Comments on: Nikon D3s vs Canon 1D Mark IV ISO

By: TMC

TMC — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 07:23:33 +0000

Yes, I have owned a Nikon D3s, and every single digit D-series body before it, as well as every single digit F-series bodies up to the F3, and have used them extensively under all extremes and conditions. As a photojournalist for the past 26 years, Nikon has been my choice. Until now.

Now I have begun to seriously contemplate a change-over to the Canon 1D line because of the exacting standards and demands in today’s print media.
As the bar is constantly set higher in terms of resolution and manageable noise for publication purposes, I have found the Nikon product lagging. Most photojournalists do not have time to play around with photoshop or other software to refine their shots, especially when they are shooting a few thousand at a time, and need to have them filed immediately thereafter. Very little today, (in print media), is shot over 6400 anyways, so super high ISO’s aren’t really that important at all. Besides, the photographer isn’t the one who decides which shots are to be used, that’s the job of the editor. Full Frame or 1.3 crop, isn’t really relevant, not by today’s digital print/publishing standards. Detail, and sharpness, as well as that “right moment” which comes with speed are the determining factors that count.

I came to this site looking for valid comparisons between the 1D MK IV & D3s, but found only squabbling amongst amateur users. I would appreciate it if there were any MK IV owners out there who could share their experiences and impressions.

By: Peter

Peter — Tue, 25 May 2010 04:00:35 +0000

Totally agreed, Canon’s 5D series has always been a massive winner, and in my eyes Canon’s best cameras have always been the 5D & 5DMK II. Fantastic balance of size, weight, functionality and price. High Iso/Noise wise it also outperforms the MK4 according to DXOMark which is in my opinion absolutely reliable.

As a Nikon user i must say i feel safe at the moment with my choice in brand. As a landscape / low-light action photographer the 5DmkII is the only real competitor to the entire Nikon lineup, compared to the D700 it serves better as a landscape camera. Just depends weather i feel like doing landscape / low light, id rather have both!

By: Roberto

Roberto — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:58:43 +0000

Nikon is better than Canon.

By: CANON

CANON — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 07:51:56 +0000

CANON!!!
WAKE UP!!AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:45:10 +0000

Excellent observation and I could not agree more.

By: Ben

Ben — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 02:02:44 +0000

high ISO is hugely important to us event/wedding photographers. I can’t fire powerful flashes/studio strobes inside a catholic church. Yet now with the D3/D700 class camera’s I can get amazing stuff for the couple even in super dark churches. That said, I would love a wider dynamic range (i *am* a weddding photographer. lol). Nikon Ergonomics are great.

We need more/better video functions, iso 3200 IQ at 25,600, more DR, and *much* better WB and auto-WB.

Oh, and lower prices :)

By: Ren Krockwell

Ren Krockwell — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:32:16 +0000

Well trolled, sir. Hats off to you.

By: ohyva

ohyva — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:37:35 +0000

Did not notice if discussed somewhere here already but wondered why in the 1D4 EXIF there is “Software: Digital Photo Professional” even though claimed to be directly from the camera.

By: Carey Photography

Carey Photography — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:29:42 +0000

First off, the 7D isn’t at the same level of the D700, in terms of price and specs (especially in relation to sensor size) you have to compare the 5D MkII and the D700, and in that respect, the price to go up from either of those to the MkIV or the D3s is the same.

I HATE pixel peepers, it’s because of you guys that there aren’t any real substantial upgrades in these camera tiers in terms of dynamic range, speed, ergonomics, features and innovation. Stop peeping, just stop. Isn’t there other ways to judge a camera? I’ve been asking that for like a year now and no one wants to give me an answer, they just want to argue over ISO performance at ISO 12800 and higher. Who uses that ISO range anyway, I never would. I would probably never use anything over 400 or 800. Why would you? Doesn’t anyone use a flash? It isn’t hard you know, and you can get great shots with a flash that look like you’re ambient light. I don’t get it, maybe I’m old fashioned from the days of film when you didn’t want to go over 800 ISO. Oh well, have fun peeping, I’ll have fun shooting, and worrying about the right angle, instead of how my camera is going to perform at an ISO level I’m never going to use.

By: Inst

Inst — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 16:21:33 +0000

Just looked it over… apparently the 32 mp 1Ds Mark 4 is supposed to have the same noise levels as the 16 mp 1D Mark 4. Scaling based on pixel count, the 32 mp 1Ds Mark 4 has eight thirds the pixels of the D3s. That should come up to about one and a third stop from pixel count, and the 1D Mark 4 on a second look is 2 stops distant from the D3s. That comes out to two thirds of a stop difference post-noise reduction / scaling, making the 1D Mark 4 very competitive with the D3s on high iso noise.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:17:57 +0000

raising the bar is good for consumers only if the price goes down,otherwise all you are getting is minor updates and u end up paying much more for every new gen cam.

as it stands right now canon is trying to catch up nikon not only in the technical stuff but on pricing level also,we are paying too much for cams at pro level from both companies simply because there aint a third company to challenge them.

a 7D + a better AF + Body + 1 to 1 1/2 stop better iso = 1dMK4 and you pay how many 1000$ more?

a nik d700 + a better body + 1 stop iso = d3s . a few 1000$ more,
why cos no other brand makes a good enough com to compete

By: Joe J

Joe J — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:57:23 +0000

Sure, when you spend the 5k on a new camera for me, I’ll stop complaining about inferior products…

By: Joe J

Joe J — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:55:56 +0000

It it absurd to say it’s unfair to Canon. Canon specifically targeted the 1D4 for the same market as the D3. It doesn’t matter what chip they decide to put in said camera. Then why arent’ you complaining about Canon not making a FF “sports” camera in the same market as the D3? If that was the case about not comparing different sensor cameras, that means the D3 really is a class above. :-)

By: Joe J

Joe J — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:44:02 +0000

yeah, and Nikon’s obviously superior philosophy has left Canon in the dust.