Canon 5D MKIII official owners/users thread, anything related to the 5D MKIII

You can print as higher PPI as you want, but if your printer can't match the DPI it's pointless.

DPI is what you want to work out for printing, then you can set the file up to match the DPI with the PPI, this will give you the most detailed prints the printer can do.

Paper stock will also affect how detailed the print is.

Surprised you don't know this considering your username?

Anyway, going to pick my 5D3 and 24-70 2.8 up today, no grip in stock but they said I can pick it up when they get one in stock, can't wait to give it a go this weekend for 2 client shoots.
 
Digitalize said:
You can print as higher PPI as you want, but if your printer can't match the DPI it's pointless.

DPI is what you want to work out for printing, then you can set the file up to match the DPI with the PPI, this will give you the most detailed prints the printer can do.

Paper stock will also affect how detailed the print is.

Surprised you don't know this considering your username?

Anyway, going to pick my 5D3 and 24-70 2.8 up today, no grip in stock but they said I can pick it up when they get one in stock, can't wait to give it a go this weekend for 2 client shoots.
Click to expand...

I know about PPI and DPI, but i was thinking if there is higher than 300 available i may not know about it available, i printed with my Epson 17" and got amazing results so far, but with higher resolution and bigger mp on bigger print sizes i can see a difference, sometimes i crop the photos even if it is from a crop body one, so going with FF and high mp will have its advantages sometimes, also i send something to the lab for bigger than 17".

most of the time i stay with 240ppi, but with smaller sizes i go with 300, the lab convert to 150ppi and i don't know why, maybe their printers are adjusted or modified to accept 150ppi only, i didn't ask them in fact.

And forget about my nickname here, it is just something i dream about, not necessary it is about my skill level, and i am just proud i have professional gear anyway, so consider it for my gear not me :D :p :lol:
 
I don't think anyone was initially trying to dismiss the D800 when you first raised your enquiry Professional. At that juncture you hadn't identified what it was you wanted to shoot. Hence it was not unexpected that 5D3 users would recommend their tried, trusted and much-loved equipment. Granted if you had a need for the higher resolution and if you could as it appears afford to run three systems, then it would be worth considering a D800 if you preferred to use a DSLR over your other unidentified system which would seemingly blow both Canon and Nikon away on resolution. Unless you were hell-bent on using a DSLR why not use your presumably medium format camera? Saves all the cost I would have thought but it's your money. ;)


Keep enjoying your photography.
 
Houston1863 said:
I don't think anyone was initially trying to dismiss the D800 when you first raised your enquiry Professional. At that juncture you hadn't identified what it was you wanted to shoot. Hence it was not unexpected that 5D3 users would recommend their tried, trusted and much-loved equipment. Granted if you had a need for the higher resolution and if you could as it appears afford to run three systems, then it would be worth considering a D800 if you preferred to use a DSLR over your other unidentified system which would seemingly blow both Canon and Nikon away on resolution. Unless you were hell-bent on using a DSLR why not use your presumably medium format camera? Saves all the cost I would have thought but it's your money. ;)


Keep enjoying your photography.
Click to expand...

I said not on my initial question that i want to shoot landscapes/cityscape/architecture and some portraits, and those all benefits from higher mp than higher ISO or higher fps.

I didn't use that my MF due to 4 issues, not very big issues but they are issues anyway:

1. Weight, i don't have tech cam which is the lightest MF gear to be use, but i have that closed system with bulky body, it is not a big issue but really it is a nightmare if i carry it all around.

2. Battery level, it runs out quickly even with full charge compared to 35mm DSLRs, the only way is to buy more spare batteries, but it is expensive for one alone, but i will afford if needed.

3. Long exposure: my MF can go as long as 32seconds only, no bulb, so i am limited to that exposure, i have filters specially Big Stopper that i want to do 1 minute or longer exposures, so this is a big limitation of my MF, and i can't afford to buy another MF that can do longer exposure.

4. Filters, with my widest lens it is a nightmare to stack filters without vignetting, even if i can edit that by software it is just annoying me first place, and that is with 2 filters, i am not sure how much vignetting i can see with 3 filters together then.

