# 5DM3 ISO 1600/3200 bad technique, or broken camera?



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

I've had my 5D3 since April, but haven't had much time to shoot it at high ISO, last night i took it to my daughters skating practice, used mainly with 70-200II and 35L, pictures are blotchy and lack definition.

I don't normally shoot indoors, but the last time i did in similar light i used my 5D2 with 70-200II and shot some martial arts at ISO 5000 and the images were sharper and cleaner.

As you can see these are blotchy, not in focus and have terrible noise, i tried with/without IS, i tried it with Various focus modes, the results below are typical.

Is it my poor technique, or should i be onto Canon for a fix/replacement.


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

heres another


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

74 views and no reply, thanks guys, perhaps i should have put D800 in the title, FWIW it's not a camera bash i actually love the thing, but i was a bit disappointed with these images, especially sharpness, and i wondered if i had done anything glaringly obvious, guess it's the bear pit at DP review or FM forums then ciao!!!


----------



## Chris Geiger (May 19, 2012)

You can't just point the camera at something and expect it to know what to do. Overall the exposure looks correct but the point of the photo is the face. I would have lowered the exposure on the background and added diffused light with off camera flash to the face. I understand you can't always do that, but without light control, you end up with just a snapshot. 

The results you are showing are normal and typical.


----------



## SteenerMe (May 19, 2012)

Looks underexposed to me which will show the noise. Did you use al servo? Cause at 2.8 its tough with that shallow depth of field to hit focus on a moving target..esp in lower light.


----------



## mitchell3417 (May 19, 2012)

On the first one her face is not properly exposed which contributes to the noise. It also seems like the first one is a touch out of focus. I would personally dial up the ISO 2 stops and the aperture a stop. This gives you a better exposure on her face, which you seem concerned about, and it gives you more depth of field for more sharpness. 

The camera might be front or back focusing slightly. Did you micro adjust your lenses.


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

thanks for your replies

I did use AIServo, I also tried various AF settings, including single point, expansion etc, I could use flash, but even at +3 FEC it wasn't enough given where i was standing, my daughter had to do the move where she could, we had little control over that, due to the fact that there were every level and she skates clockwise, most others are anti clockwise. I didn;t just point the camera and expect it to know what to do, as you'll see it was used in manual mode I tried to use 6400 but that was even worse, but the results were typical no matter what focus mode i used, and it was easier to keep her in the focus points when using expansion, zone etc. it's the noise that i'm concerned about, the lighting wasn't great but i was expecting better. Perhaps i need to increase my tracking technique, as keeping focus on her face was nigh on impossible and i suppose it does;t help that she was wearing black, i did ask her to wear brighter colours but teenage girls.....

I only took the shots as she asked me to take some of her airborne, and to be honest they have cleaned up not bad in post, and she is delighted with the results, but i was a little concerned about the noise levels, thanks for your help.


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

mitchell3417 said:


> On the first one her face is not properly exposed which contributes to the noise. It also seems like the first one is a touch out of focus. I would personally dial up the ISO 2 stops and the aperture a stop. This gives you a better exposure on her face, which you seem concerned about, and it gives you more depth of field for more sharpness.
> 
> The camera might be front or back focusing slightly. Did you micro adjust your lenses.



i'll try that next time, but at ISO 6400 it looked worse when chimping. Things looked better at 1/640 but there was too much motion blur, I also experimented with IS mode 1, mode 2 and off but it made little difference.

So far with the 70-200 i haven't need to use micro adjust, i did need a little on the 5D2 but not so on the MKIII, the 35L has around +5 or +7 from memory, but it seems to be inconstant depending on wether you are focusing on a near or far point, I have a shipping voucher to send the camera back to Canon for the light leak (non) Issue so i may send the 35L in at the same time for calibration.


----------



## wockawocka (May 19, 2012)

It's underexposed.

F/1.6 on a 35L is going to be risky, moreover risky on any lens at that aperture.

If noise is magnified by a lot if you don't get the exposure right and the subject matter is low contrast.

The first image is down to too wide an aperture.

The second is still a telephoto lens wide open at 2.8, did you have the IR focus assist enabled on the flash? If so turn the assist light off (camera menu) as it wouldn't of fired until the light gave it a lock but by that time the subject had skated past the AF point.

Turn the AF Microadjust off, it's junk and anything moving use AI servo.

To get the correct exposure meter off the ICE and overexpose by 1.5-2 stops.


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

wockawocka said:


> It's underexposed.
> 
> F/1.6 on a 35L is going to be risky, moreover risky on any lens at that aperture.
> 
> ...



