Comments on: Canon EOS 5D Mark II High ISO images samples

By: Steve Diet Buissink

Steve Diet Buissink — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 06:12:33 +0000

[quote comment="51291"]We’ve got three of these on pre order and I’ve been chomping my nails EVERY SINGLE DAY since this was announced.

I’m going to get flamed, but I would say that the mark II’s IQ at 12,800 looks like the D3′s @ 3200, with better sharpness. [/quote]

I wouldn’t go that far. I just received my Mark II after months of unbearable anticipation and have thus far found the high ISO performance to be disappointing, to say the least. I actually rented a D3 for the sake of side by side comparison and there’s no contest, I’m afraid. The D3 is noticably cleaner and sharper, especially at 1600 on up.

Not to mention the fact the you need CS4 to process RAW images from the Mark II. Another unforeseen pain-in-the-ass.

By: indoor sports shooter

indoor sports shooter — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:58:19 +0000

exposure compensation: 1 full step up…

if i have to shoot like that whats the point of a higher iso? i’m not really gaining any stopping power. that said, i’m still pre-ordering this beast.

By: DTyler Studio

DTyler Studio — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 02:32:57 +0000

We’ve got three of these on pre order and I’ve been chomping my nails EVERY SINGLE DAY since this was announced.

I’m going to get flamed, but I would say that the mark II’s IQ at 12,800 looks like the D3′s @ 3200, with better sharpness. Resize the image down or run an imagenomic filter and you have a perfectly printable image at a ridiculously high ISO. My God, I cannot wait to switch back to Canon.

By: john adams

john adams — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:17:06 +0000

[quote comment="49572"]Could you post links to the RAW files or post a zoomed-in snippet so we can see how bad noise is?[/quote]

oh nevermind, you have links! my bad!

By: john adams

john adams — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:16:35 +0000

Could you post links to the RAW files or post a zoomed-in snippet so we can see how bad noise is?