Focus with MF is much slower, but that is not a big issue for landscapes or architecture, but it lacks different WB modes, so that i was thinking if all MF have the same issue or some have more WB modes.
 
Last edited:
Houston1863 said:
I agree that MF has its drawbacks. Think the D800 might work for you in that case. If you were happy to wait, there are rumours of a high MP Canon. When and what are the 64K questions :D
Click to expand...

Yes, i can wait, i will give my MF more use for a while, and i heard about a new filter holder system from LEE that is for wider lenses of DSLRs and MF, i may give that a try over getting D800, and still happy with my 1Ds3 even sometimes i want more MP on DSLR rather than my MF.
 
Professional said:
I didn't use that my MF due to 4 issues, not very big issues but they are issues anyway:
Click to expand...

You could do what you want with a P45+, probably my next purchase, next year, you could get good money for the H4D and P45+ aren't that expensive any more, £6-7k, the options to use a tech camera, exposures up to an hour and an open system you can use on all sorts.
 
Houston1863 said:
I agree that MF has its drawbacks. Think the D800 might work for you in that case. If you were happy to wait, there are rumours of a high MP Canon. When and what are the 64K questions :D
Click to expand...

Nikon and canon are both due to bring out a mf camera soon. Nikon recently look out a patent on a mf lens
 
markmullen said:
You could do what you want with a P45+, probably my next purchase, next year, you could get good money for the H4D and P45+ aren't that expensive any more, £6-7k, the options to use a tech camera, exposures up to an hour and an open system you can use on all sorts.
Click to expand...

Yes i know, but still that £6-7k is expensive for just a used DB, i will save for years to get that IQ260 instead, newer and better than P45+ in many ways, so better i save that $7-10k over getting used P45+ one.

barratt1988 said:
Nikon and canon are both due to bring out a mf camera soon. Nikon recently look out a patent on a mf lens
Click to expand...

I don't think so, they may produce cameras with higher MP, but not MF sensor or system, Phase One, Hasselblad, Leica and Pentax have already those bodies and i don't think another companies such as Nikon or Canon can try to outperform those, with new sensor it means new glasses too, and then who knows how much they will price those new Canon/Nikon MF gear then.
 
Well, let me ask this question to keep on this thread topic, how much quality difference between 5D MarkIII and 1Ds MarkIII in term of mp only let's say at lower ISO [50-200]? i don't have that 5D3 to compare, and 1DX is 18mp after all, so i hope if someone has both full frame mk3 bodies[5d/1ds] to confirm it please.
 
Last edited:
Professional said:
Yes i know, but still that £6-7k is expensive for just a used DB, i will save for years to get that IQ260 instead, newer and better than P45+ in many ways, so better i save that $7-10k over getting used P45+ one.

I don't think so, they may produce cameras with higher MP, but not MF sensor or system, Phase One, Hasselblad, Leica and Pentax have already those bodies and i don't think another companies such as Nikon or Canon can try to outperform those, with new sensor it means new glasses too, and then who knows how much they will price those new Canon/Nikon MF gear then.
Click to expand...

So why have nikon patented a mf lens?
 
barratt1988 said:
So why have nikon patented a mf lens?
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Sorry but i don't know the word "patended" means.

In all cases, Nikon was in large format before with lenses, and Carl Ziess also making lenses for 35mm DSLRs and MF, it is not hard for Canon or Nikon to produce lenses for MF too, and i remember with a mount adapter i can use MF lenses on 35mm DSLRs too.
 
Professional said:
What do you mean? Sorry but i don't know the word "patended" means.

In all cases, Nikon was in large format before with lenses, and Carl Ziess also making lenses for 35mm DSLRs and MF, it is not hard for Canon or Nikon to produce lenses for MF too, and i remember with a mount adapter i can use MF lenses on 35mm DSLRs too.
Click to expand...

Basically nikon have brought the sole rights to produce the specific lens. They wouldnt make lenses for other systems which would suggest they are working on medium format.
 
barratt1988 said:
Basically nikon have brought the sole rights to produce the specific lens. They wouldnt make lenses for other systems which would suggest they are working on medium format.
Click to expand...