Thanks, that's helpful, it's what I deep down suspected. I wasn't using focus assist, and I use back button focus, to be honest I never used ICE I just set it until it looked fine on camera screen, i should use histogram much more


----------



## Radiating (May 19, 2012)

Part of what you're complaining seems to me to be about low contrast, the situation you're shooting in doesn't have very good contrast so it won't show detail. The other issue is your images don't seem to be perfectly in focus. Have you tried micro adjusting your lenses? The focus should really be better than that.


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

Radiating said:


> Part of what you're complaining seems to me to be about low contrast, the situation you're shooting in doesn't have very good contrast so it won't show detail. The other issue is your images don't seem to be perfectly in focus. Have you tried micro adjusting your lenses? The focus should really be better than that.



I think the 70-200 one is misfocussed due to operator error, and the low contrast makes it worse, the 35L will be going back with te camera for calibration.


----------



## daniel-barton (May 19, 2012)

wockawocka said:


> It's underexposed.
> 
> ....
> 
> To get the correct exposure meter off the ICE and overexpose by 1.5-2 stops.



This. I think it's 2 stops unless your subject is real white/pale/reflective. I learned this the hard way shooting hockey. Do this first. Then worry about what your shots look like due to focus etc. Your AF probably just sucks due to the environment too, not necessarily the camera/lens combo. Crummy light, fast-moving subject, oddly reflective background bouncing light every which way, etc.


----------



## wockawocka (May 19, 2012)

photokid said:


> Thanks, that's helpful, it's what I deep down suspected. I wasn't using focus assist, and I use back button focus, to be honest I never used ICE I just set it until it looked fine on camera screen, i should use histogram much more



Yeah, trust the Histogram over anything else but regardless if you are using the back button to focus or not I saw that flash had been used. If the flash was on a at such a high ISO the IR searchlight will of came on. This can actually hinder your AF precision.


----------



## photokid (May 19, 2012)

Thanks guys, this is good info, not used to shooting in such a challenging environment.

To be honest I never even considered the focus assist light, initially I wasn't using flash but I thought I'd try it for a couple of wide shots as a little fill, I tend not to use flash much. 

Again thanks for the feedback, it's appreciated.


----------



## wockawocka (May 19, 2012)

The way focus assist works is the light shoots at the subject, the camera focuses but then a second light is fired to check the focus. This checking is what can really mess things up on moving objects.

However if in AI servo mode it won't come on because it will give you an out of focus subject when your subject is moving


----------



## Matthew19 (May 19, 2012)

Doesn't auto exposure want to set the average exposer fore the scene to 18% grey? That would definitely cause this scene to be underexposed, same with snow. +2 stops


----------



## cpsico (May 20, 2012)

The white of the ice has you off by about a stop, I would only overexposed by one stop to give a bit more shutter speed and a bit of a safety cushion in regards to possibly blown out high lights


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 20, 2012)

photokid said:


> heres another



The meter is getting tricked by all the white into under-exposing and you probably need to do a little micro-focus adjustment. The exposures do look dark, there is no need to save the highlights of the spot lights on the walls, just let those blow out.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 20, 2012)

photokid said:


> Thanks guys, this is good info, not used to shooting in such a challenging environment.
> 
> To be honest I never even considered the focus assist light, initially I wasn't using flash but I thought I'd try it for a couple of wide shots as a little fill, I tend not to use flash much.
> 
> Again thanks for the feedback, it's appreciated.



focus assist would be rough for action shots I'd think


----------



## scottkinfw (May 20, 2012)

Calibrate your lenses?



photokid said:


> heres another


----------



## risc32 (May 20, 2012)

But someone above said that AF micro adjustment is junk, and not to use it. I'm a bit surprised nobody has disagreed with that.


----------



## krjc (May 20, 2012)

When I take photos of my sons hockey games I overexpose so that the face is not under exposed. depending on the rink the actual amount of over exposure will vary.

Not directly related but my 5D3 is so much better for this type of this environment then my 7D. I have taken photos at 10,000 ISO and they are better then my 7D at 1,600.


----------



## atvinyard (May 20, 2012)

Metering for the ice. Spot meter on the subject. Since the lighting looks pretty even, you could have her stand still where she's going to do the trick so that you can get a spot meter on her face. Then make the manual settings to get the proper exposure. Then let her do the fancy stuff and you should be exposing correctly.


----------



## agierke (May 20, 2012)

in the first shot it says you were set to F1.6. it is extremely difficult to hold focus at F1.6...the slightest movement from you or your subject and the sliver of DOF may move off your subject. simply breathing can cause you to fall out of the DOF at 1.6. same thing for 2.8 on the 70-200 (although you have a better chance of staying within the DOF at the shorter focal length than extended to 200mm). to attempt to get tack sharp results at a high ISO with the rate of motion involved with ice skating is pretty lofty expectations. 

i cant see that big of a noise issue given how the files are posted on this site. both images are certainly usable given what they are going to be used for (i assume they were for your daughter). 

these latest generation cameras offer tremendous capability to the point that it was unthinkable a mere 5 years ago. however, performance expectations are through the roof (and unrealistic imo) for what remains extremely challenging shooting situations. a poorly lit, mostly white skating rink where you are trying to freeze a high rate of motion? that is a nightmare situation and will remain so for some time to come. 

understand the physical limits of your shooting situations and temper your expectations just a bit.


