Using my 5D3

[anthony_bridges]

<p>I've had it for a week now and it's been fun to use. Usable photos at ISO 12,800, a cloud of autofocus points to choose (I prefer single point mode), Live View and faster frame rate like my 7D. (I've been using the 5D for several years now). What I don't like is the preview method. Why change it? I keep hitting the top right button on the back thinking I can enlarge my image. Also the Info button is near the viewfinder with a rate button in it's place. Huh? Rate button is useless for what I do. I do that in post after reviewing all the images. Anyways, cool camera. </p><div></div>

[dcstep]

<p>I'm looking forward to buying my own, later this year.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>Has a clunky shutter sound...much different than 5Dii. Image quality is the same - perhaps ever so slightly better. This new body should be called the 5D2.1...</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Robert, who gives a crap about the shutter sound?</p>

<p>IQ at higher ISOs is much improved in the examples that I've seen and the fps and AF are leagus ahead of the MkII. If you only shoot scenics and portraits at ISO 100, then stick with the MkII, but if you want a better all round camera to shoot concerts, sports, wildlife, where high-ISO performance and excellent AF are critical, then the MkIII is the way to go, assuming you can afford it.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>What impresses me so much about the mk III is the detail that is retained at high ISO's. Sure, the noise control is supurb, but as you crank up the ISO noise does become present. What amazes me is the sharpness and detail retention in spite of the noise.</p>

[RobertChura]

<p>It's a great camera. I went from the 5D Classic to the 5DIII so I can't compare the 5D2.<br>

The shutter can be set to quiet mode and is very quiet.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>Still noisy in the shadows if you try and lift them...especially at high ISOs - this ain't no Sony sensor...it is a slightly re-vamped 5D Mark ii sensor. By the way, the 5Dii as a refurb or from the Canon Loyalty program is (perhaps) the best deal in town right now.</p>

<p>Once I start shooting on a daily basis in Thailand/Nepal I can give better evaluation of AF performance vs. 5dii. (I shoot many raptors in flight - as well as smaller birds such as bee-eaters.) See my portfolio here for examples...</p>

<p>Meanwhile, the shutter of the new 5Diii is indeed much louder...I'd switch to silent mode (a great idea AND implementation for wedding photographers and folks in churches/museums) - but using it slows down shutter speed. For now I guess I'll just have to bear with the new "clunker" on the block.</p>

[davebell]

<p>Mr PhD I can guarantee you that the focus on the 5D Mk iii is light years ahead of the Mk ii. I've had my Mk iii for over 2 months and I can attest that it is like night versus day. I disagree on the shutter sound - the Mk iii is just a little different, more pleasing than that of the Mk ii and certainly not any louder. Quieter if you ask me...</p>

<p>High ISOs shadows are not handled as well as on a Nikon, so ensure you expose properly and do not pull up the exposure in post. It is one fine camera!</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Robert,</p>

<p>It depends on how you hang on the every printed word or if you use the tools to their best effect. Sony sensors are better with underexposed images, Canon ones work much better if you expose to the right, no difficulty in that that I can see. I have found Canon RAW files to be very forgiving for overexposure, and software is dramatically improving sensor capabilities. Lightroom 4 has added at least one stop of exposure detail over Lightroom 3, but it is probably closer to two.</p>

<p>If you find the performance and shutter noise too bad then there are many Sony sensored cameras out there for you to choose from. The 5D MkIII is nothing like the noise of the EOS 3, now that was a noisy camera.</p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>Still noisy in the shadows if you try and lift them...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Only <em>if you don't know how</em>, Robert.</p>

<p>Here you go - these are from my <em>7D</em>, which I can tell you isn't as good as the 5D Mk III as far as shadow recovery goes:</p>

<p>http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/shadows.jpg<br /> http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/shadows_recovered.jpg<br /><a href="http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/IMG_2195_minus_3_ev.jpg">http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/IMG_2195_minus_3_ev.jpg</a><br /><a href="http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/2195_recovery.jpg">http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/2195_recovery.jpg</a></p>

<p>Nothing wrong with <em>them</em>.</p>

<p>But then, I've always been one for finding solutions, rather than simply believing what I read on the internet - an attitude which occasionally allows me to do things the "experts" say can't be done...</p>

<p>I don't own a 5D Mk III, but I've worked on quite a few Raws from the camera, and I've had no problem recovering nearly 5 stops from the shadows - that competes pretty damn' well with the Nikon D800.</p>

<p>Like I say - <em>easy if you know how.</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

Besides, as Scott suggests, Canon files are better towards the top end of the histogram - that's far more important to me too - so, to be blunt, you can keep the much-vaunted <em>low </em>ISO shadow DR advantage of Sony sensors - if I want shadow detail, I'll expose accordingly, confident that I can recover as much detail as I need from the highlights. </p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Even though Shutter noise is <em>extremely important</em> to any pro (like me) who has to shoot in very quiet -> nearly silent venues routinely (distracting the subject because of your shutter doesn't make for very good images), if, as Robert says, there is a quiet shutter CFn on the mk3(my 5D2 doesn't have that!), then that is an argument for the 5D3.<br>

