Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Image Quality, Canon 1Dx vs 5D MKIII???  (Read 16572 times)
DAV33
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« on: March 13, 2012, 02:56:31 PM »
ReplyReply

There has been a lot of talk on the net that the new Canon 5D MKIII might be a “better”  [IQ] choice for landscape photography than the as yet to be released 1Dx, because of the former’s 23.2% MP “advantage” [23.2 vs. 18.1]. The sensor size is the same in both at 24x36mm and the pixels in each are immediately adjacent to each other. Since the pixel size of the 1Dx is 11.2% larger than the 5DIII [6.95 vs. 6.25u], its pixel density per mm is correspondingly lower at approximately 144 vs.160. So the prevailing view appears to be correct. But while larger size pixels are reputed to generally produce lower noise levels than small ones, the size advantage gain diminishes beyond 6 microns or so. Thus the question is, are the chip designs the same in both; and if not, does the larger pixel size of the 1Dx afford space for added/improved electronics to result in enough added noise reduction to outweigh the resolution difference? It will be interesting to see.
Logged
Peter Le
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2012, 09:42:32 PM »
ReplyReply

       Nether of them appear better then the 5DII for landscape.......good high ISO's......but no better at ISO 100 (where us landscapers live)then the 5DII...... from what the test images out on the net suggest. Very disappointing to say the least......If you are not to invested in Canon glass you may think about the Nikon D800....with it's Sony sensor ISO 100 is much cleaner and probably 2 stops better DR. If not I would just get a 5DII or a used 1DsIII probably all just as good or better then the new Canons........very very sad for us landscapers..........Peter
Logged
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 275


« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2012, 11:23:28 PM »
ReplyReply



The Nikon D800 has nearly 2 stops better dynamic range at 100 iso? Is this correct? Thats amazing.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 10:24:49 AM by billy » Logged
DAV33
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2012, 11:29:37 AM »
ReplyReply

That was an interesting observation.  However, you may find it instructive to visit the following site: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM There in the Comparometer(tm) select the Canon 5DMKIII and the Nikon D3X cameras and the corresponding ISO 100 and 3200 “Still-life” images for direct comparison. Double-click twice on each to enlarge. Then pan each to the right and observe the scale ruler text, the yellow paint brush bristles, then left and observe the background behind the black paint brush. Draw your own conclusions, and note that the D3X is ~2X the cost of the 5DIII.
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1820



WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2012, 01:39:20 PM »
ReplyReply

The better comparison would be the 5D Mark III to the 5D Mark II or 1Ds Mark III, or when they have the samples ready, to the D800.  Or compare the 1Ds MArk III to the D3x.

A D4 and 1D X comparison would also be more valid

Neither the 1D X or D4  are not designed to be a high resolution still life /landscape cameras. You can use them for that obviously but the 5D Mk III and D800 are better suited to those tasks.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
DAV33
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2012, 10:46:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I am not sure why anyone would discount the Canon 1Dx out of hand from a place as a landscape camera. The sample images here are definitely high quality: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dx/. If we only took “landscape” pictures in the bright mid-day sun, ISO 100 would be all that we would ever need.  But, as a practical matter, many such pictures are taken in low light situations and not always off a tripod for a variety of reasons--thus the need for clean high-ISO cameras. In that regard, both the 5DMKIII and the 1Dx would appear to fill that bill as the difference between 18 and 23MP is negligible in terms of printed images.  While the new Nikon D800 at 36MP may appear to be a  landscape photographers dream, potential buyers may wish to factor in the effects of the attendant noise increase that result from a smaller pixel size. A comparison of the Canon 5DMKIII and the Nikon D800 vs. ISO can be made here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Logged
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 275


« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2012, 05:12:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Still hoping to hear more about this:

The Nikon D800 has nearly 2 stops better dynamic range at 100 iso? Is this correct? Thats amazing.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7655


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2012, 05:25:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Sony Exmoor technology by Nikon...

But how often do you need those two stops?!

Best regards
Erik


The Nikon D800 has nearly 2 stops better dynamic range at 100 iso? Is this correct? Thats amazing.
Logged

kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 772


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 15, 2012, 06:30:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Sony Exmoor technology by Nikon...

But how often do you need those two stops?!

Best regards
Erik


Very often: using a D3x i need usually as many as three stops to deal with the contrast..
So - still some work to be done to catch the level of color negatives

Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Peter Le
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2012, 10:10:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Sony Exmoor technology by Nikon...

But how often do you need those two stops?!

Best regards
Erik


         You are kidding ...right ? Looking at your websites you do shoot some landscapes......how could you not want two more stops at low ISO ? But to answer your question.....I need two more stops when ever I have a camera that doesn't have them...... Grin
Logged
DAV33
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #10 on: March 16, 2012, 04:28:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Still hoping to hear more about this:

The Nikon D800 has nearly 2 stops better dynamic range at 100 iso? Is this correct? Thats amazing.
[/color]

The Nikon D800 does not have increased dynamic range at ISO 100 relative to other cameras. In fact it likely has less due to the smaller pixel size that results from the high [36MP] pixel count. At increasing ISO’s its dynamic range will decrease at an increasing rate. To see why this is true, visit http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/#Dynamic_Range. The D800 achieves the stated “expanded dynamic range” through in-camera HDR [the combination of multiple varying exposures of the same subject]. This is certainly convenient for stationary subjects such as landscapes. But for those wishing more artistic control over the result, blending the RAW files in an external editor would be advantageous. It should be noted however, that while HDR techniques tend to mitigate noise in the subject midrange, it does not help with shadow noise that is not blended with other image data in the process.
Logged
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 275


