Canon EOS 5D Mark III : Tests and Reviews
Canon EOS 5D Mark III side by side comparisons
Canon EOS 5D Mark III versus predecessor
Canon EOS 5D Mark III versus Nikon model
Canon EOS 5D Mark III versus Sony model
Canon EOS 5D Mark III versus rival model with similar score
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
| 81 |
Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III
| 80 |
Try our side-by-side camera comparison tool
Further readings for the Canon EOS 5D Mark III
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.
Sensor Review
|
September 14
 |
Canon’s iconic EOS 5D series of full-frame DSLRs have had wide appeal with both pro and enthusiast photographers, blending great image quality and good features in a more affordable mid-range body design. Boasting a significant number of upgrades over its predecessor, including increased resolution, an updated autofocus system, Dual Pixel RAW capture, improved metering and 4K-video capture, the latest Mark IV looks like a mouth-watering prospect for the still photographer. |
Lens Review
|
July 06
 |
Roundup of the top image quality scores for the widest f/1.4 aperture lens currently available. |
Lens Review
|
July 01
 |
Announced as one of a trio of lenses in the new G Master series, the new FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM boasts some pretty advanced technology to complement future sensor and camera designs. The G Master range sits above the maker’s already high-end G series and carries a hefty premium. The FE 24-70mm F2.8 will set you back close to $2,200. |
Lens Review
|
December 09, 2015
 |
Tamron has added a new moderate wide-angle Nikon F-mount SP 35mm f/1.8 Di VC USD lens to its range. It features a sophisticated optical layout with VC image stabilization, two ED glass elements and two aspheres. Read on to find out how well this new model performs. |
Lens Recommendations
|
December 01, 2015
 |
Our technicians have tested no fewer than 130 lenses on Canon’s 50.6Mp EOS 5DS R Digital SLR. With the results for both prime and zoom lenses covering a diverse range of focal lengths, we’ve got all the data you need for picking out the right lens. In Part 1 of our three-part review, we bring you the analyzed and verified scores for standard zoom lenses as well as 35mm, 50mm and 85mm primes on the Canon EOS 5DS R. |
Lens Review
|
November 30, 2015
 |
Sigma has expanded the line up of high-end, high speed Art series lenses with this model, currently the widest in the range. Read on to find out how well this new model performs. |
Lens Review
|
October 30, 2015
 |
Early in the year Canon updated its high-speed 35mm f/1.4 L series prime, which is the first revamp of this model since the original was introduced in 1998. Read on to find out how well this new lens performs. |
Lens Review
|
October 29, 2015
 |
Designed exclusively for Sony E-mount cameras and the full-frame A7 series models in particular, the Zeiss Loxia 2/50 (50mm f/2), like the Otus ZF models, deliberately avoids AF in favor of a mix of manual mechanical controls and electronic data transfer. Read on to find out how well this lens performs. |
Lens Review
|
October 28, 2015
 |
After releasing high-speed 35mm and 24mm primes, Sigma has turned its attention to more moderate f/2-speed models. But rather than competing head-on with fixed focal length models, the company has introduced a high-grade f/2 zoom instead. Read on to find out how well this intriguing model performs. |
Lens Review
|
September 02, 2015
 |
As the successor to the EF 50mm f1.8 II, this upgraded model features a new exterior design in keeping with other recent EF and EF-S models and a metal mount. It also adopts a stepper motor for more responsive and quieter AF. Read on to find out how well this upgraded model performs. |
Comments
|
Added by Fotoman |
June 03 , 2015
Ultimately it's the skill...
You can test cameras all you want, ultimately it comes down to the skill level of the user. I've been in photography over 40 years and have used Canon, Nikon, etc. my understanding of exposure, composition, etc. (the basics) is what allies me to get successful images time and time again. Use what works best for you, but perfect your craft in the brain dept.
Reply |
|
|
Added by brianschtuzaphotography |
March 25 , 2014
Great Jack of all trades
I work in Nyc as a fashion photographer and I have to say the the 5d series are the most used cameras out side of medium format cameras .Ive been shooting with the mark 3 for over a year after shooting with the mark 2 for 2 years great both great cameras. You can see the shots I've taken with it for my work on my website www.brianschutzaphotography.com hope it helps!! also note I only shoot RAW format
Reply |
|
|
Added by guslar |
April 18 , 2013
Guess who is best sponsor for DxO...
Nikon or Canon? ;)
Reply |
|
|
Added by ag08025 |
November 18 , 2012
DNR
who can help me?
