First Look: Canon 5D Mark II
by Wesley Fink on December 4, 2008 3:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Canon 5D2 Full Frame vs. Nikon D700/D3 vs. Sony A900
The Canon 5D was the first "popular" priced full-frame DSLR introduced at the $3500 mark for the body only about three years ago. The 5D Mark II just started showing up at dealers on Monday, and the first units began arriving from web etailers on Tuesday, December 2. However, the market is no longer Canon only as both Nikon and Sony have recently introduced models to compete in the $3000 full-frame DSLR market.
The A900 was introduced just a couple of months ago and sells for $3000. It is currently the highest resolution sensor in its class at 24.6MP. The 5D2 has slightly lower resolution at 21/2MP. Nikon also just announced a 24.5MP D3x that will ship later this month, but the new Nikon is in a completely different class with an $8000 price tag.
Nikon introduced the pro-targeted D3 about a year ago with a full-frame $5000 12.1MP sensor. The D3 claim to fame was the widest ISO range ever seen in a DSLR, with a range from ISO 100 to ISO 25600, a 9-stop ISO range. Mid-year 2008 Nikon moved this wide-range full-frame down to the $3000 D700 to compete with the Canon 5D, as well as the coming 5D2 and Sony A900.
Again, all images are captured using a 2-second shutter delay on a tripod in the same location. The manufacturers' 50mm f/1.4 prime lens is used in all cases at an aperture priority setting of f/4.0, some three stops down from their rated speed. All images are processed with the in-camera JPEG processing with high ISO noise reduction set to the low setting. Light is provided by a 100W tungsten bulb, and white balance on all cameras is manually set to tungsten.
| ISO Comparison – Canon 5D2 vs. Nikon D700/D3 vs. Sony A900 | |||
| ISO | Canon 5D2 | Nikon D700 | Sony A900 |
| 50 |  |
||
| 100 |  |
 |
 |
| 200 |  |
 |
 |
| 400 |  |
 |
 |
| 800 |  |
 |
 |
| 1600 |  |
 |
 |
| 3200 |  |
 |
 |
| 6400 |  |
 |
 |
| 12800 |  |
 |
|
| 25600 |  |
 |
|
Click on any of the above image crops for the full image. Note: Full size images are between 3.2MB and 15.5MB! |
|||
The D3 and 5D2 are both no brainers to ISO 3200. I wouldn't hesitate to use either of them for anything up to ISO 3200. 6400 and 12800 are both good with more noise, but still usable for most things. 25600 on either is more for small prints, although I suspect DXO, Noise Ninja, or perhaps other noise reduction programs can do wonders at that speed. They certainly do with RAW processing - the Sony A900 high ISO images that look noisy unless RAW processed. Resolution of the 5D2 is better than the D3/D700, but not quite up to the Sony A900 at regular ISO. I suspect at high ISO with in-camera JPEG the Canon will be equal or better than the Sony.
The Sony seems to be fine up to ISO 1600, but above this noise really starts to intrude. It is not the wide ISO wonder of the 5D2 or the D700, but it is definitely the highest resolution image at lower ISO ratings. The 5D2 is close in resolution, however - much closer than the D700/D3. Recently we have also seen some professionals getting extraordinary high ISO Sony results with RAW post-processing with programs other than Adobe Camera RAW. They claim ACR is quite poor at processing noise in the A900 images and there are much better tools. We are experimenting with their suggestions for A900 RAW post-processing.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
n4bby - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
> I used to trust DPR but they are biased against Canon which I don't like.huh? i don't think so at all... i think they are pretty fair. they have always rated Canon products favorably when deserved, but remain critical enough to give relatively impartial opinions. if they say Nikon does some things better, it's because they do - Canon is not perfect, and there are a few things Nikons have always done better. (and no, i am not a Nikon user - i have only Canon gear.)
n4bby - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
wesley,> It is not the wide ISO wonder of the 5D2 or the D700, but it is definitely the highest resolution image at lower ISO ratings.
i'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. looking at the ISO100 images, the 5d2 seems to resolve every bit as well the Sony, and with the much lower noise levels i can actually make out a little more detail. in any case, you would need a resolution chart to really determine - did you shoot one?
> The 5D2 is close in resolution, however - much closer than the D700/D3.
with half the pixels i wouldn't expect the Nikons to be close.....
pinto4402 - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
Wow. I'm in love. After three years, Canon finally produces a camera which is worthy of replacing my beloved 5D. I fear, however, that the images produced by this camera will kill my hard drives for sure. I only photograph in RAW mode, saving the images in TIFF.Wesley, I enjoy reading your reviews, but for the love of God, please use something else other than that Nvidia box for your test images. It's time to make a clean break, consistency be damned! The thing with noise I worry about it how it affects key facial features (eyes and lips). Your test setup is not as helpful as could be. A feasible alternative is a good quality mannequin head. I hope you will consider it.
Also, are you going to be doing any comparisons of the leading noise reduction programs?
Wesley Fink - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
I will be replacing my test setup with something more useful. However in the interest of bringing you the first real comparison published in just one day after buyers began receiving production 5D2s, I used the setup I already had used for all the compare shots.I hope readers will forgive me. Reshooting everything with a new setup would have added several days to the review time and I suspected you wanted this comparison fast.
melgross - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
I would like to see the same reduced sized samples when compared to the D3/700 with both the Canon and Sony. I'm also of the opinion that it is more useful in showing a real comparison, print size to print size.Also, why were the images of the Canon so much denser? That will also affect the way the noise looks.
Wesley Fink - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
Our A900 review "Sony A900: A Closer Look at 24.6MP Resolution and Noise" contains image area adjusted A900 images that match the 12 megapixels of the D700 and the 5D. You will find the review by clicking on the Digital Cameras tab above.melgross - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
Yes, I read that review when it came out.I mean the new 5D mkII compared to the a900, and the Nikon, with all three (or four, if including the 1Ds mkII) shown at the same size.
What about the exposure?
Lord 666 - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
Agreed that this review was a much improved effort and found it informative as well.tonyeck - Thursday, December 4, 2008 - link
I am very happy with my 5D mkII apart from one thing - a stuck pixel! It's fine for photographs, and it's almost expected with 21 megapixels... However, with video, stuck pixels show up like crazy!Have a look at this still from a video I took:
http://flickr.com/photos/tonysphotographs/30810827...">http://flickr.com/photos/tonysphotographs/30810827...
Milleman - Friday, December 5, 2008 - link
Yea...That dead pixel looks not good at all. Can't you have the sensor replaced by warranty? I mean, this is not a El Cheapo camera you just bought! Canon should have a replacement policy for dead pixels. I'm glad you bringning this up, as I'm about to buy a 5D2 myself. I will certainly try the video and look for dead pixels.
Could be a good point if Anand, Wesley Fink, looks att dead pixels and the manufacturers policy with this issue. The more pixels, the bigger the chance. It's the same problem as the LCD screen buyers have. Would be an interresting article indeed.