just admit it , the 5D3 is an old tech and already dated when it was first announced.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I was very busy and could not write anything online these days, but I think as we all see it , not many people actually want a high resolution D-SLRs like the D800 and D810.
if many many want it then why Canon , Sony,etc do not release such a camera?
Why is only Nikon with the D810 suffering from recent financial crisis ?
Those who want high resolution bodies should get the A7R or MFDB, I have the A7R and now replaced my D800E and returned the D810 for another A7R. Noone shoot high resolution stuff wants the annoying mirrorslap.
IMHO, the5D3 and 6D are pretty recent event cameras, and for landscapes and set up location works we do not really need D-SLR type of AF, so the A7R makes more sense for this type of works than the Nikon D810 or possible Canon high resolution EOS body.
I think we tend to think what we want is what the market want, but it is obviously not correct. If the market really wanted the D800E type of camera, then why did it not sell well?
Those who really need high resolution sensor, already got MFDB or rent them time to time like we all do.
Just upping mp in the same sensor size with the same old sony canon type of sensor tech does not improve over all IQ in real life(only at DXO lab)
FYI on Nikon's latest postmarket findings:
I'm on the fence with this one. Dust with the D600 100% should have been caught in evaluation period before launch. But finding an issue that only shows up in crop mode + long exposures might be more of the weird lightning bolt of an issue you don't find until you release it to the masses.
If only Zeiss made AF Canon lenses.
I think I can safely say that all of us agree with you on that point. This lens with AF and IS would be worth $3000+. It is crazy good optically.
You could just buy an a99, or A7R and E4 adapter paired with the Sony 135 sonnar f.18 and have AF
as a multi-system user I have to agree with DXO guys, they are honest, much more so than DPR or any other unscientific review sites online.
The problem is that DXO's "science" is in dispute. How can you trust something that produces inconsistent and obviously incorrect results?
In particular I am considering the new D810 with 14-24 and 24-70 for landscapes.
The Canon 16-35 F4 is good but the 14-24 is great!
I do not agree here , the 16-35mm f4 is much more practical lens and even optically a bit better than the aged Nikon 14-24. the 14-24 is the most overrated Nikon lens, imho.
The 5DM3 is a nice camera but lacks the DR of the D810.
I do not think the 5D3 is a good camera , the D810 is a good one but it is just a REFINED D800E, I have both D800E and D810 and every time I compared them with the Zeiss 25mm f2 ZF2 or 135mm f2 APO , the results were always same identical.
In Jpeg, the D810 is about stop better as promised, but hey who will shoot this type of cameras jpeg?
I got the D810 for the new better ergonomics , the new AF , the new quiet shutter and the better LV , not for the new sensor.
But I found ISO64 is very very handy shooting long exposure.
The 5D3 ,in comparison, is already dated camera that no rational people buy at this point. it has a poor quality sensor , no need to compare it to the Nikons or Sonys , but even Canon's own low end camera the 6D kills it in terms of DR and over all IQ.
Hate to spend the extra $ for another body and duplicate lenses.
Then get the A7R ,which I just sold due to the shutter issue but for landscape type of work , you can use some adapter and heavy tripod with your Canon lenses. So it is much cheaper and much more logical to go Sony + Canon than Canon + Nikon.
Does anyone shoot both Canon and Nikon - Canon for long lens and Nikon for wide angles? Experience? Thoughts?
I shoot Canon Sony Nikon Panasonic , but I do seldom use them side by side. I have the GH4 for video and for street work, IMO for street , the m43 IQ is more than good enough and I use it very often.
I have Sony A7s for extreme lowlight handheld work and video, the A7s has excellent lowlight AF and I think it is much more accurate than the D4s ,which I compared to my A7s in real world several times before I returning it to Nikon.
I have D800E /D810 for all around use, and they are great for that.
I also have Canon EOS6D for TSE and a set of great small IS primes of Canon.
I think I use my gh4 more often than anything else , but I just prefer feel and size of my 6D with its incredible lowlight capability, so I think I use that one a lot more than my heavier D810 or D800E.
To be honest , after I got my D810 , I've never liked my D800E because the D810has much better quiet shutter and its grip is much better than the grip of the D800E, and I think the D810 is about 100g lighter than the D800E, also the D810 LV mode is much more refined, not as good or noiseless as my 6D or A7s but close.
Oh I also have A6000 and this is my always in my work bag kind of camera, I've never left it at home , it's been always in my work bag. I also keep my NEX5n in my car.
Anyway, I think all cameras are great but work great for different apps.
I am not trolling nor trying to start a flame war, but look for well thought out positions based upon experience.
Oly extreme fanboys care about brands and fight over whatever they prefer or happen to own.
So ignore them and go dual or even more mount kits if your wallet or bank allows you.
Really there is no one good brand solution for now, honestly if I can afford it I will also have Phase One backs for my high resolution work(for me the D800E or D810 is a big compromise but a good one, indeed).