Why DPReview in the dynamic range is equal to the D800 and DxO no? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d800-d800e/19 Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
First replies for this comment
|
|
Added by randybenter |
November 18 , 2012
Re: DNR
Because the JPEG tone curve (measured by DPR) tells us nothing about the DR captured by the sensor. It really just indicates which jpeg settings produce low contrast images and which jpeg settings produce high contrast images. In some recent reviews DPR has tried to clarify the difference, but unfortunately they continue to use the term Dynamic Range on their tone curve test.
The Shadow Noise test on page 26 of that same review tells us more about the Dynamic Range of the sensor. You can clearly see the Canon has more noise in the shadows. The D800 can capture more stops of highlight and shadow detail while remaining below a specific level of noise. That is how it achieves a higher DR score. It is not a conspiracy. Canon just hasn't improved the DR of their sensors yet; I am sure they will catch up eventually. As a Canon fan, you know there are many aspects to a camera beyond sensor performance (e.g. lens quality, AF performance, metering accuracy). For example, the Canon S100 sensor is better than the Lumix LX5 and Olympus XZ-1, but the Canon S100 lens is so bad that the other 2 cameras are much better options. So, DXO sensor testing only tells us half the story. Reply |
|
|
Added by viktas |
November 01 , 2012
viktas
I own and use a 5Dmk3 for my studies and some of my clients for a few months now. I would have to write a sensor reading doesn't even come close to showing off this bodies attributes. Canon still have best lens choices if you can afford them, just show in raw if you might want more dynamic range or change settings in Picture Styles ( easy ). This is the fastest focusing body in this price range helping any one get the shot ( not missing it ), due to focus hesitation. Build quality is still best in class except for shutter count, Canon blew that one, but swaping out the mechanisium is always a option if you are a Professional down the line. Only because I'm able to buy one FF system did I invest in the best for most situations like a pro. I did care about just studio resolution becasue I don't have time for this in the field! The 5Dmk3 is the best in the field hands down. No hesitating focus, best lens choices and buid quality. Dxo's mark is for ametures.
Reply |
|
|
Added by Echidna |
June 01 , 2012
Split Personality
DxO Labs use a scientific/unprejudiced approach to measure and evaluate camera sensor properties. Then again, they also use a tabloid way of distorting whatever their findings might be.
There's a difference between perception and assessment. Lurid presentation will attract the masses, informed audience will probably be driven away by it. Anyway, whatever the title says, information is in the measurements instead. Reply |
|
|
Added by AaronMC |
June 01 , 2012
Thank you
I'm really glad to see a major website, in such dry terms, effectively lay some smack down on the 5D Mark III. It's a minor upgrade over the Mark II and it costs $1,000 more.
That's 100% corporate arrogance coming from a company that thinks it rules the industry. Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
First replies for this comment
|
|
Added by Tegularius |
June 02 , 2012
Re: Thank you
I'm afraid it does rules the industry. But I agree with you that it is very arrogant. Unless of course this is the best they can come up with, a bluff of sorts. Just ask a lot of cash for something that isn't bad, but it isn't great either, and maybe you'll impress their loyal followers. After all, if it is this expensive it must be because it's good, right? :-)
Reply |
|
|
Added by Jossbones |
May 31 , 2012
Sospechosa sensibilidad.
Estoy sorprendido por la gran diferencia de calidad que hay entre las dos cámaras. He sido usuario de nikon, de canon y ahora lo soy de sony. Está claro que el sensor de la d800 es mejor en casi todo, pero hay algo que no me cuadra dado que no tiene ningún sentido. El tamaño de los foto-captadores es muy importante a la hora de obtener poco ruido a altas sensibilidades. No es posible que la D800 arroje mejores resultados a altas sensibilidades que la canon 5D markIII. Sencillamente no me lo creo, además he visto comparativas reales en internet y ni de lejos se le acerca en sensibilidad a la canon 5D markIII. No dudo de la objetividad de la pruebas efectuadas pero no cuadra de ninguna forma los resultados. Si hay forma de explicar esto sin recurrir al tópico de que son ciclos y que la tecnología avanza hacedmelo llegar. Saludos.
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
First replies for this comment
|
|
Added by Tegularius |
May 31 , 2012
Re: Sospechosa sensibilidad.
