Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 34 of 34

Thread: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    ol Ken just posted this!

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3x...5d-mark-ii.htm

    Does this mean the final 5d mk ii is no different from the prototype which had massive noise reduction even at ISO100.

    Ken shows the D3x beating the 5d mk ii hands down in this area.

    Opinions please.

    Mazor

  2. #2
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Ken says that the difference is due to massive NR on the Canon, but there is much more sharpening on the Nikon image in his comparison. Since this is a comparison of in-camera JPEGs, he ought to have tried adjusting the in-camera sharpening settings on the two cameras in order to get a similar level of sharpening. He also did not specify, from what I saw, what the in-camera NR settings were.

    Personally, my decision would not be affected by such a comparison, because I shoot RAW.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    2,010
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    I'd pay more attention to the opinions of folks like Lloyd Chambers on his paid (but excellent) review site. He LOVES the D3x and likes the 5DII (so far) within the limitations of it's pro-sumer body, VF, etc but is not a fan of the noise and noise characteristics of the 5D Mod 2. Test is still in early stages (he updates daily) but the IQ from the D3X looks VERY impressive - camera appears to have a very 'different' than the norm (weak?) AA filter.

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    181
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Unless one thinks that Ken faked the entire test on purpose, it looks pretty straightforward to me...am sure that won't keep some from tearing it apart, what conclusions you reach from it can be a whole other thing. I don't see from a monitor jpeg a whole lot to say bout noise, but sharpness certainly looks like a whole other thing, with the D3X looking more sharp and detailed then the new 5D. One should remember that you are looking on a monitor of a jpeg, and whether this translates to prints may be a whole other thing.. personally I can't say I disagree with the findings...fwiw..

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Amin, I suspect that even with RAW captures Canons digic 4 processor will still adjust the noise from the 5d mk ii. The reason being that people want a camera that is "low noise" and hence why Canon has responded to the consumers and made it so.

    There is no doubt though that this noise reduction is very clever, and maintains quite substantial detail while minimizing noise. But in that image, even with USM appleid in photoshop would not being back details visible in the D3x image.

    I had another look at the image from Ken, and the JPG does indeed look like alot of noise reduction at ISO100 has been applied. So much so that it resembles images from Nokias 5MP N series cell cam range which sports amazing water colour images, with bush details lost in mush.

    MAzor

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    I just do not understand. i can see one doing a comparison using in camera generated jpgs if one is testing some point and shoots or even lower end DSLRs but how many people buy the 5DII and primarily use the in camera generated jpgs?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Well 5d mk ii is considered as a non pro camera, or just under, hence why JPG may have been important. Also Canon has to find a way to further dumb down the camera so as to not encroach on 1ds mk iii sales.

    Also it is always nice to know that you can use the JPG output directly from camera for instant publication should one require to do so.

    Mazor

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    For those interested, ken has been at it again.

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3x...mark-ii-d3.htm

    Comparing JPG between D3x, 5d mk ii , D3 and the old 5D

    I am really amazed at how good the old 5D does against the 5d mk ii here. I know they are JPG, but still if using RAW would improve the ISO3200 performance of the 5dmkii, it would do similarly with the old 5D as well.

    5D Users need only apply a little chroma noise reduction during their workflow process, and essentially they will get a similar result in terms of noise and detail to the 5d mk ii I believe.

    Mazor

  9. #9
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by mark1958 View Post
    I just do not understand. i can see one doing a comparison using in camera generated jpgs if one is testing some point and shoots or even lower end DSLRs but how many people buy the 5DII and primarily use the in camera generated jpgs?
    I'm completely with you on this, Mark.
    I don't get it either
    The only reason I can think of would be an attempt to avoid showing the difference with RAW.

  10. #10
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by bondo View Post
    I'm completely with you on this, Mark.
    I don't get it either
    The only reason I can think of would be an attempt to avoid showing the difference with RAW.
    if you read anything else from Ken, you'll see he insists there's no benefit in shooting RAW.

