« on: March 24, 2013, 12:14:34 PM »
I wish to weigh in on not the speculatation of a larger mpx camera, but my personal experiance and desire for Canon to join the party. I'm a professional wildlife and landscape photographer and have been so since 1974 which means I have seen alot of equipment between my eye and subject. I have been shooting side-by-side since their release both the 5d3 and D800 and Im torn right down the middle. Heres my take away:
1) I love the way the 5d3 feels in my hand and functions. Function and ease of use is close to the top of my list when choosing a camera. Maybe the best two features I like is the C# dial settings and ease of switching from Single shot to Al-servo with the push of programable button. On the D800 you need two hands and be somewhat of a contortionist.
2) Low light (high ISO) situations with wildlife is a daily issue for me and while both camps get excited about their products results the fact is at high ISO (lets just say 12,000 and up for discussion) give nothing better than a record shot or best use a small jpg for screen display only. I know, I know, I have seen and read others argue their results are simply amazing. I'm happy your happy. Lets move on.
3) Frame rate: The D800 is not the camera if high frame rate is important. It is simply slow and takes for ever to refresh, Period. The 5d3 is not much faster, but at least refreshes in less time. Personally unless I'm shooting hummingbird the 5d3 is just fine and in fact the percentage of OOF images with the 5d3 is very low compared to my 1dX. Most the bird life I photograph (and I'm not saying I'm a big birder) I have taken away some great images with the 5d3 that was just not possible with the D800. The good news for me is that most the wildlife I photograph I have never felt I needed 14 fps. I can do that with the 1dx, but OMG thats a lot of editing. Side bar: If you have ever been in Yellowstone photographing lets say a bear, there is likely to be at least a dozen or more photographers standing side by side with you and than the bear moves an ear. The sound of hundreds of frames per second that you hear always makes me chuckle. I digress...
4) When you talk about camera bodies and megapixels there must be some discussion of lenses. Again I use both worlds and you can show me all the graphs you want, but in my world IQ from both lines are close to equal. With that said I feel Canon has put a lot of R&D in recent years into their 'L' prime lenses. I simply love them! Sharpness is simply outstanding and heres the kicker, the weight! Not sure how they do it, but I think this is what keeps me with Canon. My go to lens is my Canon 600mm. I spent the last year with a Nikon 600mm lens and while the IQ is outstanding it weighs pounds more than the new Canon 600mm and when your my age and carrying it over your shoulder for miles while walking though river banks looking for moose it makes a huge difference. Not a fan of zoom lenses, I dont care who makes them.
5) Final point and this brings me back to this thread: Megapixel. I have looked over hundreds of shots with both cameras and megapixels matter. Again, you can show me all your graphs, but the end result is what brings home the bacon. Hands down the d800 IQ is hard to beat. I'm very pleased with the 5d3 (I still own two), but the 36megapixel is going knock your socks off.
My conclusion is that they both have advantages. If I was king my camera would feel and function like my 5d3 with 36 megapixels. Someday after I'm long gone there will be 80 megapixel camera that fit in you pocket with one lens that does it all with large format results, but until than and while I'm in the game all I ask Canon for is 36 (give or take a few). I think in todays technology there is no reason our DSLR's can't offer IQ that rivals medium format after all they did back in the days of film so why not digital. We are so close.