« Reply #11 on: March 16, 2012, 07:05:49 PM »
ReplyReply

[/color]

The Nikon D800 does not have increased dynamic range at ISO 100 relative to other cameras. In fact it likely has less due to the smaller pixel size that results from the high [36MP] pixel count. At increasing ISO’s its dynamic range will decrease at an increasing rate. To see why this is true, visit http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/#Dynamic_Range. The D800 achieves the stated “expanded dynamic range” through in-camera HDR [the combination of multiple varying exposures of the same subject]. This is certainly convenient for stationary subjects such as landscapes. But for those wishing more artistic control over the result, blending the RAW files in an external editor would be advantageous. It should be noted however, that while HDR techniques tend to mitigate noise in the subject midrange, it does not help with shadow noise that is not blended with other image data in the process.


hey thanks. geeze, I wonder what was Peter referring to then in his post above ? I was ready to sell all my canon glass and switch to nikon. 2 stops more Dynamic Range seems to good to be true.
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #12 on: March 16, 2012, 07:22:15 PM »
ReplyReply

[/color]
The Nikon D800 does not have increased dynamic range at ISO 100 relative to other cameras.

Check this out from forum member BCLAF ... http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm
Logged
CptZar
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106



WWW
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2012, 12:49:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Is this chart done with jpgs per RAW files? If it is RAW files, is the same RAW converter used? Maybe a better comparison is possible, once both cameras are available.
Logged

DAV33
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2012, 06:57:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Is this chart done with jpgs per RAW files? If it is RAW files, is the same RAW converter used? Maybe a better comparison is possible, once both cameras are available.

While I certainly respect the work of DxO Labs and others, “objective” IQ measurements don’t always seem to square well with what you see in images. While I agree that jpgs are not the best for making quality judgments, a good first-glance” comparison of the Canon 5DMKIII and the Nikon D800 vs. ISO can be made at http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM, if their comparometer™ is used on their comparable ISO “Still-life” images.
Logged
jeremypayne
Guest
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2012, 09:01:59 PM »
ReplyReply

The Nikon D800 does not have increased dynamic range at ISO 100 relative to other cameras.

While I certainly respect the work of DxO Labs and others, “objective” IQ measurements don’t always seem to square well with what you see in images.

Are you saying you are "seeing" dynamic range that Bill's methodology for measuring Photographic Dynamic Range isn't picking up?

Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 832


« Reply #16 on: March 17, 2012, 10:00:43 PM »
ReplyReply

[/color]

The Nikon D800 does not have increased dynamic range at ISO 100 relative to other cameras. In fact it likely has less due to the smaller pixel size that results from the high [36MP] pixel count. At increasing ISO’s its dynamic range will decrease at an increasing rate. To see why this is true, visit http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/#Dynamic_Range. The D800 achieves the stated “expanded dynamic range” through in-camera HDR [the combination of multiple varying exposures of the same subject]. This is certainly convenient for stationary subjects such as landscapes. But for those wishing more artistic control over the result, blending the RAW files in an external editor would be advantageous. It should be noted however, that while HDR techniques tend to mitigate noise in the subject midrange, it does not help with shadow noise that is not blended with other image data in the process.

This is fiction.  This camera has been measured up and down, and it compares with similar Exmor type sensors in its ancestry.  That is solid dynamic range from a very clean sensor.  

Neither the D4 nor especially the 5D3 come anywhere close to this.  It's a new record in the 35mm sensor format.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2012, 10:06:13 PM by LKaven » Logged

DAV33
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2012, 09:10:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Neither the D4 nor especially the 5D3 come anywhere close to this.  It's a new record in the 35mm sensor format.


If you really feel that way, perhaps you should look here:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/Canon_5D3_vs_Nikon_D800_noise.shtml
Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 832


« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2012, 09:34:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Neither the D4 nor especially the 5D3 come anywhere close to this.  It's a new record in the 35mm sensor format.If you really feel that way, perhaps you should look here:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III/Canon_5D3_vs_Nikon_D800_noise.shtml

Those are JPGs with settings: extreme NR on the Canon and not extreme on the Nikon.  There's no winner or loser in that game.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2012, 10:22:15 AM by LKaven » Logged

Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 532


« Reply #19 on: April 06, 2012, 12:32:52 AM »
ReplyReply

I have been shooting with D4 for a few days now and like the camera immensely. BUT I would not get one for landscape oriented work, as this is a press photographer's camera. It is fast and responsive and low light results are great. At the same time it is big and heavy and expensive. Why even consider it when there are D800 and D800e at less cost, better picture quality and in a lighter, smaller package? Different tools for different jobs, biggest and baddest is not best for everything. D800 would be the better choice as the only body for an around shooter who is not shooting sports all the time. At the company I work for (magazine publishing house) most Nikon photographers are using D700, not D3, and now moving to D800, not D4. That is because we do less fast paced news stuff and more studio and portraits. Most Canonists have 5DII, moving to 5DIII, for the same reason.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2012, 12:34:23 AM by Petrus » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad