there is no question the D800 is an awesome camera. I am still waiting for the side by side comparison with the 5DIII. I think all of us professional photographers are...
Really? Professional photographers waiting for internet reviews on 2 new bodies which will be out of date in 3 years time?
What about the lenses?
If youre invested in Canon lenses and flashes the 5D3 would have to be pretty crap to make you sell all your gear and start again with another system surely?
Surely every owner of Canon who has invested a lot in lenses needs to look at the long term, not the short? By that I mean where do you think both Nikon and Canon will be in 5+ years. If you think that Nikon will continue with their "lead" over Canon then the lens investment should not be a barrier if you migrate over time. And by "lead" I mean whatever features you value in a dSLR, be that video, high fps, AF, sensor res, low light capabilities etc.
So for me it is the longer term view and looking at 2 generations of Nikon and Canon (MK II / D700 and MK III/D800). If I believe that Nikon has more of what I want, and Canon will never close that gap, then I don't think swapping is as big as some people may believe so long as you do it over time.
I think quite a few people here will change / increase their lens collection over time. I'm certainly looking at the 24-70 and the 70-200. So if I picked them up for Nikon rather than Canon, paired it with a D800 then I would keep my 1Ds with the 500mm etc for wildlife until such time as I could swap those out.
No way would I make that decision until the year is out, and the full Canon / Nikon line up is released....
And now to contradict myself (such is my dilemma
If you go over to Tom Hogan's site and look at his commentary in March, I think he nails it pretty much spot on. Whether you have a D800/D4/5DMK IIII/1DX, it won't matter - you'll be able to take great photos in different conditions and know that the camera will produce the results.
And I think that is the case. I think the current sensor design is reaching a plateau in terms of what it can squeeze out of a bayer arrangement, and I think there needs to be a tech leap to a different design before this will yield a significant change. Hence why there is not a significant difference between this generation and the previous one (evolution not revolution). But again, the results from either system (N or C) will satisfy the large majority of shooters.
Finally, I'm reminded of an article a while back on Lu La which talked about the days where a lot of Hi Fi manufacturers desired the lowest THD on their equipment, and were in competition to get the lowest value. Ignoring the fact that the final sound it made was not to the taste of many people as it was too sterile. Translate therefore into DxO benchmarks... Sure they give an indication of the quality of the sensor, but no more. Compare a picture from a latest gen DSLR with a Phase One MF and I don't think anyone would doubt the Phase One is a lot better (ignoring low light / high iso). And so it should be for the cost
Similarly between Canon and Nikon, since you will never be able to eliminate the glass used, with an A:B print comparison, if you like the results from Nikon enough then you have your answer for this generation. Now you have to decide whether Nikon will maintain that "lead" for you and then figure out how to migrate (slowly or big bang)...