If you'd shoot with a phone in this conditions your photo would either be black or completely blurry. (not to mention the noise)
This doesn't look so bad if you ask me. It's quite sharp so with some anti-noise 'dose' you would be able to get a very decent photo for such a high ISO like 12,800.
looks like a phone image
In case some people are not aware, this was probably shot in mixed light. The main correction is for what is likely to be daylight or tungsten but the shaded areas of the eyes are predominantly lit by fluorescent light, which is generally green, relative to daylight. Correcting it involves adding magenta. This shows in areas that were not dominated by the fluro. The only way to get around this is to either light with one colour temperature on all light sources (use gels), or do localised adjustments in post. This is not a problem with the camera, it has no way of knowing that the light is from mixed sources and no way of doing localised adjustments if it did. Now, that would be a clever camera. I want one.
Amplifier noise galore... just like the D800 at that ISO. People having the 5DmkIII might look into the Nikon forum for a trick on how I got rid of it fairly simple.
What happened to the WB dear reviewers?
I think the purple is sensor noise - the corners seem to have the kind of amp noise that the ancient EOS 1D suffered from (albeit that this is ISO 12800).
It certainly hold up well against the D4 despite better ambient lighting on this Nikon sample
Looks like D800 at ISO 3200. Canon is winning the high ISO game.
Noise is hedious, far worse than Nikon D4, even worse than recently reviewed Fujifilm X-Pro1. Canon is losing the high ISO game.
You can tell the image is stressed, but wow... that's ISO: 12800... I didn't think that was possible without far worse stress.
hm, yuck or yay?
looks OK to me, the noise looks great.
This looks as clean as my D300 around ISO 1600...
Hand held, no solid tripod needed!