Quick Unscientific High ISO Comparison: Canon 5D Mk II, Sony A99, and Sony RX-1

Tonight I did a super quick and super informal comparison post in my hotel suite between the Canon 5D Mk II, Sony A99 and RX1. Why the 5D Mk II? Well, most of you couldn’t tell the high ISO differences between the 5D Mk II and 5D Mk III; so why bother?

Each camera was set to Auto White Balance, 35mm at f2.8, 1/1000th and ISO 6400. They all focused on the same spot as well. Take a look at the samples and let us know your thoughts.

5D Mk II

Sony A99

Sony RX1

A couple of notes:

- Yes I’m aware of the different white balancing. No, I’m not changing it because it shows how the different cameras also react.

- The RX1 was a JPEG while the others were RAW files. No processing was done to any image though.

- This is informal

- I am extremely close to purchasing the A99. This is pretty much everything I wanted in a Full Frame DSLR.

- Though I was a bit offput by the RX1 when I tested the pre-production model, I’ve spent an entire day shooting with it and I’m convinced that with the electronic viewfinder attached, this camera will best nearly anything out there for street photography. The ergonomics are great, the manual focusing is awesome when combined with peaking, the image quality is top notch, and it is pretty darn small.

Something else a Sony rep and I discovered. The RX1 has wireless flash control built in: however, the pop-up flash doesn’t actually act like a master. It is only there for attached Sony flashes. That’s a bummer too; but it could just be the fact that myself and journalists with all coverage coming out right now on the web are dealing with near final production quality units.

More to come, so stay tuned.

Please Support The Phoblographer

We love to bring you guys the latest and greatest news and gear related stuff. However, we can’t keep doing that unless we have your continued support. If you would like to purchase any of the items mentioned, please do so by clicking our links first and then purchasing the items as we then get a small portion of the sale to help run the website.

Also, please follow us on Facebook, Flickr and Twitter.

Tagged as: 5d Mk II, a99, canon, comparison, high iso, image quality, mk iii, rx1, sony

Peter Walkowiak

I am going to say that the A99 appears to retain more detail but maybe they have different amounts of NR applied. This is a very exciting camera for Sony. Their high ISO on their full frame was several generations behind with the A850 but now it seems like they are either on par or just 1 generation behind (I know the mk3 would beat out this camera).
- http://www.facebook.com/dvir.barkay Dvir Barkay
  
  it would be on par if it wouldn’t be the light lose for the semi transparent mirror. The Dxomark test for the Rx1 is almost as good as the D600 so it is the mirror difference.
http://www.facebook.com/pnguyen1 Peter Nguyen

Glad you left the WB alone so we could see the differences. I downloaded the 5D2 and A99 samples into Photoshop and did Auto color to get similar white balances. The A99 looks cleaner and with better details. I have D800 now but I’m considering an A99. It’ll be my first Sony. Thx for the shots!
Joe Gunawan

Love the A99. Damn, Chris, I’m in the same position as you are, too, with the A99, haha! Guess next time we see each other after this trip, we’d be rocking the A99s!

– Joe
Matthew Dunlap

Also looking forward to my A99
(current A77 user)
Dan Liew

Hi, I just pre-ordered the A99 + VG as well and can’t wait to hold it in my hands!! Currently using an A77. Main improvements I’m looking for is the ISO performance and also a better DOF from a Full Frame body. While I’m amazed at the RX1′s ISO performance, I can’t help but feel that the 5D’s image is slightly cleaner than the A99. Is it just me?
- http://www.facebook.com/pnguyen1 Peter Nguyen
  
  Download the images and open them in Photoshop. Make the WB’s similar which will give a more accurate comparison…then the A99 def more detailed and slightly cleaner than the 5D2, to my eyes
Yngvar Johnsen

And here’s someone who supports your A99 views http://www.pixiq.com/article/the-best-camera-ever
Pingback: New A99, NEX-6 and RX1 tests (and ISO comaprison) | sonyalpharumors
http://twitter.com/Emacs232 Denis Cheremisov

RX1 is obviously better than both A99 and 5d3. Too bad this thing resembles other Sony half-baked cameras too much.
A99 and 5d3 are about the similar.
T.j.

These results are interesting. The RX1 retains very good detail and low noise, suprising to me, the Canon didn’t handle this test so well, the A99 did just as good as the Canon (IMO) the A99 and seems to have more NR. I may have to give the RX1 a real look, I hate the form factor, other than that wonderful lens setup, but not having an EVF built in just seems insane to me, what a killer that thing would have been with an EVF and a bigger battery.
raz744u

Just curious, why was the RX1 in JPEG and the other 2 RAW?
- ChrisGampat
  
  Lightroom can’t support it.
  
  - Chris Gampat
  Editor in Chief
  The Phoblographer
A. Non

RX1 wins that one.
Terry

You must be honestly stupid if you think anyone said the 5D II and 5D III had same high ISO quality. No one said that. The one thing that the 5D III boasted was good low light performance. Cannot believe how dumb some of you writers are.
- http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=38008586 Frankie Withers
  
  The point is from a nonscientific test- such as this one- in other words, a practical test- viewers could not differentiate the mark III and mark II files. Is that ok with you? Because its very true. Try to differentiate files shot by d3, d3s, d3x at same size- its tough. D4 has markedly higher dynamic range though and this has visible difference. Not so with the mark III and mark II. Calm down. Canon is great
- ChrisGampat
  
  Just showed your comment to three journalists, they laughed at you.
  
  - Chris Gampat
  Editor in Chief
  The Phoblographer
  - http://twitter.com/greenlimabeans Donovan
    
    Maybe Terry has a point, despite his lack of diplomacy. I was suprised by your statement that “most of you couldn’t tell the high ISO differences between the 5D Mk II and 5D Mk III”. As much as I’d love it to be true (since I still have a 5dii, and can’t justify an upgrade), it seemed highly unlikely. So I went to the link. Of the 14 comments below the 5dii vs 5diii comparison in the link, only a couple couldn’t tell, one got it wrong, and all the rest correctly stated that image 1 was the 5diii due to lower noise, better detail and better dynamic range.
filu

Hey, nice comparison. Care to put the RAW files somewhere for download? At this compression level you can only see how bad the JPEG artifacts are
GH

Hi Chris,

Does the RX1 have some kind of indicator for focus distance on the LCD like the Fuji cameras have? Without this, it makes zone focusing for street photography difficult.
- ChrisGampat
  
  It does. Plus focus peaking
  
  - Chris Gampat
  Editor in Chief
  The Phoblographer
Sony fanboy

5d mark iii triples the ISP performance of the mark ii. You sir, you sound like a Sony fanboy or Sony rep trying to make it look like the a99 Ido is as good as the mark iii. It’s as good as a 4 year old camera, the mark ii.

Btw, I’m a Sony fanboy let down by the a99 iSo performance
- Jack
  
  *first world problems*
Eskay

Could you clarify and/or explain some regarding the pop-up flash as a trigger (master) on the RX1? Is the pop-up a commander/master or does the built-in wireless flash capability work another way?

Will it offer high speed sync similar to the Nikon CLS?
- ChrisGampat
  
  It won’t trigger flashes at all as stated
  
  - Chris Gampat
  Editor in Chief
  The Phoblographer
Nate Jedinak

The Sonys are looking good, and the AWB corrects a bit better. I was fine with 5D2 high ISO, this looks just as fine. What’s up with the distortion in the RX1′s shot? I sure hope final production includes correction… That’s nasty.
fooza

what lenses were used on the dslrs?
http://www.facebook.com/peter.turner.56027 Peter Turner

The grain on the rx1 is considerably less when blown up than the other two.. If it has the same sensor as the A99 what would explain this? Since I’m seriously considering the A99 as my next dslr, any idea how the Sony lenses compare to their Zeis lenses, i.e. how much and what differences are visible?
- http://twitter.com/Emacs232 Denis Cheremisov
  
  No “translucent” mirror
- Bluelake
  
  Obviously some noise reduction was applied to the RX1 as it’s a jpg. The two others are raw files with no noise reduction. To make a valid comparison we should have the raw file from the RX1.
Pingback: Photo camera review | Canon BG-E11 Battery Grip for
Robroy

Compairing a processed JPG ooc vs a “non-processed” RAW is utterly pointless.

You should at least also have shown the ooc JPGs from the other two cameras. That way all those lazy “photographers” that don’t even adjust white balance accordingly to the scene, as you seem to suppose, could at least see the different JPG engines at work, which they, i guess, most probably also won’t optimize? Hooray for today’s point and click crowd buying theirselves into the top line of cameras…
Ralph Martin

Another great thing about the A99 is the universal hot shoe. I use a canon TTL flash on it and I quite enjoy having that option.