September 23, 2014, 10:29:28 AM

Show Posts

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.

Messages - V8Beast

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 65
But it's funny, because when my jaw drops at an amazing image in the galleries on, I don't start drilling down to the pixel level to figure out why. I think, "Amazing light, great composition, outstanding quality." I don't think, "Oh, that must have been taken by Nikon or Canon" but instead, "Why is that photographer so much better than I am?"

Precisely. I just don't see either of these bodies giving their handlers a big enough edge over the other where the tech specs would be what separates a mediocre image from a great image.

For all the "switchers" out there (or pretend switchers), I can't fathom that you would dump your glass and familiarity with a UI to make a change from Canon to Nikon (or vice-versa), when both tools look to by quite exceptional.

I'm guilty of this myself, as I pre-ordered a D800 when the rumor mill was swirling with some very underwhelming 5DIII specs. Then Canon shocked me by putting a near-1Dx caliber AF system and a 6 FPS burst rate in the 5DIII, addressing my two biggest gripes with the 5DII. The dual card slots, weather sealing, and improved ISO are just icing on the cake. Before the 5DIII was announced, I thought the D800 would blow it out of the weeds. However, after seeing some real sample pics between the two, the difference in IQ between them is so  insignificant for my shooting needs that I'm reconsidering my plans to test both bodies out side by side, and may just cancel my D800 order outright. My 5DIII pre-order is probably going to show up on my doorstep first anyway :)

For this round of the mid-range DSLR war, I'll concede that Nikon appears to have delivered the overall winner. Even so, the D800's advantages aren't that substantial for my style of shooting and Nikon hasn't distanced itself enough from Canon to put up with the hassle of switching systems,   

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DM3 HDR Article
« on: March 14, 2012, 10:06:42 PM »
Wow, those samples look terrible, but then again I hate HDR. Hopefully the feature will be of more merit when in practice in the hands of those that take a more tasteful approach to HDR.

EOS Bodies / Here we go again: 5DIII vs. D800 raw files head-to-head
« on: March 14, 2012, 07:46:18 PM »
Now we finally have a somewhat scientific side-by-side comparison of the raw files from both bodies, courtesy of Imaging Resource.

5DIII samples:

D800 samples:

To make this comparo as precise as possible, I thought it made sense to compare the Nikons NEF files with no noise reduction applied to the Canon's CR2 files. Truthfully, I had a very hard time distinguishing the the 5DIII images from the D800 images. The noise, DR, and overall IQ are just so freakin' close. Maybe the 5DIII starts to edge ahead after ISO 3200, but it is the slightest of advantages. I tried to compare them at 51,200 and 102,400 as well, but IR must have forgotten to test the D800 at those ISO speeds   ;D 

DR wise, there is a noticeable advantage in the Nikon's shadow details, but again, it's only the slightest of advantages. Call me crazy, but I actually think the extra DR makes the Nikon's files look flatter. I also prefer the 5DIII's color reproduction, and the files look a tad sharper granted that might be attributable to the lenses. On a purely subjective level, to me the 5DIII's files just look better, but again, under identical shooting situations the two cameras produce nearly identical images. 

After pixel peeping for about an hour, it really put into perspective what terrific tools each of these bodies are for creating fantastic art. It also put into perspective how silly it is to argue about the pros and cons of each body when it requires an hour of pixel peeping to attempt to distinguish any differences in IQ between them.

That's just my worthless opinion. Discuss :)

EOS Bodies / Re: I touched it, and it was awesome!!!
« on: March 14, 2012, 04:44:30 PM »
Your title reminds me of what my wife said to her friends after our first date  :D

Now this is the way to thread jack! LMAO! +1 for creativity  :P

I didn't mean to thread jack. There's just been so much tensions on here lately over the 5DIII/D800 debate that I wanted to try to lighten the mood  :)

EOS Bodies / Re: I touched it, and it was awesome!!!
« on: March 14, 2012, 03:38:36 PM »
Your title reminds me of what my wife said to her friends after our first date  :D

That's not what she told me.   ;)

What are you talking about? I thought we were there together?

EOS Bodies / Re: New 5d Mark 3 images
« on: March 14, 2012, 03:37:14 PM »
I know the DR on this camera is supposed to suck, but I find it quite impressive in these samples :)

EOS Bodies / Re: I touched it, and it was awesome!!!
« on: March 14, 2012, 03:16:32 PM »
Your title reminds me of what my wife said to her friends after our first date  :D

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: March 14, 2012, 02:23:04 PM »
The 5D3 is much better at generating controversy within this community. Check out Nikon Rumors - there is nothing like this going on there. Why not?

