October 24, 2014, 02:56:39 PM

Author Topic: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE  (Read 19586 times)

smirkypants

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2012, 01:02:55 PM »
I wonder what would happen if you had to crop away 50% of the photo and then upsample both. I have been known to crop a wide photo tall and vice versa. You lose at least half the photo. Say then after that you wanted to do a 20x30 print (which I do quite frequently), where would we stand? Do you suppose the minor differences would still be minor?

This is an honest question, not a "sez you!"

canon rumors FORUM

Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2012, 01:02:55 PM »

tonyp

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2012, 01:04:26 PM »
Shoot the scene both ratios... problem solved and keep the true MPs

Maui5150

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 417
    • View Profile
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2012, 01:10:57 PM »
You can not take images from 1 that is pretty much from Raw and compared to another that is upsampled by close to 30% and expect to make a true judge of sharpness.

Sure you can.  All you have to do is decide ahead of time what 'conclusion' you want your 'test' to show, and then design your test accordingly.    ::)

Exactly.

I can understand some of the initial premise of the upsizing, i.e. showing the same size crop so the size of an object shown in the crop is the same size, but this just does not work. 

If anything, what it tells me is either:

1)  The author is intentionally being deceptive

-  or -

2)  They really do not understand digital files, resolution and comparison.

To me the proper way of doing this comparison has to be raw to raw with an understanding that the the Nikon image will obviously be blown up a bit, but looking at a 500 x 500 pixel representation of the Canon Raw and then comparing to the Nikon Raw, one can look at the edges, CA, noise, etc. 

By the same token, another poster raised an excellent point that the lenses used will also make a big difference as I expect the quality of say a 70-200 L2.8 IS II will produce a different image than a 24-105 F/4.

By that degree, Camera to Camera comparisons can be very selective between different brands, where as at least within a brand, lens performance and difference can be mitigated.


awinphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2002
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #18 on: March 15, 2012, 01:19:16 PM »
I wonder what would happen if you had to crop away 50% of the photo and then upsample both. I have been known to crop a wide photo tall and vice versa. You lose at least half the photo. Say then after that you wanted to do a 20x30 print (which I do quite frequently), where would we stand? Do you suppose the minor differences would still be minor?

This is an honest question, not a "sez you!"

Theoretically, if both are cropped exactly at 50% each, the D800 would still have the bigger file and then when enlarged, the D800 would have the edge, but if you cropped the D800 in similar size to the 5d3 so they are both x pixels by y pixels, and enlarge both to similar sizes, then maybe canon has the edge because it would have less manipulations/artifacts, but would be pretty close
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.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14747
    • View Profile
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2012, 01:21:56 PM »
To me the proper way of doing this comparison has to be raw to raw with an understanding that the the Nikon image will obviously be blown up a bit, but looking at a 500 x 500 pixel representation of the Canon Raw and then comparing to the Nikon Raw, one can look at the edges, CA, noise, etc. 

Alternatively, upsample both to 40 MP using something like Genuine Fractals, where the degree of upscaling has less of an impact than the presence/absence of the manipulation.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

3kramd5

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 449
    • View Profile
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2012, 01:22:52 PM »
... now lets say you take the D800, reduce it to meet the 5d3, the D800 probably is a lot closer in noise, but details would probably be a lot closer if not the same.  .

That's how I looked at the IR stills. D800 still looked better at 5D dimensions.

I'm holding on to my pre order slot, but not ruling out returning the mk3.
5D3, 5D2, 40D; Various lenses

sublime LightWorks

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2012, 01:25:16 PM »
You can not take images from 1 that is pretty much from Raw and compared to another that is upsampled by close to 30% and expect to make a true judge of sharpness.

Sure you can.  All you have to do is decide ahead of time what 'conclusion' you want your 'test' to show, and then design your test accordingly.    ::)

Exactly.  I have a saying when it comes to technology demos......