Well, we have to wait and see what they will bring, so does that mean we will see a lot of Canon shooters move/convert to Nikon then?
 
Professional said:
Well, we have to wait and see what they will bring, so does that mean we will see a lot of Canon shooters move/convert to Nikon then?
Click to expand...

Nikon knows exactly what canon are upto and vise versa. So canon will be making mf also to match nikons
 
barratt1988 said:
Nikon knows exactly what canon are upto and vise versa. So canon will be making mf also to match nikons
Click to expand...

Good for us, huh?!!!! I hope they will not produce many many gear to us and they increase the prices to nearly to those current MF gear brands already.
 
I'm not sure if many of you use it, but my Samyang 8mm Fisheye (Mk2 with removable hood) is much more useful/easy to use on the 5D3 than my 7D! Probably thanks to the better screen for live view focusing.
 
Digitalize said:
I'm not sure if many of you use it, but my Samyang 8mm Fisheye (Mk2 with removable hood) is much more useful/easy to use on the 5D3 than my 7D! Probably thanks to the better screen for live view focusing.
Click to expand...

This reminding me with my 300m f2.8IS mk1, it was nice or fine on my 1D3 for a while then suddenly it became soft or not so sharp for most shots i take, then when i put it on my 1DX ....WOW, it is like this camera fixed the issue, now i get sharp results again.

I will try my sigma 8mm fisheye and Siggy 12-24 on my 1DX and see how is the quality.
 
I've been meaning to ask, and I'm fairly sure I know the answer already, but is it possible to get the DoF preview working through the viewfinder? Obviously works fine with live view.
 
Number45 said:
I've been meaning to ask, and I'm fairly sure I know the answer already, but is it possible to get the DoF preview working through the viewfinder? Obviously works fine with live view.
Click to expand...

Isn't it that big button below the lens and just towards your right hand?

I have to say I wish canon would stop moving it around, though......
 
It's the only button your right hands middle finger could touch when gripping the camera, basically the same place as the 7D but bigger. Almost looks like a second lens release.
 
Yeah, that's the one. It works fine in LV, but through the VF it doesn't seem to do anything. I assume that's what's supposed to happen, but just wanted to confirm.
 
Number45 said:
Yeah, that's the one. It works fine in LV, but through the VF it doesn't seem to do anything. I assume that's what's supposed to happen, but just wanted to confirm.
Click to expand...

Definitely works through the VF. It's been there on almost all the canon bodies, long before LV, and hardly ever used lol.
Remember that the lens is always wide open until you take the shot, so if you are shooting wide open you won't see any difference. Stop down quite a bit and it should get darker when you press the button.
 
PDub said:
Any ideas which lens would be better for weddings? 24-70 tamron vc or the canon 24-105? Don't think I can afford the 24-70 mk2. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I originally got my Tamron for a wedding, but as it happened I had got rid of it before the big day. I ended up using a Canon MKII.

It's a tricky one but I have read a few blogs/posts where the Tamron has been used fine at weddings. The only downside I can see is that, IME, AF can be more hit or miss in low light, and slower than USM.

What about hiring the Canon MKII (or even MKI)?
 
Last edited:
dave_bass5 said:
I originally got my Tamron for a wedding, but as it happened I had got rid of it before the big day. I ended up using a Canon MKII.

It's a tricky one but I have read a few blogs/posts where the Tamron has been used fine at weddings. The only downside I can see is that, IME, AF can be more hit or miss in low light, and slower than USM.

What about hiring the Canon MKII (or even MKII)?
Click to expand...

What do you mean by (even MKII) after you mentioned hiring Canon MKII?
 
PDub said:
Any ideas which lens would be better for weddings? 24-70 tamron vc or the canon 24-105? Don't think I can afford the 24-70 mk2. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Although I've not used the Tamron 24-70, I have used other Tamrons, and while the image quality is generally very good (esp for the price) the AF speed and accuracy wasn't a patch on the Nikon 24-70 I used after, especially in low light.

