5d mark iii

All posts tagged 5d mark iii

News: Canon announces 50.6 megapixel 5DS and 5DS R DSLRs

Posted by Snob on February 9, 2015
Posted in: Camera, canon 5D mark III, Canon 7D Mark II, News, Reviews. Tagged: , , , , , . Leave a comment

Canon_5DsR_PressKit

Canon_5Ds_PressKitI must admit I have been asleep the last few days. I almost missed Canon’s announcement a few days ago. The announcement is for two high resolution variants of the 5D series DSLR cameras. Both the 5DS and 5DS R will have a resolution of 50.6 megapixels.

Also most notable for me is the much needed dual DIGIC6 processors. Before shooting my 5D Mark III, I shot my 7D and a few months ago I added the 7D Mark II to my kit. The 7D series makes it  painfully obvious the 5D Mark III is underpowered with it’s single DIGIC5 processor. In my opinion all pro bodies should be equipped with at least two processors.

Once I started using the 7D Mark II, it quickly became my main go-to camera. I started considering selling my 5D Mark III and just trading up to a medium format. I figured if my 5D Mark III was mostly good for still life and studio work and was beat out by the 7D Mark II in almost every other scenario then I might as well get a proper studio system. Up until now, I have been taking a long hard look at the 50 megapixel Pentax 645Z. The only reason I haven’t bought one yet is the idea of committing to and maintaining yet another lens system.

However while I have my doubts about cramming that many pixels into the full frame sensor, if the image comparisons between the 645z and the 5DS/5DSR turn out close, I will most likely replace my 5D Mark III with a 5DSR. It also remains to be seen if there is Canon glass sharp enough to take full advantage of the sensor.

With that said this resolution is really not groundbreaking. If you look at the approximate numbers for pixel densities below, you will see that these are essentially a 19 megapixel APS-C sensor scaled up to full frame dimensions. So I expect image quality on par with the 7D Mark II – which is perfectly fine with me.

5Ds /R Sensor: 50,600,000P/864mmsq = 58,564.8 Pixels per square mm
7D II Sensor: 20,200,000P/333.27mmsq = 60,611.5 Pixels per square mm
7D Sensor: 18,000,000P/333.27mmsq = 54,010.3 Pixels per square mm
5DIII Sensor: 23,400,000P/864mmsq = 27,083.3 Pixels per square mm

Noise wise, I’m not really going to bother getting into it because I have never needed my 5D Mark III or 7D Mark II to shoot above ISO-6400, and for any professional assignments and print work I never shoot above ISO-1600 period. So “high ISO capability” is a marketing gimmick I simply do not care about.

This is an interesting development. Canon is clearly intent on keeping some folks from jumping over to ever more affordable medium format alternatives and perhaps also eroding the medium format market share.

For a more in detailed insight into both camera systems please visit Bryan Carnathan’s review.

Canon 7D Mark II – First Impressions

Posted by Snob on November 3, 2014
Posted in: Canon 7D Mark II, Reviews. Tagged: , , , , . 2 Comments

This past weekend I took delivery of the Canon 7D Mark II. I usually research any piece of gear thoroughly before purchasing. In this case I was very confident the Canon 7D Mark II met my needs because after shooting the original 7D for a while it still meets most of my needs even after 5 years.

The 7D is one of those cameras that will either make you a better photographer or break you. It is in some ways an unforgiving platform with very little room for error. After shooting the 5D Mark III for a few years I have to say there are some things you just cannot do with a full frame system, without spending a ton of money. As time progressed I found myself wishing for an updated, zero compromise APS-C pro body. After using both, it is pretty evident that the 7D series is in fact a flagship APS-C camera, the 5D Mark III is not, that would be the 1Dx. There are a lot of important things the 5D Mark III cannot do as well the 7D. One of my biggest gripes is the 1Dx AF system that has to share a single DIGIC5 processor with all other camera functions. It results in a slower system that is very often hit or miss under the slightest dynamic scenario.