I've only handled a mk3 a couple of times, and didn't find any of it's features compelling enough to drop $3.5k on it (over the 5D2). Sorry guys, it's a nice piece of hardware, no doubt, but it isn't 'light years' ahead of the mk2 in <em>any</em> regards except FPS.<br>

Noise- pretty much the same. maybe a 1/2 stop improvements if you shoot RAWS (which I do entirely). Far more important is exposing properly (as pointed out above).<br>

AF? -depends on what you shoot of course, but since I use center point AF only anyway, I never found the 5D2 to be particularly lacking - Net speed? about the same (assuming you know what you are doing). Using one shot AF - center point - I couldn't <em>detect</em> a difference. Of course I don't shoot @ the Olympics, or BIF, so maybe I'm missing something ;-)</p>

<p>In a nutshell, like I said, it's a great camera, but it does represent a significant lack of<em> improvement</em> which I really was looking forward too... maybe they are saving the 'good' sensor for the 5Dx ;-) Is it worth the $1500 premium you'll pay over a 5D2? IDKAY, but for me? nope. Since I've already got mk2s, I'll just spend the cash on more glass...</p>

<p>... Either that or I'll pick up a D800E and a nikon prime or two. ;-)</p>

<p> </p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>Marcus, it isn't a custom function for silent operation. It's a drive mode. The modes available are Single Shot, High Speed Continuous, Low Speed Continuous, Silent Single Shot, Silent Continuous, and 10- and 2-second timed. Silent continuous is 3 fps, which is plenty for me. This has become my normal drive mode. It certainly isn't silent, but it is much quieter than the other modes and much quieter than the 5D mk 1.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Even better. Since my mk2 was louder than my mk1, I definitely feel a 'quiet' mode is called for, and, while simple, a notable improvement.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>Well...I now own and use the 5Diii. I purchased it because of the improved AF and FPS compared to the 5dii. Yes those are improvements - important to me.</p>

<p>However, there are some other things about the camera I don't like, or could have been done differently or better by Canon...so rather than re-invent the wheel - or beat a dead horse - here are some quotes from the web that I agree with based upon my use of the new 5Diii:<strong><br /></strong><br>

<strong> </strong>1."I went in to look at the 5D3 some weeks ago and although the silent mode is very nice and quite it would be too quiet for when I shoot like this. I also noticed that the 5D3 sounds cheap in normal mode, to me it sounds like an old manual typewriter key, very metallic. I like the solid sound of the EOS1 series best as they are not too loud. "<br /><br /> 2."Snapping a few images I noticed that the shutter on the 5D3 sounds clankier and sounds like more moving parts, the 1DS3 shutter sounds more authoritative, smoother but solid, nice. BUT, the Silent mode on the 5D3 is AMAZING, super quiet and smooth, much quieter than the Silent mode on the 1DS3, WOW. It is a huge difference. Some of you might not care BUT I shoot a lot in film and commercial production sets, so its a big plus."<br /><br /> 3."Just because the DR sucks for this day and age, and producing their main landscape camera with actually slightly worse ISO100 performance than they had 3 years ago and even worse still than they had 4 years ago is ridiculous, has nothing to do with AF potentially being much better or the rest of the camera being much more pleasant and joyful to use."<br /><br /> "But the fanboys think that if you knock one aspect of something and find out that a camera is not class leading in every single respect then it must be being proclaimed a general 100% failure."<br /><br /> "Things are often not all or nothing."<br /><br /> "I can say that it does way better on one AF test or that it seems to be 2/3rds stops better at high ISO or that the UI is even more improved and the general handling is much better and yet not have to make up lies about the how DR is basically no worse than with anything else, when it's much worse than half a dozen recent releases by other companies and actually and only run of the mill even for Canon." </p>

<p>OK don't shoot me I am only the messenger...</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<blockquote>

<p>more authoritative</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The Eric Cartman camera review. Respect my authority!</p>

<p>Evidently this is an important point for some; but not for me.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>I'm not shooting you, but you are saying you agree with the messages, and half of it just isn't fair, well 1 and 2 aren't. If you prefer a 1 series or the sound of a 1Ds MkIII then pay a lot more money and buy one, or pay the same money and get a secondhand one.</p>

<p>With regards number 3, well this <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/19">independent well regarded site</a> didn't find that, that link also shows that the DR doesn't suck, it isn't class leading, but it doesn't suck, you just have to use a modicum of technique and expose to the right, look at how much worse the Nikon D800 is in the highlights. In real shooting both cameras are very close, but to maximise DR you need to expose for the sensors specific characteristics, with the 5D MkIII that is ETTR.</p>