----------



## AJ (May 20, 2012)

Yes you could work with ambient and crank up the exposure another stop or two.

Or - you could do the strobist thing. Keep background exposure the same, and place a flash off-camera to the side. You could set it on the boards. Shoot direct or through an umbrella. Press the shutter when your daughter faces in the same direction as the flash. Play with flash power and see what happens. Good luck!


----------



## Terry Rogers (May 20, 2012)

The way I've metered exposure at rinks is to take a shot filled mostly with the white ice. I then check the histogram and adjust so the large spike is far to the right without clipping. Seems to work well for me.


----------



## yulia (May 20, 2012)

AJ said:


> Yes you could work with ambient and crank up the exposure another stop or two.
> 
> Or - you could do the strobist thing. Keep background exposure the same, and place a flash off-camera to the side. You could set it on the boards. Shoot direct or through an umbrella. Press the shutter when your daughter faces in the same direction as the flash. Play with flash power and see what happens. Good luck!


i don't think flash is allowed at the rink


----------



## michi (May 20, 2012)

Never heard anyone say micro focus adjust is junk. Why would it be. If a lens is properly adjusted, you can only benefit. It's not like it slows the focus system down or degrades any other functions. With zooms specifically you obviously need to make sure you have it adjusted for the focal length you will most likely be using.


----------



## sanj (May 20, 2012)

In my opinion it is not underexposed. I do think, for whatever reason, the focus is not exact.


----------



## sanj (May 20, 2012)

I also think your crop is too much. At this magnification most cameras will seem noisy. IMHO.


----------



## Northstar (May 20, 2012)

Are you shooting through plexiglass? If so, that would contribute to the problem. 
 It's underexposed -the ice is playing a trick on metering....I've made this mistake myself. As others have said, try to overexpose by a stop.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 20, 2012)

photokid said:


> 74 views and no reply, thanks guys, perhaps i should have put D800 in the title



You expect people to provide instant help after 6 hours after your post and get sarcastic if it isn't delivered? Sounds like you expect too much, like pressing a button on you camera and taking instant great pictures... you may have to adjust your expectations on both fields, if I may say so.



photokid said:


> I've had my 5D3 since April, but haven't had much time to shoot it at high ISO, last night i took it to my daughters skating practice, used mainly with 70-200II and 35L, pictures are blotchy and lack definition. [...] Is it my poor technique, or should i be onto Canon for a fix/replacement.



Um, seriously, maybe you should have shot with a crop camera like a 60d for some time to appreciate the iq and af of the pictures you are able to take even in *problematic* lighting conditions with the 5d3 and your stellar lenses most people can only dream about. This is really no gloating, just an observation

As for you technique, it's indeed underexposed, you should have overexposed just so much that you are just able to recover the highlights in raw (I use Lightroom for this) so you can use the dynamic range to the max = less noise. That being said, what you are seeing at higher iso certainly is not "terrible noise". Maybe you expected to just push the shutter and get the sports pictures you see in the media which were taken in *optimal* conditions?

For a moving object, your shutter speed is not not high enough for 100% crop sharpness (I'm frequently shooting animals) and your keeper rate will drop - imho the hair shows motion blur. Did the sharpness improve @iso6400?

Last not least, as you said, raising fec doesn't help if your flash is not strong enough. Get a 600rt


----------



## sandymandy (May 20, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> photokid said:
> 
> 
> > 74 views and no reply, thanks guys, perhaps i should have put D800 in the title
> ...


----------



## photokid (May 20, 2012)

Thanks again

Re sarcasm, wasn't really serious, should have put smiley. 

Re metering, I was in manual. 

Re plexiglass, sadly no, I wish I could blame that, but no glass of any sort

Re 60D, this was my first time shooting ice skating, my 5D3 is new but it's not my first camera. Started with Fuji bridge camera, then 30D then 5D2 then 5D3. My first good lenses where Sigma. And the reason for my post was exactly as you mentioned, we're the images typical and I was expecting too much, or did I have a faulty camera. 

You guys have convinced me camera is fine, and it's all down to user error/difficult scene. 


Re 600rt, can't afford it, but is its only 2m better than 580 can it be that much brighter ?