  11. #11
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Oh.
    Whoa.
    Now I get it .-)

  12. #12
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    he also has a disclaimer on his site that everything he writes, he does so in jest, and shouldn't be taken seriously. As a result, he's done a pretty good job of misdirecting many beginning photographers

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    In addition, the argument that this is not a pro camera is not a valid argument. Pro by definition means someone who earns his living in part or whole. There are lots of good amateurs that use RAW exclusively. If one were shooting daily and in the elements, the 5DII might not be the best "pro" camera.

    Quote Originally Posted by bondo View Post
    I'm completely with you on this, Mark.
    I don't get it either
    The only reason I can think of would be an attempt to avoid showing the difference with RAW.

  14. #14
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by JimCollum View Post
    he also has a disclaimer on his site that everything he writes, he does so in jest, and shouldn't be taken seriously. As a result, he's done a pretty good job of misdirecting many beginning photographers
    Exactly why I refuse to read him Jim and it is a great disservice for the industry.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Hey, Ken Rockwell has updated his web page showing the sharpness differnces between the D3x and the 5d mk ii.

    Now he has comparisons with High NR off on JPG as well as converted RAW CR2 files from the 5d mk ii to compare.

    MAzor

  16. #16
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by mazor View Post
    Hey, Ken Rockwell has updated his web page showing the sharpness differnces between the D3x and the 5d mk ii.

    Now he has comparisons with High NR off on JPG as well as converted RAW CR2 files from the 5d mk ii to compare.

    MAzor

    the problem is just what is real and what isn't.. is this a real test or not. Given his own words on what he presents.. how can anyone actually take any thing said on the site as real? Since he mixes truth and fantasy, without saying which is which... *everything* on his site has to be taken as fake

    "While often inspired by actual products and events, just like any other good news organization, I like to make things up and stretch the truth if they make an article more fun. In the case of new products, rumors and just plain silly stuff, it's all pretend. If you lack a good BS detector, please treat this entire site as a work of fiction."

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    hehe true, but he does state at the bottom of the comparison how it was done. thought the 5D mk ii with CR2 conversion looked pretty good against the D3x.

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32° 31' 37.06" N, 111° 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    I just read the outline for one of his “workshops” which leads me to believe the trip isn’t focused on photographers rather just a nice drive around the northern portion of the state. I liked the idea that there would be little walking as most image captures will be taken either near or from the van.

    Sorry, not my cup of tea. His site is now on my do not read under any circumstances even if bored list.


    don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    764
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    I have the best dslr in the world, whoops now I don"t this reviewer said this the other said this. Hey guys all of these cameras have different areas they excel at. Do I want to lug a big pro camera all day. I own 3 do I want to get a photo that I would not have seen because I have my little leica on me and it does not stress my body out to carry around all day. Or maybe I fell like carrying a 5d mk 11 and I am on a dog walk and run into a moose. The best camera is the one you will have on you. If I have a specific assignment then the pro cameras come out. But who wants to carry a 1d or d3 series camera all day? PS Ken Rockwell is a bad joke on the industry as you never know what to take seriousily

  20. #20
    Deceased, but remembered fondly here... johnastovall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Dublin, Texas, U.S.A.
    Posts
    1,549
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    112

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    My cats know more about cameras than KR. They at least sleep curled up around the 5D and Leicas.

    "The market wants a Leica to be a Leica: the inheritor of tradition, the subject of lore, and indisputably a mark of status to own."
    Mike Johnston


  21. #21
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Owing a 5D2 and a D3 and knowing some results from D3X I can only say I prefer the 5D2 if it comes to higher resolution and higher ISO - I shoot ONLY RAW !!!

    The D3X shows lot of noise and not very clean transitions in shadow as well as highlight areas, miles away from the D3 quality! The 5D2 is not quite as good as the D3, but offers much higher resolution and in my eyes much better results than the D3X So for me the clear choice if it comes to high res and high ISO while delivering great quality also at standard ISO.

    Not sure what all this discussion about KR is about, I cannot take such tests serious.

    And BTW - it also depends on the whole chain of processing which result you get, finally on the screen you use to show for example high dynamic range etc. So if you have not the best in any part of this chain talking about high IQ is nonsense - just my experience and worth AT LEAST 5c

  22. #22
    nautilus
    Guest

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    Owing a 5D2 and a D3 and knowing some results from D3X I can only say I prefer the 5D2 if it comes to higher resolution and higher ISO - I shoot ONLY RAW !!!

