Canon 5D Mark III

[rodi]

ugh. gonna buy one next month. and rent a second one. :\

[The1]

Originally Posted by rodi

ugh. gonna buy one next month. and rent a second one. :\

why "ugh"? You're making it sound like we are twisting your arm to do it

I love the idea of owning one. But I have to competent cameras as it is, so that's my big thing holding me back.

[rodi]

because i was trying to not spend so much on my business this year as i did last year.

i would have loved it tonight shooting outside, the markII was weeping at ISO 5000.

[Chewy734]

Canon 5D Mark III: Video compression test

If I recall correctly, rodi was interested in seeing the differences of the two compression schemes that the 5D3 uses. Same setup as before, with the fiber optic lamp.

[The1]

Interesting, the only time I really saw it was when the wall was hitting the mid level grey at 800-1600 and then after that, the fragments seemed to even out the rest of the way through.

How much of a size difference in files were you seeing?

I think if you're shooting day time, probably not worth the extra file size, but if shooting evening, it may be worth the extra to maintain quality. Besides, if one is shooting cleaner at a high ISO, you're more likely to use that high ISO to get the slower aperture setting you really want.

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by The1

How much of a size difference in files were you seeing?

Using IPB it was ~120 mb per 30 seconds. That was about 35-65% smaller than the equivalent ALL-I compression for the various ISOs.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Using IPB it was ~120 mb per 30 seconds. That was about 35-65% smaller than the equivalent ALL-I compression for the various ISOs.

that's a pretty sizeable difference.

again though, if it's a bright day, it's probably not really necessary, but if you're shooting cloudy or evening, might be worth switching on.

[rodi]

well you're not really going to see much here i think. plus it's compressed for upload.
you'll see it in high-iso stuff. you'll see it in banding and gradations and tones - like a clear blue sky.

[The1]

I know you haven't finished all your testing yet chewy, but If I were to go out tomorrow and hold one in my hand, would I be smart to hand over my credit card and purchase it or hold off a while?

Not that I'm trying to rush the verdict....

[Chewy734]

Reed,

The 5D Mark III is better than the Mark II, no doubt about that. That being said, I still have some reservations because of the big price difference between the two. I'm not convinced it's necessarily worth the ~$1500 more than the 5D Mark II, unless you are getting paid for your photography, or if you need the advantages/features it provides.

There is no harm in holding one in your hand at your local shop and playing with it there.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Reed,

The 5D Mark III is better than the Mark II, no doubt about that. That being said, I still have some reservations because of the big price difference between the two. I'm not convinced it's necessarily worth the ~$1500 more than the 5D Mark II, unless you are getting paid for your photography, or if you need the advantages/features it provides.

There is no harm in holding one in your hand at your local shop and playing with it there.

Good to know, I'll stay tuned and behave myself and keep my wallet in my pants.

Also, not sure I could hold one without buying it, so I'll hold off. There's a lens I'm curious about (but really have no use for) that might be money better spent then on the body.

[Chewy734]

if you have money to burn, feel free to toss some my way

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

if you have money to burn, feel free to toss some my way

lol, and what would you do with Canadian

[Chewy734]

it's worth the same as the US dollar... beggars can't be choosers

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Reed,

The 5D Mark III is better than the Mark II, no doubt about that. That being said, I still have some reservations because of the big price difference between the two. I'm not convinced it's necessarily worth the ~$1500 more than the 5D Mark II, unless you are getting paid for your photography, or if you need the advantages/features it provides.

There is no harm in holding one in your hand at your local shop and playing with it there.

Are you using the new DPP to process the 5D3 images? I'm curious to know how well the DLO ("digital lens optimizer") works.

Dave

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

it's worth the same as the US dollar... beggars can't be choosers

haha, just checkin if you were keeping an eye

Sadly, the spare has to go into some boat motor updates for now. One of my engines isn't happy with me at the moment. So heads are getting redone, new valve springs, and high rise intakes going in (I had to do at least one mod while I was in there.)

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Are you using the new DPP to process the 5D3 images? I'm curious to know how well the DLO ("digital lens optimizer") works.

Dave

I was using LR4's ACR vRC1. DPP apparently has some issues with the raw conversion (it smoothens it noticeably).

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

I was using LR4's ACR vRC1. DPP apparently has some issues with the raw conversion (it smoothens it noticeably).

I found that with the old DPP and importing it into DxO and that's the reason I stopped with DPP.

[dcstep]

Great review of the MkIII video capacities:

http://www.twolightfilms.com/philip-...anon-5d-mkiii/

Be sure to watch in HD, full-screen.

Dave

[signes]

Very impressive indeed. UPS guy should be arriving any minute now...

[rodi]

nice.

[signes]

This thing is quite a bit different from my D200... Going to take me a while to get used to the settings to even get a fraction of the capability out of it. Will post up some pics soon. I am finding that the usual image editing tools (LR4, etc.) don't support mkIII RAW files. Any ideas for something not in beta (or a "release candidate")? Thanks.