Pues a mí no me sorprende nada. Nikon usa sensores de alto rendimiento fabricados por Sony, Aptina y otros, mientras que Canon lleva casi una década sin innovar sustancialmente en la tecnología de los sensores. Por ponerte un ejemplo, los sensores de Sony son backlit; es decir que la parte que recibe la luz está libre de elementos conductores y otros obstáculos. Esos obstáculos disminuyen la cantidad de fotones que puede capturar cada fotosite y por tanto los backlit dan mejores resultados.
El desarrollo de sensores está cambiando a gran velocidad, a parte de la tecnología Exmor están saliendo al mercado muchos con patrones diferentes al de Bayer y también con posibilidades de "binning" o también los sensores con tecnología "foveon". Canon se ha quedado (hace mucho ya) atrás. No sabe o no puede desarrollar nuevas tecnologías en este área. La única manera que tiene de fabricar sensores de cierta calidad es el usar formatos grandes en donde la relativamente baja densidad de píxeles hacen que tengan un nivel de ruido moderado. Pero claro, a igualdad de densidad o incluso mas alta (mira la NEX-7 una APS-C que iguala a puntos a la 5D MK III), Nikon se los come con patatas. No es cosa de DXOMark (no es razonable cargarse al mensajero por traer las malas noticias). Si Canon no es capaz de ponerse a la altura de la competencia, entonces debería considerar comprar sus sensores a terceros, como hace Nikon. Saludos. Reply |
|
|
Added by Tegularius |
May 31 , 2012
Re: Sospechosa sensibilidad.
Y ojo, no estoy diciendo que la 5D MK III sea una mala cámara. En absoluto. es la mejor cámara que ha sacado Canon hasta la fecha y en términos globales es una excelente cámara. Simplemente sucede que hay otras muchas mejores.
Saludos. Reply |
|
|
Added by IAMDXOMark |
April 20 , 2012
I AM DXOMark !
<div id="linkdxomark">This a comment for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Canon/EOS-5D-Mark-III">this page on the website</a></div>
[color=blue]Latest Photoshoot Collaboration of DXOMark and Nikon ! Enjoy: [/color] http://i42.tinypic.com/2q83pes.jpg [img]http://i42.tinypic.com/2q83pes.jpg[/img] Reply |
|
|
Added by ibangpots |
April 19 , 2012
Confused about the low ISO score
The print graph for SNR is almost identical to the D800 but the 5dIII is rated much lower. Also looking at picture comparisons I'm surprised to see this low number.
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
First replies for this comment
|
|
Added by kinematic |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO score
I'm confused as well... how does someone else who uses the same software by DxO and methodology (as standardized by DxO as well) get far different results?
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hybrids/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-1074186/review/page:5#articleContent Something doesn't jive. But in my own experience with the three cameras, I would say it matches Techradar's results. I'm not one to think that DxO got it wrong, but something doesn't make sense here. Reply |
|
|
Added by Vamp898 |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO score
Im not 100% sure but there are maybe two reasons
The 5D Mark III have 2 more ISO Stops (even torough they are completly uselss) So maybe the 5D Mark III looses some points in case of horrible performance at ISO 50k and 100k or (what would make more sense) The D800 have a much higher resolution. So at 36MP the D800 have nearly the same performance than the 5D Mark III at 24MP But if you downscale the 36MP Images to 24MP the Noise is visible less a the D800 than on the 5D Mark III So with the 36MP you can compensate the noise that you and with less noise at 24MP, compared to the 5D Mark III --> higher score As this can be easily seen in every test i think also DxO Benchmark calculates this in Reply |
|
|
Added by SLRist |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO score
Techradar are using DxO's software to perform the test. Who do you think is more likely to be using DxO's software correctly - DxO or Techradar?
Reply |
|
|
Added by dosdan |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO scoreQuote: The print graph for SNR is almost identical to the D800 but the 5dIII is rated much lower. This is easy to understand if you consider that: "The DxO Mark Sports Score is the maximum ISO for which the three criteria (SNR ≥ 30 dB, DR ≥ 9 EV, CS ≥ 18 bits) are still met." So all 3 criteria must be met. [url=http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/795|0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28appareil2%29/792|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon]http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/795|0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28appareil2%29/792|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon[/url] Since the SNR performance is close, that's not holding the 5DIII back. Neither is the DR at this ISO level where both sensors are close. It's the weaker CS (Colour Sensitivity) that causes the Canon's Sports (ISO) Score to be lower. The ISO has to be lowered in this instance until the CS = 18 bits to pass all 3 criteria tests. Why is the Canon inferior to the Nikon in this regard? Although DXO has mentioned this in the past (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/Canon-500D-T1i-vs.-Nikon-D5000/Color-blindness-sensor-quality), it's worthwhile bringing it up again: Canon's Red channel filter is not very selective, requiring more signal processing and therefore noisier reds: Compare the R[sub]raw[/sub] colour matrix lines (R[sub]sRGB[/sub], G[sub]sRGB[/sub], B[sub]sRGB[/sub]): D800: 1.94 -0.86 -0.08 5DIII: 2.27 -1.42 0.15 As it understand it, the smaller the positive & negative co-efficient values are, the better. A less discriminating colour filter is purported to offer a bit better light sensitivity (more photons reaching the sensel), but that's not reflected in their respective QE differences here: D800: 56% 5DIII 49% according to www.sensorgen.info The superior QE purformance is due I believe to Nikon's lead in micro-lens & coating technology. Note: I believe, SNR and thus QE, is measured on the Green channel (the colour our eye is most sensitive to), so QE measurements alone may not notice any improvement in Red channel sensitivity. The D800's Sport Score seems to be coming from its SNR figure. Consider the SNR18% at a measured ISO2211: 31.3dB. SNR ideally is inversely proportional to log(ISO). To compare the "Sports Score" of ISO2853 to ISO2211 = 10 log(2211/2853) = -1.1dB. So the SNR at the higher ISO should be 31.3dB - 1.1dB = 30.2dB (approx 30dB). Dan. Reply |
|
|
Added by kinematic |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO scoreQuote: Techradar are using DxO's software to perform the test. Who do you think is more likely to be using DxO's software correctly - DxO or Techradar? Something doesn't make sense. I know for a fact that there's far more dynamic range when using the 5Dmk3 yet their charts claim that it's lower than the 5Dmk2. In my own tests with both units, I get far more with the 5Dmk3 (about 8-12% depending on the colour) which matches Techradar's findings. Reply |
|
|
Added by IAMDXOMark |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO score
Latest Photoshoot Collaboration of DXOMark and Nikon !
Enjoy: http://i42.tinypic.com/2q83pes.jpg [img]http://i42.tinypic.com/2q83pes.jpg[/img] Reply |
|
|
Added by dosdan |
April 20 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO scoreQuote: It's the weaker CS (Colour Sensitivity) that causes the Canon's Sports (ISO) Score to be lower. The ISO has to be lowered in this instance until the CS = 18 bits to pass all 3 criteria tests. I've just noticed that the same topic was discussed in Horshack's post here with the same conclusion: [url=http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=41265241] http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=41265241[/url] Dan. Reply |
|
|
Added by HenryT2 |
April 21 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO score
OK, I kind of understand why the low score for the 5D. Not sure I agree, but I can accept it.
But I still question some of their conclusions. For instance, I was just looking at 3 prime lenses: the Nikkor 105 micro, the Nikkor 50 1.4G, and the Canon EF 1.8 II. Now, this is basically an unfair comparison as the 105 and the Canon 1.8 are completely different class of lens. In theory, there should be some points for build quality, speed and accuracy of focus, etc. But by the specs they report, the 105 is better in resolution, distortion, and vignetting, but worse by transmission and CA. The 50 1.4 is, on the otherhand, better transmission, but worse or the same in every other category. How is it that they both have better overall scores? I can't see how the math would work unless you add a bunch of points for having the name Nikon somewhere in the equation. Reply |
|
|
Added by dosdan |
April 21 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO scoreQuote: there should be some points for build quality, speed and accuracy of focus, etc. These are not considered. The dynamic performance of the lens and AF is not considered either. Everything is measured statically. Please remember that this isn't a full-featured lens review and probably never will be. It's a by-product of the process of measuring the data to be used in the DxO software to correct lens aberrations. Dan. Reply |
|
|
Added by flash01 |
April 21 , 2012
Re: Confused about the low ISO scoreQuote: The print graph for SNR is almost identical to the D800 but the 5dIII is rated much lower. Also looking at picture comparisons I'm surprised to see this low number. This explains it all... [url=http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/Detailed-computation-of-DxOMark-Sensor-normalization]http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/Detailed-computation-of-DxOMark-Sensor-normalization[/url] DXO Marks are normalized to a standard print / display size. So the 36 Megapixels of the D800 actually helps it get a better real-world, non-pixel-peeper, result. Reply |