    The D3X shows lot of noise and not very clean transitions in shadow as well as highlight areas, miles away from the D3 quality! The 5D2 is not quite as good as the D3, but offers much higher resolution and in my eyes much better results than the D3X So for me the clear choice if it comes to high res and high ISO while delivering great quality also at standard ISO.

    Not sure what all this discussion about KR is about, I cannot take such tests serious.

    And BTW - it also depends on the whole chain of processing which result you get, finally on the screen you use to show for example high dynamic range etc. So if you have not the best in any part of this chain talking about high IQ is nonsense - just my experience and worth AT LEAST 5c
    It's too funny what you wrote.
    I like the look of 5D2 images better than the look of Nikon or Sony images.
    When I read the tests of D3x, A900 and 5D2 which prefer the Nikon and Sony (at least at lower ISO's in the case of the Sony) I often ask myself what's wrong with my eyes.
    That was the same in the past with pictures from 5D1 and 1D Canon cameras but not with Canon APS cameras.
    I'm still not sure what's different with theses Canon cameras compared to other brands that makes their pictures appear so good in my eyes.
    Of course it's a matter of taste but I think the difference could be that colors and contrasts look too harsh with Nikon and Sony whereas Canon is more smooth and pleasing to the eye.
    Too bad that I'm bound to Sony since I have some good lenses from Minolta and Sony and therefore didn't buy a small Canon system to try it out by myself.

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by nautilus View Post
    It's too funny what you wrote.
    I like the look of 5D2 images better than the look of Nikon or Sony images.
    When I read the tests of D3x, A900 and 5D2 which prefer the Nikon and Sony (at least at lower ISO's in the case of the Sony) I often ask myself what's wrong with my eyes.
    That was the same in the past with pictures from 5D1 and 1D Canon cameras but not with Canon APS cameras.
    I'm still not sure what's different with theses Canon cameras compared to other brands that makes their pictures appear so good in my eyes.
    Of course it's a matter of taste but I think the difference could be that colors and contrasts look too harsh with Nikon and Sony whereas Canon is more smooth and pleasing to the eye.
    Too bad that I'm bound to Sony since I have some good lenses from Minolta and Sony and therefore didn't buy a small Canon system to try it out by myself.
    What do you have that's binding you to Sony? Line list it and maybe you can get rid of it here to all of the new Sony A900 shooters

    The Grass is always greener ... having recently moved from Canon for the very reasons that attract you to Canon, I would relish a chance to grab a few more select Sony/Minolta lenses.

  24. #24
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    I would guess that color could be one thing which makes a difference between the brands.
    I have replaced my D3 with a D3x because I was not 100% happy with the microdetail of the D3. For some reason I sometimes got the feeling that there might have been either strong AA filter or maybe some basic noise reduction or something like this going on.
    SO far I find the d3x not to be problematic up to 1600 ISO - personally I rather get some noise than a loss of detail cause by noise reduction.
    Regarding the 5DII - no experience but once had a 5D for some months and I was not happy with the color balance, specielly the reds.
    However I think lenses have a huge influence as well and this is a problem of many comparisons.
    The other thing was speed, the D3/D3x feels instant, the shutter delay is barely noticable, I dont know about the 5DII but the 5D seemed not in the same level to me.
    IMO the D3x was the best compromise between detail at low ISO, quite good high ISO, speed, lens choices. However if I had not had allready many Nikon lenses I would have given the A900 a try.

  25. #25
    Workshop Member ChrisDauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    82

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    The raw converters can have a large impact on the colors (most noticeably to me was the color red) depending on which you use.

    Though I'm guessing you used the very same workflow both both cameras (?)

  26. #26
    Senior Member Erik Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    470
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by mark1958 View Post
    I just do not understand. i can see one doing a comparison using in camera generated jpgs if one is testing some point and shoots or even lower end DSLRs but how many people buy the 5DII and primarily use the in camera generated jpgs?

    I cant remember if ive ever shot a dlsr in jpeg. Except for the 5d mkII cause it was blocked for Raw use since I tested a prototype for 5mins.

