Canon 5D Mark III

Masked Bandit

Masked Bandit

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,349
Name
Philip
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,

I would appreciate a few views. If I decide to chop my 5D Mark II for a 5D Mark III, what are the differences (good or bad) that I would notice?
I do mainly landscapes.
I know there are reviews on the web, but I would like views from members who have hands on experience.

Thanks,

Philip
 
Last edited:
For landscapes specifically I don't think its a huge gain, as your going to be low ISO, tripods etc anyway, no need for 50 AF points. The 5D 2 is a mega capable camera, 3 is obviously 'better', good for weddings, sports etc, a good all rounder. There is a TAD more dynamic range, and better low light, but just for scapes ? Would buy better glass or a wide prime.

If you want to go up a little in per pixel quality try the 6D, lovely camera better than the 5D 2, but won't break the bank upgrading.
 
Unless you need the AF I can't see the point in the upgrade the sensor improvements are really marginal for the money.
 
I would agree with the above, there isn't a lot to gain between 5DII and 5DIII unless you need super AF and better noise handling, neither of which are that important to general landscape work.
 
Love my 5D3,
Check out my flickr pics, 90% are with this camera.
Steve
 
Wont it be worth it to wait for 5ds? It`s a bit worse than Mk3 in iso performance but in your situation 50mp would be great.
 
I do like my 5D3 but I wouldn't upgrade to that from the 5D2 just for landscapes. Maybe the new 5DS would be worth looking at though. Those megapixels would be great for large prints.
 
bertpalmer said:
I do like my 5D3 but I wouldn't upgrade to that from the 5D2 just for landscapes. Maybe the new 5DS would be worth looking at though. Those megapixels would be great for large prints.
Click to expand...


Allow for the cost of upgrading your PC as well............;). I wonder what size of prints the 5ds might be capable of that the 5d2 cannot produce?

I eventually upgraded to a mk3 and it is a much more versatile camera than the mk2. The 6d is very capable as well and may be more suitable for you if you're only doing landscapes.
 
jerry12953 said:
Allow for the cost of upgrading your PC as well............;). I wonder what size of prints the 5ds might be capable of that the 5d2 cannot produce?

I eventually upgraded to a mk3 and it is a much more versatile camera than the mk2. The 6d is very capable as well and may be more suitable for you if you're only doing landscapes.
Click to expand...

Well considering how well a sony A7s can print out an A2 with only 12MP, I can imagine how well the new Canon is going to look. Although at nearly 4K I'll stick to my upgrade to the 5d3 from my 550D lol.
 
CaveDweller said:
Well considering how well a sony A7s can print out an A2 with only 12MP, I can imagine how well the new Canon is going to look. Although at nearly 4K I'll stick to my upgrade to the 5d3 from my 550D lol.
Click to expand...

sharp 12MP image will make a nice A2 print no problem. 1D mark III at just 10MP did that just fine. With 5DsR were are probably talking sharp A0 or double A0...
 
What's the dynamic range like with the 5D mk3?
 
gman said:
What's the dynamic range like with the 5D mk3?
Click to expand...
Not the best compared to some rival Nikon's or Sony's of the 5D3, but since most of my shots are done with a tripod/sliders it doesn't really bother me, or at least it won't when I get round to ordering one. Also if you run ML on the 5D3, the guys (superhuman? lol) behind the firmware have squeezed 1/2 a stop of extra DR out of it. Canon should really employ them, especially now with them using Sony sensors in the upcoming models.
 
Last edited:
A tripod won't increase dynamic range. A 5D 3 is 3 stops of dynamic range behind a D800. If your preference is for landscape only it really would make sense to switch brands.

The new canon sensor isn't a Sony one its just made in their factories.
 
I was thinking that for landscape photographers would a few stops of dynamic range really matter as you could subtly blend multiple exposures instead seeing as it's a static subject. But then how would that would if doing long exposures of things such as water? Would multiple exposures not quite work out and therefore making a wider native dynamic range more necessary?
 
Brazo said:
If your preference is for landscape only it really would make sense to switch brands.
Click to expand...

This is the sort of logic that only really exists on forums. It will likely be a major hassle switching brands if the OP shoots Canon at present. They were simply asking if there were any obvious benefits to upgrading to a 5D3... And as a 5D3 owner, I'd say the same as most of the other 5D2/3 users - probably not for landscape.
 
Brazo said:
A tripod won't increase dynamic range. A 5D 3 is 3 stops of dynamic range behind a D800. If your preference is for landscape only it really would make sense to switch brands.

The new canon sensor isn't a Sony one its just made in their factories.
Click to expand...
I know a tripod doesn't increase DR, it just means I can do multiple exposures.
 
dkh said:
In which case, it actually does increase DR.

Remember, all those quoting higher dr will not see a bit of difference between the outputs in any format. It only allows you to alter / mess with raw files later.
Click to expand...
That's what I mean't. The tripod allows the use of multiple exposures, which does increase DR. I just didn't word it very well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dkh
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top