----------



## te4o (May 20, 2012)

Photo kid,
I had the same impression initially using Aperture. Is this your only noise reduction system?
DPP and LR 4.1 RC2 gave a lot better noise control with chroma. Try a different RAW converter. I changed over to LR because of that just a week ago. LR chroma + Dfine 2.0 clean up almost everything up to ISO 10000... 
Just an idea. I loved Aperture until I started shooting high ISO.
Cheers


----------



## wockawocka (May 20, 2012)

michi said:


> Never heard anyone say micro focus adjust is junk. Why would it be. If a lens is properly adjusted, you can only benefit. It's not like it slows the focus system down or degrades any other functions. With zooms specifically you obviously need to make sure you have it adjusted for the focal length you will most likely be using.



I've never had a focus issue with my lenses other than with ones that are duff from the factory.
I never use micro adjust and shoot at F/2.8 or faster nearly all the time.

I have most L series lenses from the 16mm-200mm range, primes and zooms yet I've never felt the need to tune my focus. I have used the 1D4, 1Ds3, 5D2 and 5D3 on these lenses and never needed to adjust the lens focus.

Either I'm exceptionally lucky with my equipment, have a different version of what 'in focus' means or it's a system to correct lenses that didn't quite hit the quality control mark at Canon HQ. I will suggest it's more to stop Canon receiving returns than to help the consumer out.


----------



## awinphoto (May 20, 2012)

The exposure is off but the camera won't think so with the bright lights in the shot. It sees them and naturally thinks its the white point and under expose from there. The only caveat is shooting in spot, exposure comp, or ext metering. Also with focus, that shallow is very difficult to follow and track, ask and 5d2 shooter at a wedding. That fstop range is very unwieldy and settings and practice will go a long way. MA is real. Ive had L lenses be different MA values for different bodies. It is there to help, not hurt.


----------



## photokid (May 20, 2012)

te4o said:


> Photo kid,
> I had the same impression initially using Aperture. Is this your only noise reduction system?
> DPP and LR 4.1 RC2 gave a lot better noise control with chroma. Try a different RAW converter. I changed over to LR because of that just a week ago. LR chroma + Dfine 2.0 clean up almost everything up to ISO 10000...
> Just an idea. I loved Aperture until I started shooting high ISO.
> Cheers



Thanks, similar results with LR4 and DPP, that's why I thought it may be camera. The screenshots where shown with aperture defaults, they have cleaned up better with a little PP. to be honest DPP is limited and clunky, LR4 is compromised re noise, and aperture is compromised too, I'm not sure any RC app is ideal with these raw files yet.


----------



## michi (May 20, 2012)

wockawocka said:


> I've never had a focus issue with my lenses other than with ones that are duff from the factory.
> I never use micro adjust and shoot at F/2.8 or faster nearly all the time.
> 
> I have most L series lenses from the 16mm-200mm range, primes and zooms yet I've never felt the need to tune my focus. I have used the 1D4, 1Ds3, 5D2 and 5D3 on these lenses and never needed to adjust the lens focus.
> ...



Well, I don't own a Canon store like you do, but on my 7D, many of my lenses improved with MFA. On my 5DII on the other hand, I haven't felt the need to use it yet. So maybe it's the 7D body, although some of the lenses with it are +, some are -, so I don't know if it really is the camera. Either way, I'm happy to have tweaked all my lenses to their maximum potential.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 20, 2012)

wockawocka said:


> I never use micro adjust and shoot at F/2.8 or faster nearly all the time.



I guess that means that you're only Canon lenses - 3rd party manufacturers are said to have more variance in their lenses, thus requiring af adjustment more often. And that would be one of the reasons Canon cut afma from the 60d, other than increasing the difference to the 7d of course.


----------



## AJ (May 21, 2012)

yulia said:


> AJ said:
> 
> 
> > Yes you could work with ambient and crank up the exposure another stop or two.
> ...


Did you ask them? Or are you assuming?


----------



## agierke (May 21, 2012)

i'm pretty sure flash during ice skating is generally frowned upon. i have shot diving and flash was completely prohibited. reason behind it was they didn't want the athletes to be distracted or disoriented during a critical moment that may result in them crashing and injuring themselves.

i could be wrong with ice skating but i wouldn't be surprised if they said no.


----------



## AJ (May 21, 2012)

This is a skating practice. Read the original post. Just the OP and his daughter getting some ice time. It's not a competition with officials and rules and such.


----------



## cpsico (May 22, 2012)

photokid said:


> Thanks again
> 
> Re sarcasm, wasn't really serious, should have put smiley.
> 
> ...


Learning how to read a histogram will greatly improve your exposure accuracy , if there is a lot of white there should a big spike almost all the way to but not touching the right, grey, light blue like sky dead in the middle black just like white but way to the left. Any mid tone should have a nice hump in the middle. If blacks, whites and mid tones are all in the shot you would have a hump in the middle with spikes on both sides.


----------



## photokid (May 24, 2012)

Thanks for all your replies guys, will take your advice on board and try again next week.


----------