    Ken is a Nikon fan boy as well

  27. #27
    Workshop Member ChrisDauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, CA
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    82

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Not that I put any more stock in this, than I do Ken... but here it is anyway:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5Dmarkii/

    At the end of the day, all that matters is that you're happy; not that anyone else is (okay, well maybe we'll make an exception for clients! ;-)

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisDauer View Post
    The raw converters can have a large impact on the colors (most noticeably to me was the color red) depending on which you use.

    Though I'm guessing you used the very same workflow both both cameras (?)
    Well, Capture NX only works for Nikon, but C1works for both. Its some time ago and I dont remember 100% which rawconverter I have used mainly since I have various on my computer .

  29. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    74
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisDauer View Post
    At the end of the day, all that matters is that you're happy; not that anyone else is (okay, well maybe we'll make an exception for clients! ;-)
    So true.
    I don't visit this forum nearly enough but as ever, it's always ground in common sense which I appreciate.

  30. #30
    nautilus
    Guest

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    What do you have that's binding you to Sony? Line list it and maybe you can get rid of it here to all of the new Sony A900 shooters

    The Grass is always greener ... having recently moved from Canon for the very reasons that attract you to Canon, I would relish a chance to grab a few more select Sony/Minolta lenses.

    2x 4/600G Minolta
    3x 2,8/300G Minolta and Sony
    1x 1,4/85G limited Minolta

    Only sold in one package. Do you still want to buy?

    Just kidding.
    I wouldn't change the system. Maybe I would buy a Canon 5DII and a lens like the 50/1,2 as a parallel mini system to make my own experiences with Canon's picture quality and to see how green the Canon grass really is.
    What did hold me back one or two times at the last moment before buying is that this and other prime lenses are not stabilized (Sony's security belt).
    But I don't have to do that immediately.
    Maybe we will see different senors beyond current bayer sensors that will change the picture appearance in one or two years anyway.

  31. #31
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by nautilus View Post

    2x 4/600G Minolta
    3x 2,8/300G Minolta and Sony
    1x 1,4/85G limited Minolta

    Only sold in one package. Do you still want to buy?

    Just kidding.
    I wouldn't change the system. Maybe I would buy a Canon 5DII and a lens like the 50/1,2 as a parallel mini system to make my own experiences with Canon's picture quality and to see how green the Canon grass really is.
    What did hold me back one or two times at the last moment before buying is that this and other prime lenses are not stabilized (Sony's security belt).
    But I don't have to do that immediately.
    Maybe we will see different senors beyond current bayer sensors that will change the picture appearance in one or two years anyway.
    Is that 300/2.8G the APO Sony version? If it is ... YUM!

  32. #32
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by johnastovall View Post
    My cats know more about cameras than KR. They at least sleep curled up around the 5D and Leicas.


    Good one!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  33. #33
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Quote Originally Posted by nautilus View Post

    2x 4/600G Minolta
    3x 2,8/300G Minolta and Sony
    1x 1,4/85G limited Minolta

    Only sold in one package. Do you still want to buy?

    Just kidding.
    I wouldn't change the system. Maybe I would buy a Canon 5DII and a lens like the 50/1,2 as a parallel mini system to make my own experiences with Canon's picture quality and to see how green the Canon grass really is.
    What did hold me back one or two times at the last moment before buying is that this and other prime lenses are not stabilized (Sony's security belt).
    But I don't have to do that immediately.
    Maybe we will see different senors beyond current bayer sensors that will change the picture appearance in one or two years anyway.
    Grass isn't always greener. I was a happy Canon user (1Ds2 with Contax lenses) until I saw the images taken with the A900. Now that I have completely switched to Sony/Zeiss and looking back to my Canon archives, I still believe my grass is still greener than the other side. No regrets whatsoever. I have always had doubts about digital and why was I not able te get the color depth and richness that film gave me, but now this question is already resolved. The A900 images have a certain Fujichrome look that I was never able to emulate with the 1Ds2.

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Ken Rockwell puts 5d mk ii against d3x

    Nice edwardkaraa, it just shows all this technical blah about having 14bit may not all that much improvement. As we can see the A900 is a superb performer in dynamic range, etc even though it only supports 12bit.

    MAzor

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •