Reading mode: Light Dark

D4 x 5D3 ISO series in ACR, IR raws (large file)

Go to last post
jeminijoseph said:
From your samples, D4 is better per pixel. Right? I'm not sure the difference 1 stop, but there's a difference.....
Click to expand...
He had downsized the 5DmkIII image to 16MP, so you can't obviously tell which is better per pixel. Equally obvious is that if D4 is better even when the compared image is downsized, that it is, indeed, better per pixel than 5DmkIII.

But note how there is more detail in the drawing of the fiddler in the 5DmkIII crop, even up till ISO 6400.

--
regards
Janne Mankila, Finland
 
It's obvious the D4 has a good one stop advantage...maybe a tad more. I wonder how the D800 will compare. I view that as the 5D3 killer, not the D4.
 
Since the 5D3 files are shot at 2/3Ev more exposure, it's a LOT more "equal" to compare the 5D3 at 12800 with the D4 at 6400. This gives the 5D3 a third of a step in "handicap", half the handicap you give the D4 by comparing the same "in camera indicated ISO".

Comparing them at "equal in-camera ISO setting" gives the D4 a 2/3 Ev handicap. Almost a full ISO step in exposure.

(repeat post from Canon forum)
 
Iliah Borg said:
Dear Renato, to be sure this test makes sense one needs to check the raw levels on grey wedges and compare those after normalizing to saturation point.

Otherwise it is possible that shots with different effective exposure are compared. The difference may amount to 1 stop.
Click to expand...
I checked the values after conversion, midtone gray patch (averages)

Iso 5D3 D4
1600 125 113
3200 125 114
6400 130 113
12800 128 120
25600 145 120

A little more exposure for 5D3, but not that much more. If ACR is tricking it from much different RAW levels, I can't say. My guess is lighting was about 1/3 EV less for 5D3, they overcompensated, from the settings (or didn't check camera's exposure), and got more exposure for 5D3.

Do you think that invalidates the comparison? (I need to get that RAW digger ...).

These sites are really lax with their protocols.

--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
actually if you set the aperture and shutter of two cameras to the same,
you still cannot get the same exposure because there are errors
from both the lenses and bodies, besides the lighting of your lab.

so let's wait for DxO ISO measurements.
 
To really grasp the difference, one needs to check RAW levels, saturation points, etc, and make corrections (as Iliah says below). I didn't do that. The difference in values after conversions is under 1/3 (more exposure for 5D3), so my estimateis a little over 1 stop overall, increasing as ISO goes up.
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
J Mankila said:
But note how there is more detail in the drawing of the fiddler in the 5DmkIII crop, even up till ISO 6400.
Click to expand...
Beware of using these for detail analysis: focus, lens, f/number, exposure, etc. But, yes, I'd probably guess the more pixels, in general the better detail, at same printing sizes. I learned that from both D3X and D7000.

Now, bring on the D800!
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
brightcolours said:
DocS said:
...I’d say the 5DMk3 is looking pretty good.

The one thing I find somewhat unsettling about the camera is some of the features its missing when compared to the D800.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
brightcolours said:
Which features is the 5D mk III missing compared to the D800, besides the higher resolution?
Click to expand...
That will be enough ;).

--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
The big ones are the less sensitive AF, the worse metering and the effect that has on AF tracking, the lack of HDMI clean out and the pop-up flash.
brightcolours said:
Which features is the 5D mk III missing compared to the D800, besides the higher resolution? Pop up flash, yes... what else?
Click to expand...
 
Very interesting comparison. The D4 looks superb. Seems as though Canon is finally getting a handle on high ISO - I am surprised as to how close the cameras are - I expected a bigger difference. Canon does not seem to put much emphasis on chroma noise reduction - much like the good old days of the D100 and D1 series :)
--
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca
 
rhlpetrus said:
Iliah Borg said:
Dear Renato, to be sure this test makes sense one needs to check the raw levels on grey wedges and compare those after normalizing to saturation point.

Otherwise it is possible that shots with different effective exposure are compared. The difference may amount to 1 stop.
Click to expand...
I checked the values after conversion, midtone gray patch (averages)

Iso 5D3 D4
1600 125 113
3200 125 114
6400 130 113
12800 128 120
25600 145 120

A little more exposure for 5D3, but not that much more. If ACR is tricking it from much different RAW levels, I can't say. My guess is lighting was about 1/3 EV less for 5D3, they overcompensated, from the settings (or didn't check camera's exposure), and got more exposure for 5D3.

Do you think that invalidates the comparison? (I need to get that RAW digger ...).

These sites are really lax with their protocols.
Click to expand...
I would say, yes, you really need to get RawDigger.

We need to know the black point and the white point to normalize the range.

then we can compare gray patches and construct a curve for each camera - raw value versus noise and compare

I thought I had done this test, but apparently I used the wrong raw file.

This assumes that ISO for each camera is the same. That is not entirely clear at this point given the settings from imaging resource differ for each camera. I find it hard to imagine that the D5 MK3 was receiving 2/3 step less light in a test run in the same month.
 
brightcolours said:
DocS said:
...I’d say the 5DMk3 is looking pretty good.

The one thing I find somewhat unsettling about the camera is some of the features its missing when compared to the D800.
Click to expand...
Which features is the 5D mk III missing compared to the D800, besides the higher resolution? Pop up flash, yes... what else?
Click to expand...
Nikon: 200k cycle shutter, USB3, uncompressed HDMI out, shutter blind, and of course 14M more pixels and $500 less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
D5 x Z7 - Jim Kasson's high ISO RAWs with PL5
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
8K
JimKasson
JimKasson
R
Try to guess: D5 x D850 ISOs 3,200 and 6,400
2
Replies
24
Views
25
rhlpetrus
R
R
Imaging Resource NEFs with CNX-D
Replies
10
Views
11
rhlpetrus
R
R
Working with a D850 file: CNX-D -> CNX2
Replies
3
Views
4
rhlpetrus
R
R
D500: ACR vs CNX-D, some comments
Replies
4
Views
5
Nicholas128
N

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top