobody is asking for magic or fairly land, just look at how all those Nikons, even ones without Exmor, do at low ISO. This is reality.