The 7D Mark II comes properly equipped in all relevant aspects. Here are my thoughts:

Resolution
The 20MP is good enough, but considering Canon probably sacrificed a little resolution for better image quality, higher dynamic range and lower noise, I am happy with the results. It is important to note that, what attracts me most about the APS-C platform is pixel densities. Consider the following approximate numbers below:

7D Mark II Sensor: 20,200,000P/333.27mmsq = 60611.5 Pixels per square mm
7D Sensor: 18,000,000P/333.27mmsq = 54010.3 Pixels per square mm
5DIII Sensor: 23,400,000P/864mmsq = 27083.33 Pixels per square mm

The 7D Mark II will capture more than twice the detail of the 5D Mark III for any given focal length, provided your lens optics can keep up. Which brings me to my next point – most lenses cannot resolve 12 or 14 megapixels unless you spend on some of the exotic high end options, megapixels are simply wasted and image quality is further compromised. I am looking forward to maximizing my EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens and squeezing every bit of detail out of my telescope and astrophotography exploits.

Canon7DMarkII_8

ISO-16000 handheld HDR test

High ISO Noise
Let me preface by saying I find it completely ridiculous that anyone would buy a camera based on a feature that lets them jack-up ISO to absurd levels. Sure if you pump enough voltage through any image sensor I’m sure you can get an ISO-1000000 reading but it is completely useless! I read a lot of claims out there that are simply not true or realistic. All cameras generate noise period. Anything higher than ISO-1600 is not usable in my opinion, unless you’re just taking candid shots at a party. You just don’t have much of any dynamic range left at high ISO. With the 7D I am comfortable shooting up to ISO-400, ISO-800 in a pinch. With the 5D Mark III I just don’t go higher than ISO-1600 and usually stay lower than ISO-800 because there is just too much noise. I am happy to say the 7D Mark II sensor definitely meets and exceeds those expectations. With that said, take a look at this photo (right) taken at ISO-16,000 (sixteen thousand), while noisy, quite a bit of detail is retained and the noise is more pleasant/softer than the 7D or even the 5D Mark III at similar ISO.

Speed
The 7D Mark II is blazing fast. A real flagship body with no compromise. I thought my 7D was fast but 10fps is definitely in a class of it’s own. Handheld brackets are that much more accurate. You can capture action/motion almost as fast as your brain can signal your trigger finger. Not to mention the 1000+ shot burst mode. Make sure you have a fast CF card on hand. Don’t bother with SD cards.

Auto Focus (AF)
AF on the 7D Mark II is simply second to none. You will be hard pressed to have AF issues with this camera. The 7D’s AF was already one of the best out there but this takes it to a whole new level following in the 7D tradition with all cross-type points and dual DIGIC6 processors. The 7D Mark II update remains overpowered. I expect Canon to unlock more exciting features in future firmware updates. Also impressive is the hybrid phase detect AF in live view or video mode. It is very fast and very accurate – almost as fast as the standard AF. When autofocusing in live view you get this eery ghost-like feel as if the camera is alive as it very intuitively switches focus between your intended subjects. I suspect once folks realize what the 7D Mark II can do, it will take off for video production just like the original 7D.

Ergonomics
It feels and handles just like the original 7D. Sometimes I still think I’m shooting my 7D but someone updated the menu and added a bunch of features I used to always wish for. There is no learning curve involved. My transition to the Mark II was instant. This is truly a photographer’s camera.

HDR
One of the features I use a lot in the 5D Mark III is the in-camera HDR. I like how I can proof the final HDR image, adjust and retake the bracket shots as need. This is one of those features you never knew how much you needed it until you use it. Unfortunately the single DIGIC5 processor of the 5D Mark III is painfully slow when composing HDR and I have often missed key shots (especially at sunset). The 7D Mark II’s two DIGIC6 processors and 10fps shutter make minced meat of any HDR shot. It can snag 3 shots in less than a second an just a few seconds later you’re looking at the final HDR composition. This opens up so many possibilities.

Sample Images
Below are some quick test images. I used the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens. Again I recommend no less than this lens for your 7D Mark II. Images are tack sharp. Lens profiles come preloaded. I shot mostly in low light and high ISO (1600 and higher) to show how clean the images are and how much dynamic range still remains. The clean, low ISO shots will come as I begin taking the 7D Mark II out shooting. I shot in AV mode, wide open at f/2.8 so you may notice a shallow depth of field. All images are straight from the camera and downsized 30%. Please let me know in comments below of you’d like to see the full size images.