Good question. I'd venture to say that it's because the Nikon product line was so bad just five years ago, that even if the D800 isn't the exact camera they wanted spec wise, they're thrilled to finally have an option that can compete with Canon. On the other had, since the digital revolution Canon has set the bar very high, and its users expect nothing less than greatness. It must be odd to see how much the competition has caught up, but personally, I love competition :)

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: March 14, 2012, 02:16:48 PM »
I much prefer the files too - they have a look that Nikon doesn't.

IMHO, this is the most subjective issue when judging IQ, but also the most important! When you present your images to a client or just a casual observer, they gauge its visual impact based on the overall "look" it conveys, a certain X-factor if you will, not some highly technical method used to calculate DR or noise.

I was reading some review of a crop Nikon body the other day (D7000?) about how its DR put Canon's full-frame bodies to shame in lab tests. This intrigued me, so I checked out some sample images. They weren't bad, but they looked flat and lifeless compared to what I'm accustomed to out of my antiquated 5DC. Sorry, but I'm not buying a camera based on what some lab tests say. I don't know if any tech specs exist that can gauge this sort of thing, but IMHO the film-like color, contrast, sharpness, and overall IQ of bodies like the 5DC, 5DII, and 1DsIII are why LOTS of working pros shoot Canon.

This isn't strictly a Canon vs. Nikon issue either. If lab tests are all that mattered, why would any Canon shooter opt for anything other than a 7D?  Doesn't it match the 5DII and 1DsIII in DR for a fraction of the cost? My hunch is that some people just prefer the look of the files produced by the costlier bodies.

The key point for me though is that Canon is a SYSTEM and not a BODY. People crush on bodies too much these days.

Werd. Let's say the D800 is as great as people are making it out to be, and the 5DIII is as bad as people suggest. Many people will just give credit where credit is due, concede that Nikon has won this round, and stick with Canon because it offers a better overall system.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: March 13, 2012, 11:06:18 PM »
at that base level its all about the megapixels i am afraid.

Wait a second, I thought it was all about megapixels at the 5DIII/D800 level :D

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?
« on: March 13, 2012, 10:49:50 PM »
So the question is how Canon is going to attract new customers?

By offering a dizzying number of Rebel/60D/7D type bodies packed full of megapixels. Canon has been using this strategy to great effect. Most will never upgrade their gear beyond a kit lens, but the ones that do will probably stick with Canon indefinitely. Very few people are going to buy a $3,000-plus body as their first DSLR, so attracting new customers is all about winning people over at the entry-level price point.

You, my friend, are one bad arse mofo  ;D Incredible work!
Haha thanks :)

Just curious which body(ies) you shoot with right now?


4900 USD (without lens).

You get the new 24-70 mkII for only 3500 USD.

It's in Norway.

Wow, that's stiff. You must be laughing at all the people complaining about paying $3,500 USD for it.

Out of curiosity, are US retailers not allowed to ship to Norway? What prevents a US retailer from shipping the camera at $3,500 into Norway?

I did a quick range test and they fired just fine up to about 300-400' for me...I don't know if they work well beyond that as I ran out of room to go further. I've been using them in much shorter distances like 100-150' regularly and they've been 100% reliable there. Like any 2.4ghz trigger (canon 600ex rt included), you should get good consistent results for a couple hundred feet, but they can still be susceptible to wifi interference. I haven't had that problem yet since I'm out in the woods, but I know it's a potential problem. The 600exrt has a nice feature where you can compare signal strengths to choose a good one. That's pretty cool.

Thanks for the feedback. That's some very impressive range, and more than adequate for my needs. The Canon setup is nice, and I particularly like how you can use the STE3 and 600EX to remotely trigger the shutter, but I'm not sure I can justify the price premium over the Odins. I can pick up a 550EX, which has nearly as much power as a 600EX, for $200, throw on a $140 Odin receiver, and add an extra off-camera flash while retaining ETTL capability for $340. That's half the price one one 600EX.

It's hard to believe you shoot weddings.
P.S And you're welcome to check out my work any time:
Fashion & Beauty:

You, my friend, are one bad arse mofo  ;D Incredible work!

Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 65