October 02, 2014, 06:35:36 AM

Author Topic: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison  (Read 10055 times)

Flake

  • Guest
Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« on: February 16, 2012, 08:34:26 AM »
OK I know it's digital rev reviewing the two, but they appear to have had their hands on the new Nikon, I think it's interesting reading in the abscence of anything else.

Oh & if anyones offered any cheap Nikon gear some one stole the van with all the Nikon roadshow gear last night in Southern Ireland, including the D4 & the D800 round about £100K worth (Don't we know someone here with links there?) ;)

http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d800-vs-canon-eos/OTE5NzQxMQ_A_A

canon rumors FORUM

Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« on: February 16, 2012, 08:34:26 AM »

Maui5150

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2012, 08:55:42 AM »
What is the point in comparing a $3000 brand new camera to a camera that is 2 years old and $1000 cheaper. 

One would certainly hope for 50% more in price, and two years newer that the comparison would be one sided.

Now a 1Dx vs D4 would be much more interesting

vbi

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2012, 09:11:20 AM »
Essentially everyone knows that the 5D2 is the camera to beat as it set a new standard in IQ when it was released. Hence the comparisons.
All politicians are scum
5D3, 5D2, 7D and too many lenses

Maui5150

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2012, 09:18:55 AM »
Essentially everyone knows that the 5D2 is the camera to beat as it set a new standard in IQ when it was released. Hence the comparisons.

Quote I liked in there:  "However, in the right hands, the Canon EOS 5D Mark II can still beat the D800 if you are not looking at large high res landscape shots."

I guess the photographer matters for something, but also goes a long way to say while most of these newer cameras are more capable and have great improvements, most cameras we are currently shooting with are very adequate as well

sb

  • Guest
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2012, 09:46:12 AM »
This is not a "review", this is a joke. And by the way, since when does 5DMk2 have only 1 movie mode? At least get the spec sheet right....

Maui5150

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2012, 10:02:17 AM »
Given this is Digital Rev, it is hard to tell what is a joke and what is a review.  One could also read that as their reviews are often jokes or filled with jokes...

awinphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2000
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2012, 10:11:02 AM »
What is the point in comparing a $3000 brand new camera to a camera that is 2 years old and $1000 cheaper. 

One would certainly hope for 50% more in price, and two years newer that the comparison would be one sided.

Now a 1Dx vs D4 would be much more interesting

You mean 3 going on 4 years old and was a month or so ago almost $1200 cheaper... 2 separate generations, 2 separate beasts... It would be like pitting Dan Fouts head to head now with Phillip Rivers (football) or the like.  Not very fair comparison I would say... but for a slow news cycle, i guess you get what you get
Canon 5d III, Canon 24-105L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 70-200 F4L, Canon 100L 2.8, Canon 85 1.8, 430EX 2's and a lot of bumps along the road to get to where I am.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2012, 10:11:02 AM »

D.Sim

  • Guest
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2012, 02:12:04 AM »
What is the point in comparing a $3000 brand new camera to a camera that is 2 years old and $1000 cheaper. 

One would certainly hope for 50% more in price, and two years newer that the comparison would be one sided.

Now a 1Dx vs D4 would be much more interesting

it would give people an idea of what the new camera can do, comparing it to whats already been established...

But then again its digitalrev, they're doing it for a lark, with a bit of info thrown in if you know what to look for.

dystorsion

  • Guest
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2012, 06:03:28 PM »
As much as I like digitalrev, I have to say this article is terrible (not because of the nature of the comparison)

Edwin Herdman

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 543
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2012, 10:36:27 PM »
The author has an interesting conspiracy theory, stating that Sony and Nikon have cooperated on both the XQD format (ugh, let's pick the three hardest letters to type at the same time) and on digital sensors.

zim

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2012, 12:22:25 AM »
Have to admit I quote enjoyed reading that bit of fun (then again it is 5 in the morning and I’ve got insomnia) what I do find interesting is the spec sheet comparison and just how well the MkII stands up. I wasn’t doing digital SLR photography four years ago so it really brings home just how much of a game changer it must have been when it was released. Put in a better AF and duel card slots improve the IQ at higher ISO a bit and those spec sheets would look very similar to me, and I’m sure that’s the least they will do.