If I were you I would consider looking for a S/H MK1 Canon 24-70, they can be picked up for a good price these days. This is what I did when I made the move to Canon, rather than going for a new Tamron 24-70.
 
PDub said:
Any ideas which lens would be better for weddings? 24-70 tamron vc or the canon 24-105? Don't think I can afford the 24-70 mk2. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Look for a Canon 24-70 mk1 in the classifieds on here, still a great lens and still used by a lot of people, just because there's a mk2 doesn't make the mk1 bad. It was around for a lot of years and has done very good service for many photographers. I'd gone to preferring primes all the time, but recently in the mk3 I've really taken to the 24-70 again.
 
I'm still torn, from what I've read the they're pretty much on a par, IQ is not noticeably better on the canon but the canon is like twice as much and doesn't have IS which could come in handy for weddings. But with the great ISO handling on the mk3 do I need the vc? Or I could look at the 24-105 for the extra reach which is great for portraits. Tough choice. Lol.

Thanks for the opinions tho.
 
I use the 24-70 mk1 pretty much 99% on my 5D3 at weddings, it's a heavy beast but a real workhorse - usually it's at f/4 most of the time for sharpness reasons but with the 5D3 have used it down to about 1/60 with no problems - just wang the ISO up :)
 
PDub said:
I'm still torn, from what I've read the they're pretty much on a par, IQ is not noticeably better on the canon but the canon is like twice as much and doesn't have IS which could come in handy for weddings. But with the great ISO handling on the mk3 do I need the vc? Or I could look at the 24-105 for the extra reach which is great for portraits. Tough choice. Lol.

Thanks for the opinions tho.
Click to expand...

The Tamron IQ is great, at least it is in the center where it really counts. My issue with the lens would be the AF system. While i realise many do have fantastic results from it i found the AF to be a bit slow and not as reliable in low light as my 24-105L (and i had two copies).
Even shooting my son on his roller blades (with a 5DMKIII) showed that it couldn't keep up in AI Servo, unlike the 24-105 which produced more keepers per batch.

Consider that the Canon MKI has been used for many years as the standard wedding zoom, and you will see that while IS/VC might well be useful, the lack of it will not stop you getting the job done.

Yes, its a tough choice, i dont envy you. I ended up just biting the bullet and using a credit card ot get the Canon MKII, but i realise that's not for everyone. .
 
dave_bass5 said:
The Tamron IQ is great, at least it is in the center where it really counts. My issue with the lens would be the AF system. While i realise many do have fantastic results from it i found the AF to be a bit slow and not as reliable in low light as my 24-105L (and i had two copies).
Click to expand...

This in my eyes is the clincher when it comes to the Tamron ( or other 3rd party zooms). To be fair I've not shot any weddings yet, I would choose AF reliability over ultimate IQ every time. IQ is obviously important, but if you miss the shot entirely then amazing quality is pointless.
 
EspressoJunkie said:
This in my eyes is the clincher when it comes to the Tamron ( or other 3rd party zooms). To be fair I've not shot any weddings yet, I would choose AF reliability over ultimate IQ every time. IQ is obviously important, but if you miss the shot entirely then amazing quality is pointless.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Ive posted before but i really struggled to get some shots of my son in low light a few times. Although focus was on his eyes it was his cheek or ear lobe that was in focus. I ran all the usual focus tests and couldn't find anything wrong, no front or back focus in decent light. I felt it just wasn't worth spending £850 on a lens that cant focus as well as my pancake that cost around £120, especially with my daughters wedding coming up.
 
dave_bass5 said:
Definitely works through the VF. It's been there on almost all the canon bodies, long before LV, and hardly ever used lol.
Remember that the lens is always wide open until you take the shot, so if you are shooting wide open you won't see any difference. Stop down quite a bit and it should get darker when you press the button.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I thought that should be the case. I was testing it via LV and I could see the change (stopped down from about f/4 to f/22 to test), but through the VF it didn't appear to make a difference at all.

I must have been doing something wrong, I'll have another look later this afternoon.
 
Just got a 5D mk iii after selling my classic all I can say is omg what a menu this is going to take a bit to get my head around :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top