The 7D Mark II packs so much camera for your buck it really begs the question, why bother spending more for a 5D Mark III which honestly overall does little better and in some cases cannot keep up with the 7D Mark II. I will be grabbing this more versatile APS-C flagship camera more often than the 5D Mark III now.

For a more in depth review of this Camera I highly recommend reading Bryan Carnathan’s Canon EOS 7D Mark II Review.

Reader Comments – Canon 5D Mark III vs 7D

Posted by Snob on May 15, 2014
Posted in: Camera, canon 5D mark III, Reader Comments, Reviews. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , . 4 Comments

I recently got a question from a reader regarding my post titled Canon 5D Mark III vs 7D. Rather than let these conversations get buried in the comments section I will do my best to reply as a new post.

That post has been the subject of much debate, many questions and discussions. However I would like to keep this post focused on this question I received, because I think it is representative of the question on a lot of people’s minds when they approach the subject with me.

FROM ZAMANI:

Hi Bryan, great post. I own a 5D2 and have been using that for my wedding and portraiture but was considering getting the 7d or the 5d3 for action work. I have to admit I was biased towards the 5D3 based on everything I read so I rented the 7D to try it myself with a 200mm 2.8 prime and it was terribly sharp and accurate with the football game I shot. I do prefer the shallower and slightly more pleasing depth of field I get from full frame cameras though.

Im wondering what your feelings are on the Nikon D800 and the D600 and their 36 and 24 megapixel offerings as well as the crop factor that those cameras offer in DX mode. I am a Canon shooter but have considered purchasing a Nikon D800 for those features.

Thanks Zamani [and all who’ve asked similar questions].

The sort version of this post is, for any kind of action, I would pick the 7D over the 5D3 any day, all day. Believe it or not 6fps on the 5D3 is a deal breaker. Compared to the 8fps on the 7D, that extra 2fps translates into more than twice the usable shots and a 100+% success rate over the 5D3. In practice, the AF on the 7D is faster and much better suited for action. The 7D’s Dual processor architecture with one processor dedicated to AF guarantees your shot every time. The 5D Mark III is hit-or-miss as soon as your subject as much as starts dancing around – there go half your shots. Your 5D3 shots may be at lower ISO, they may have less noise than the 7D shots, they may have higher dynamic range, but what good are they if they are out of focus or simply missed that split second magical moment you wanted to capture? The only camera system that does it better than the 7D is the 1Dx. So unless you have $7000 to drop on a 1Dx, your best bet is the 7D which is amazingly still a bargain till this day. Buy a refurbished or used one for under $1000. They are built like a tank and are virtually indestructible. Here’s a fun video by DigitalRev that illustrates this:

Now as for the D800 it appears Nikon essentially took an APS-C sensor and scaled it up to the size of a full frame sensor. Let’s take a look at the approximate numbers for pixel density below:
  • Canon 5D Mark III Sensor: 23,400,000P/864mmsq = 27083.33 Pixels / mm squared
  • Canon 7D Sensor: 19,000,000P/333.27mmsq = 57010.8 Pixels / mm squared
  • Nikon D800: 36,000,000/864mmsq = 41666.7 Pixels / mm squared (approximations)
  • Nikon D600: 24,000,000/864mmsq = 27777.7 Pixels / mm squared (approximations)

So the D800 sensor has a pixel density somewhere between the 5D3 and the 7D. The D600 has a pixel density almost identical to the 5D3. I would expect the D600 will yield an image with quality more comparable to the 5D3 and the D800 will yield slightly better than that from a 7D assuming they all used the same optics. However I have always said, in practice the sensor almost doesn’t matter anymore these days because the technology is just that good regardless of the manufacturer. The D800 will suffer a bit from some of the challenges 7D owners faced when it was released – the higher pixel densities will easily reveal more of the optical flaws in every lens from chromatic aberration to distortion to focus inconsistencies. I recall a lot of 7D owners complaining about having to adjust their focus when in fact this probably had to do with the flaws in the optics of their lenses.

