Thanks for the heads up. I had no idea Canon was going to be in attendance. How much does it cost to get into the trade show?
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.
Exactly... everything is still up in the air and no real world samples have been provided... So many unknowns... So many assumptions and testing of unreleased photographs... The 5d2 was flamed for being soft, too much NR, low DR when it was first announced... Since then we know that the 5d2 more capable and higher quality than initially mentioned.
You can make the argument that better DR may make your life easier.
If you regularly find yourself dragging up the shadows, then you might as well jump ship and head over to Nikon where the grass is greener. Or you could ETTR, utilize the sensor DR better (Canon does seem to have a bit more highlight headroom than Nikon by about 1/2 a stop based on DPR charts), and correct exposure at the click of a button in post
Well what's happened is I'm reading all these forums about dynamic range, dynamic range, banding banding and it's messing with my mind man! LOL
I would REALLY like to hear from a broad set of editors and art directors to know if that line has even a scrap of truth in it. I don't think DR or even noise are anywhere near the top things on an editors mind when they are critiquing photographs for publication.For one, no one can even gauge the dynamic range of a photo by eyeballing it, and even if they did measure it...what are they measuring? The DR capability of the camera you used to take the shot, or your fully post-processed image that has a myriad of exposure tweaks, curve adjustments, color tweaks, noise reduction, and sharpening applied?
Assuming you actually did capture a photo with 14 stops of dynamic range, does that even matter a wit for the final presentation format...in this case print?
If your photos are so noisy or have such atrocious DR that an editor dumps them, then the problem is far more likely that you aren't exposing or lighting your scene properly than the fact that the camera shows a minor amount of banding noise in the lower few bits of the 14 available.
As for IQ...well, even the crummy samples Canon has offered demonstrate that the 5D III will take photos with stunning IQ when they are exposed properly (and that really is the goal).
There are SO many other things that make a photograph, and many more that make it art. Whether your camera is a stop or two less capable than the competitions is not going to cost you your job with that fancy magazine.
I believe the IQ of the two will be very simillar such that it will impossible to tell the difference on a 20" x 16" print
Anyone who expects high IQ at more than iso 800 is going to beunlucky because that is about the point where the DR takes a nose dive. There may be little noise but it will be flat as a pancake - so all the wonderful talk about high iso means low DR and a horrible picture
you could just use both, I used both Nikon and canon for ages then just got sick of different batteries , doubling up on alot of gear so sold off all my nikon gear mainly because I was so heavily invested in canon too and the 5Dmk2s give great IQ also the whole D800 being continually delayed annoyed the hell out of me . I'll be interested to hear your take when you get them both though, I am sure both will be great
does anyone seriously think the 5D III is actually going to be incapable of capturing the exact same photos as the D800 at more than acceptable quality?
The main issue to me is that the mark 3 is takes better pictures than the mark 2. I find the low ISO pictures are fine. If you comparing the high ISO 25600 shots to the mark 2 they are much better and the noise is more pleasant. The d800 25600 noise looks bad from what I have seen. Look at the final picture on this site:
The noise has a lot of random color in it like the mark 2 at high ISO. I think it will be nice to have more wiggle room at high ISO myself.
5DIII and D800 are completely different cameras. So why would you try to compare them?
As long digital cameras are being sold there always has been the trade of between amount of pixels and amount of noise. Also you can not expect large files and high fps together. All this is getting better with every camera but the difference remains. Just get what you need most.
...Which graphically demonstrates the complete nonsense of that line of thinking.
Oh boy, not the 7D Gestapo!I'm sorry. Did someone say Full Frame KGB?
If you want to avoid smites, do not say anything other than "the 7D is the greatest camera ever made and nothing can surpass it". I gotta go. I think the 7D Gestapo are on to me......
Someone smites me all the time regardless of whether I comment or not