Kernuak

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2012, 04:59:28 AM »
I have to say that they chose the wrong type of photographer as a match to the D800. At 21MP, you can already prints easily at A2, 240 ppi, which is pretty big and if you reduce the quality to 150 ppi, you can approach 1 metre (39 inches) on the long side. It isn't often you would need to print larger than that for a landscape. Also, the sample landscape images from the D800 looked less than perfect to me, even at 50% (which tends to be my measure as to sharp enough), as there were pretty soft in the corners. Ok, so it was with the 14-24, which while it is pretty highly regarded, it is still a wideangle zoom. Maybe the images would look better with a top quality prime, but with the target market (and also many Nikon pros), zooms are pretty much standard at wider angles. Had they mentione studio portrait photographers or even product photographers, it would have been a different matter. They wouldn't care about corner softness, as the subject would be somewhere around the middle, give or take a thousand pixels or so, then the corner softness would help. If you are making full use of the resolution, then I don't think it is a landscape camera, without exceptional glass. If you are reducing the image size, then I'm sure it would be fine, but then why have 36MP to start with? Yes the detail would be nice, but how far does that go?
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14538
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2012, 07:21:51 AM »
... why have 36MP to start with? Yes the detail would be nice, but how far does that go?

It's the perfect camera for the lazy amateur photographer.  Slap on a wide lens (14-24 is perfect for that), point
and shoot, and crop out your desired composition later.   :P

Seriously, though, there are many settings in which it's best to frame loosely and crop later, and times you need to change orientation in post and still have enough resolution.  Consider - a D800 shot in landscape orientation can be cropped to portrait and leave a 16 MP image.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2012, 07:21:51 AM »

Kernuak

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2012, 10:11:40 AM »
... why have 36MP to start with? Yes the detail would be nice, but how far does that go?

It's the perfect camera for the lazy amateur photographer.  Slap on a wide lens (14-24 is perfect for that), point
and shoot, and crop out your desired composition later.   :P

Seriously, though, there are many settings in which it's best to frame loosely and crop later, and times you need to change orientation in post and still have enough resolution.  Consider - a D800 shot in landscape orientation can be cropped to portrait and leave a 16 MP image.
True and I have done that myself for wildlife, but for landscapes, I would prefer to shoot in portrait in the first place, but then I don't like spending more time than I have to on PP.
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

psolberg

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2012, 10:30:26 AM »
... why have 36MP to start with? Yes the detail would be nice, but how far does that go?

It's the perfect camera for the lazy amateur photographer.  Slap on a wide lens (14-24 is perfect for that), point
and shoot, and crop out your desired composition later.   :P

Seriously, though, there are many settings in which it's best to frame loosely and crop later, and times you need to change orientation in post and still have enough resolution.  Consider - a D800 shot in landscape orientation can be cropped to portrait and leave a 16 MP image.

yes but beyond cropping, which is nice, the reason this is a landscape dream camera is because each landscape is unique. if you shoot landsapes, you know you often wait for the light to be perfect, the weather to be perfect, and the mood to be perfect. And if you shoot landscaes, you know this rarely happens. When it does, trust me, you want to capture all 36 million sucker pixels for posterity because that momment will never repeat itself.

So while I don't have much need for 36MP most of the time, I fully understand that if you spend thousands if not tens of thousands in glass, and getting to the location, you want to get all the detail you want. Take for instance a trip to antartica. You'll pay nearly 20K after it is all said and done. Do you want to walk away with 36MP or 20MP per file? though so...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Nikon D800 Canon 5D MkII comparison
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2012, 10:30:26 AM »