If you are planning on acquiring a camera system like the D800 or 7D, then I suggest you plan on acquiring the best possible lenses that money can buy – Canon L Mark-II revision lenses or the Nikon equivalents if you go with a D800. The 5D3 or D600 will be more forgiving and yield crisp images with less than premium lenses.
Now I must say I have never used the D800 and perhaps I should get one and try it out. However the only reason I would not go for a camera system like the D800 has to do not with image quality or whatever else the pixel-peepers whine about. It has to do with other features I actually consider more important to everyday shooting. The Nikon interface has always seemed too cumbersome compared to Canon’s 1-click layout. 4fps is just not good enough. It seems Nikon made this compromise in exchange for higher megapixels. 4fps is digital rebel speed which while good enough for most is painfully slow for anyone half serious about photography. Unless your D800 is pretty much only for shooting landscapes and other stills, this will be a big issue over time. I can barely tolerate the 6fps of my 5D3, but then again I may have been spoiled by the 7D.
I’m sure the D800 is a great camera no doubt. The fact is few need 36MP images and when I need 36MP or more, I simply pan my scene and extract more specific detail and clarity than can be achieved in one shot. I do this all the time with my 5D3 and 7D. I really don’t think there is a burning need for high MP bodies as much as the need for sharper higher resolution optics. The D800 might be a more economical proposition for someone trying to break into the Medium Format (Hasselblad) commercial domain, but not much importance in the traditional SLR domain. The D800 feels like the DSLR that wanted to be a Hasselblad and in so doing, forgot how to be a DSLR. I like that Canon consistently takes notice of these important details. They revised their top lens optics soon after the 7D hit the market as well as dramatically improved the usability and features in their cameras. Each new Canon body I’ve bought has made my life as photographer much easier and much more successful to that end. There are many reasons the 5D3 still gets top ratings and it’s has little to do with Megapixels.
So I get it. Canon is the 800 pound gorilla and Nikon felt they need to set themselves apart with the D800 but I feel in doing so they missed some very important details that matter to those who actually use these pro cameras as tools and not trophies. I just don’t think it was a good gamble.
The biggest reason I chose to invest in Canon is for the L-lenses. I buy one, it’s built to serve me the rest of my life. I’ll probably own 10-20 bodies over that period so I don’t base my choices on what bodies are currently on the market.
I hope this answered your question.
Cheers.

Paris Day 1 – Pont Neuf [New Bridge]

Posted by Snob on July 11, 2013
Posted in: Architecture, Cityscapes, Landscape, Paris. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , . 1 Comment

Continuing from: https://bryanallo.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/paris-day-1-eglise-de-la-madeleine/

After my visit at Eglise De La Madeleine, I walked down towards Place de la Concorde [Concorde Square??]. It was undergoing a major renovation and presented little photo opportunity so I ambled through Jardin des Tuileries till I arrived at the Louvre. This was the highlight of my day. I have seen so much about this landmark in various media so it was really nice to finally see it in person.

At this point of my visit, I realized Paris was a really big tourist destination. Everywhere I went there were throngs of tourists. I had packed a 10 stop filter which my good friend Steve was kind enough to let me borrow before I left. I hoped that the 10 stop filter would enable me to take very long bulb exposures that would ultimately erase the crowds of tourists from my shot. I did not even come close. There were that many tourists and that much traffic everywhere I went. 5 minute exposures looked like your typical 15 second exposure. This was even more evident when I shot the Eiffel Tower at sunset several days later.

I realized the only way I could shoot Paris would be to shoot at night only. So I just scouted for a few hours during the day and then started to take my shots after sunset and often went on through the night into the early morning.

Blew through the Louvre and ended up at Pont Neuf on the river. Not sure what it is about it, but I just love this bridge. When I returned later that night I was pleased to find calm waters on the river. This meant I could get some really cool light reflections using extended exposures. I proceeded to retrace my steps from earlier in the day upon arriving at Pont Neuf. Below is a wide shot of the bridge followed by a panoramic shot. This was close to midnight with sparse activity around downtown and much fewer people. It was relaxing and refreshing to be able to just take it all it uninterrupted.

Pont_Neuf_web

Pont_Neuf_Pan_web