« on: July 22, 2014, 01:39:21 PM »
I think my previous reply to the OP was very confusing.
So try to rewrite it here:
1 N 14-24 vs C 16-35. I think they are about identical in resolving power and the 16-35f4 IS has a bit lower CA and distortion. So they are optically of similar quality.
So I think the N 14-24 is the most overrated lens ever and it is already a bit too long in the tooth.
The 16-35f4 IS is a very sharp zoom and it is very versatile with the super effective IS(works on the A7R too) and very strong FL coating.
The 16-35mm f4IS seldom flares , the 14-24 N is extremely prone to flare in comparison.
2 A7R vs D810.
the D810 is indeed a bit better with a bit lower color noise throughout their ISO range , but in print it is invisible or at least indistinguishable, so if you want to save a lot of money(and weight) and want reuse your Canon lenses get the A7R. I often use my 16-35f4IS, 35mm f1.4 Sigma, 135mm f2 and 200mm f2 on my A7R and A7s.
You can not use your Canon lenses or Sony lenses on the Nikon, so unless you absolutely want to go dual mount with many specialized Zeiss and Nikon primes, you do not want to get the D810.
3 if your only reason to get or want to try a Nikon 36mp sensor is the sensor itself , then go for the D800E and save some big money, or even better the A7R.
The D810 is indeed a better more refined body but the RAW IQ is the same as the D800E, or at least very identical that no one can see the difference in print.
I have the D810 but I got it for better AF, better LV with EFC and better ergonomics not for the newer 36mp sensor, and I've already got many many Nikon and Zeiss lenses for it.
And going dual mount or more mount system is nothing wrong, and in fact it is the only realistic solution for people shooting both video and stills or more than one type of app.
The 5D3 is useless , the sensor is really bad , I never thought it was actually as bad as some Nikon die-hard fanboys say about it at DPR or many fora ,but unfortunately, it is as bad as the mk2 was or even worse.
I confirmed it by testing it against my 6D , 5D2, A7R, A7 and D810.
So do not get the 5D3 unless you absolutely need the 61 AF with 41 cross type sensors.
For me it did not work regardless of the super AF or super high quality body, and I am sure the upcoming 5D4 will get at least as good sensor as the one in the 6D with more pixels.
So I am looking forward to visiting Germany in this Sept for the Photokina.
If Canon cannot get out a great 5D3 replacement , I think they will seriously have hard time competing against Nikon in the high resolution high end 35mm D-SLR market(especially old guys with a set of Leica R or Zeiss Otus kind love it).
The D810 is a great camera and if you only want to own one camera, then it is the camera for you(at least for now). But in your case , I think the A7R is a bit more rational choice since you can re-use your Canon EF lenses on that body.
I personally do not think D-SLRs of any kind is exciting , even as good as the D810 is kind of boring compared to Sony A7 or Pana GH4. The mirrorless is the future and I think Nikon is investing wrong kind of money on wrong kind of market. I hope Canon will make 5D3 replacement camera without mirror (with EVF), it will need 4k , clean LV and great EVF at least to be even competitive to the next gen Sony A7 series or Panasonic GH4.
Nikon is too timid to go there, and like all other old tech makers in this industry, it will eventually be forced to go out of this market just like Minolta. And their shareholders know it so Nikon stocks devalued and their trust status degraded by 32 percent in the last 13 days.
So while Nikon seems to have been doing everything so well in this particular market , it has been like Minolta in its last few years of its life it has been investing too much money into wrong old dying technology, e.g , the D-SLR(OVF tech), therefore it's stock hit hard and the company is doomed.
BTW, Nikon lost about 13 percent of market share in last year and now it is the no3 in this game.
I think it will be Sony vs Canon , not Nikon vs Canon any more.
I guess what I have been trying to say is to invest too much money on the dying system is too risky, and unless you already have expensive Nikon glass or Zeiss or Leica R glass for it , it is not worth going for it.
Just keep what you've got and get a Sony A7R or a A7 in addition to your current camera.
In many ways the Sony A7R is not as refined as the D810 is , but it is a lot less risky and also much cheaper to get.
And if you do shoot only landscapes or studio set up work , then there is no difference between the D810 and the A7R.