<p>Some will see the value in the MkIII, some will always find fault. I know three pro users who now have them and they are not gear hounds, they are very happy with their new cameras and consider it a big improvement over the MkII. I suppose people who are 1 series users see it as very good value, people who are coming from a 5D MkII and expect twice the camera for so much more money (even though the Japanese actually get less for a 5D MkIII than they did for a 5D MkII) are disappointed. I am a 1 series owner and from what I have seen of the 5D MkIII I think it is an amazing camera that I have zero complaints about. I can't wait to use one with a BG-E11.</p>

[bill_morrow1]

<p>ISO 12,800. Yeah...sure I thought. Well...must say it really does shoot good quality<br>

pics at that ISO. I was impressed enough to sell my 1D. Now if Canon would just off<br>

of this "kit" kick and sell just the body, it would be great. </p>

[anthony_bridges]

<p>Just shot a gig with the 5D3 at a doctor's office. I had my 5D classic as my back-up camera body. Still need to review all the photos. The increased number of AF points was real handy when composing. Easy focus lock on most points except for really dreadful contrast situations. For a business shoot, the back-up drive slot is a good thing to have. Have a wedding scheduled for July and I can see how the second slot can come in handy as a just in case thing. Write speed was "OK" writing raw to both drives. Not an issue for me since I mostly do portraiture in different situations.</p>

[dan_south]

<p>A gentleman stops by the Canon Forum to mention how much he's enjoying his new camera. People are genuinely happy for the guy. Oh, except for those folks who can't control their impulse to make disparaging remarks.</p>

<p>If you listen to the critics, you'd get the idea that the guy's new camera is an overpriced, underspecified relic that the engineers shouldn't have even bothered to design. I don't quite understand the motivation for making such comments - perhaps these nice folks were just trying to be helpful.</p>

<p>Dynamic Range - it seems pretty usable to me. My D700 had better DR than my 5D2. That didn't prevent me from selling the D700 after using the 5D2 exclusively for two years while the D700 collected dust. Not every application requires high DR. I come from a color positive film background. Velvia and Kodachrome didn't have much DR, but somehow folks managed to take acceptable photos with them occasionally. Occasionally as in EVERY issue of National Geographic for decades.</p>

<p>You claim that the 5D3's DR isn't the same as Sony/Nikon? Great! If you want to use those cameras, BUY those cameras. They're good. Really good. Call B&H. Be happy.</p>

<p>The 5D3's AF is astounding. Is it better than some other brand? I don't care one way or another. It's not a contest. It's just a really, really good feature which combined with a number of other really, really good features adds up to a very capable camera with IMHO the finest lens selection available.</p>

<p>Resolution is only a tad better than the 5D2, but I've printed 48" prints from that camera with stunning detail. Individual hairs on the head as sharp as your eyes can perceive them. I assume that my 5D3 prints will be as good or better. Some other cameras have even more resolution. Maybe you can get the same detail at 60 or 70 inches. That remains to be seen, but if you can do it, that's great. Wonderful. Be happy. I don't make a 6-foot wide print very often, but it's nice to know that it's possible.</p>

<p>ISO 12,800 is quite clean on the 5D3 (just a little noisier than 3,200 on its predecessor). I just saw an exhibition of photos of famous rock 'n' roll stars taken on film. The grain in those images looks like a snowstorm. You could push the 5D3 past 25,600 and get cleaner shots than anything in that exhibit, and those shots are hanging in a MUSEUM. Somehow, I think the 5D3's technology is going to make acceptable images no matter how many fanboy complaints pop up on the Internet.</p>

<p>Sony and Nikon cameras are good, solid, productive gear. Someone lent me a NEX 7 recently, and I was very impressed with the image quality at or near base ISO. By all accounts the D800 is fabulous as well. If you covet the "Sony sensor," then buy one. They're not contraband. Maybe afterward you'll find happiness in Nikon Nirvana. Maybe you'll be happy enough to stop slamming other people's equipment choices.</p>

<p>I'll keep my fingers crossed just in case.</p>

 

[matthijs]

To the OP: thanks for the post, I'm glad to hear the camera brings you joy!

 

It's now on my wishlist. (alas my wishlist is longer than my pay)

 

M.

[Robin Smith]

<p>Dynamic range=the most overrated current concept in photography. It used to be resolution was the biggest issue, but that has faded. Now its DR. What will it be in a year's time? How about "base ISO noise"? I suppose we must have something to talk about!</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>"<em>Even though Shutter noise is extremely important to any pro (like me) who has to shoot in very quiet -> nearly silent venues routinely</em> "<br>

<em>Snapping a few images I noticed that the shutter on the 5D3 sounds clankier and sounds like more moving parts, the</em></p>

<p>I'm asking myself why is this a custom function ?<br>

OMG it could not be any clankier...</p>