"Any company presentation of a product's advanced technological feature or performance is indistinguishable from a rigged demo."


canon rumors FORUM

Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2012, 01:25:16 PM »

jaduffy007

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2012, 01:26:51 PM »
Jpeg comparisons are the only way 5d3 even competes.  Canon's jpeg engine is applying a lot of NR...and well done overall.  One can nitpick about smearing of detail or adjusting Nikon settings to match, blah, blah, blah....but I think Canon's jpegs look good and better than D800.

Comparing raw images shows the iso performance to be almost identical between the two cameras...yet the D800 has 36MP and a "huge" DR advantage.  Yes, HUUUUUGE.  Like 1.5 to  2 stops more!  D800 detail and DR really does bump up against MFD quality.  And $500 less than 5d3.  Sorry, but this really isn't debatable.

IMO...why choose 5d3? If one could say it's a choice between the D800's detail and DR vs the 5d3's 1.5 extra stops of useable iso...ok, that would be a legit choice.  Unfortunately, that isn't the case.  As a raw shooter, I see no advantage to the 5d3..and yet see significant D800 advantages.

By no means do I think the 5d3 sucks.  It's a 5d2 with excellent AF...what's not to like?  Yet, that's the result of 3.5 years of development??  My perspective is driven by what I see as Canon's falling behind in sensor tech (Sony).  Sony makes a 36mp sensor that equals Canon 's 22mp in raw iso performance?!  That Canon addressed better iso predominantly through their jpeg engine vs the sensor reinforces this... significantly so.  This appears to be true of the 1D X as well.  I'm starting to think in 5 years...we may all be jumping ship for Sony.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2012, 02:47:46 PM by jaduffy007 »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14747
    • View Profile
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2012, 01:28:15 PM »
I'm starting to think in 5 years...we may all be jumping ship for Sony.

...and using what for lenses?   ::)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

tonyp

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2012, 01:28:50 PM »
Why choose it?!!?  Umm.. I'm invested in Canon primes...

CanonLITA

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2012, 01:30:20 PM »
By the same token, another poster raised an excellent point that the lenses used will also make a big difference as I expect the quality of say a 70-200 L2.8 IS II will produce a different image than a 24-105 F/4.

By that degree, Camera to Camera comparisons can be very selective between different brands, where as at least within a brand, lens performance and difference can be mitigated.

IMO the comparison should be done with the same (3rd party, read Zeiss) lens, assuming that the mount itself does not affect the result.

maxxevv

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2012, 01:40:57 PM »

IMO the comparison should be done with the same (3rd party, read Zeiss) lens, assuming that the mount itself does not affect the result.

That's true. A consistent lens by a third party would create a far fairer/equitable test comparison. 

DavidRiesenberg

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
    • David Riesenberg
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2012, 02:13:15 PM »
Comparing raw images shows the iso performance to be almost identical between the two cameras...yet the D800 has 36MP and a "huge" DR advantage.  Yes, HUUUUUGE.  Like 2 stops more!

Perhaps my eyes are broken but I am not seeing any  DR differences in that set. Looking at the black and white pieces of cloth that are near each other, both cameras show roughly the same amount of variation. The D800 shows more details in the fabric but that's expected due to the resolution.

If I missed something, please correct me.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2012, 02:13:15 PM »

awinphoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2002
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2012, 02:19:40 PM »
Comparing raw images shows the iso performance to be almost identical between the two cameras...yet the D800 has 36MP and a "huge" DR advantage.  Yes, HUUUUUGE.  Like 2 stops more!

Perhaps my eyes are broken but I am not seeing any  DR differences in that set. Looking at the black and white pieces of cloth that are near each other, both cameras show roughly the same amount of variation. The D800 shows more details in the fabric but that's expected due to the resolution.

If I missed something, please correct me.

It's slightly argued that the extra detail is an effect of the extra DR, as well as the fact that the nikon image was as is and not upscaled like the Canon. 
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.

wrack_of_lamb

  • Guest
Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2012, 02:55:15 PM »
That's true. A consistent lens by a third party would create a far fairer/equitable test comparison.

The exif data indicates that both cameras used the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro EF at f8.0. Now if you want to debate the differences between the Canon mount version and the Nikon mount version...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2012, 02:55:15 PM »