5D MK3 vs. D800 - fredmiranda

[xps]

On Friday I was allowed to use the D800, as the Institution I´m working at, is testing cameras (we need a lot of them for our photographers). The 5DMk3, we tested some days ago is very good, when you don´t have much light and you are not allowed to use an flashlight. But my heart stopped beating, when I saw the quality of the D800s pictures we took in the operating theatre, outside of the building (landsape,...) and shooting portraits. The quality is great! Really great! The product specialist of the selling company used lightroom to optimize the imagequality. But the result was amazing.
I took some pictures of flyinging birds around the builiding and landing helicopters. As the helicopters were approaching fast and I had just some seconds to take the shot, I can say, that the AF is very fast.

As I´m owning just Canon cameras, I´ll pray for an pedant from Canon (or an payable 7D MKII)

[Astro]

Well, I'm sure this ensures you pick the right camera for all those NatGeo contest winning Stouffer Transmission Wedge pictures everybody is clamoring for!! Call the NY times!! Wedge pictures here, get yer wedge pictures here!!

God pixel peepers are a joke. Ansel Adams surely never questioned this type of crap.

said the ostrich..... oh... narrow minded fanboy i wanted to say.

[Canon-F1]

God pixel peepers are a joke. Ansel Adams surely never questioned this type of crap.

mentioning ansel adams doesn´t make you one. 

when it´s from nikon it can not be good .. right?
in fact people who can´t admit that other companys build great cameras are a sad joke.

if someon had posted the same test but with a great result for a canon camera, i bet you (and others) would be all praise and glory.  it´s ridiculous.

especially as this is clearly a forum/website focused on the GEAR side of photography.
only when nikon, sony etc. gets some praise the "ansel adams posse" make an appearance with the "but gear does not make good pictures" argument.

well yeah im sure we all heard it a trilion times by now... it´s not as if these people tell something new. 

[spinworkxroy]

I wish i had the money….i'd have gotten BOTH the 5D3 and D800E
I love the detail on the Nikon but i also love the ISO on the Canon..if only i had both cameras haha..
Again, i guess Canon shooters will stay with Canon and Nikon with Nikon…it's just like the Mac vs PC argument…and i use both daily so…i wish i could do the same for cameras..if only someone made universal lenses (no adapters)
However i must admit something, even on the 5D3, i'm shooting at mJpg and mRaw..i;m not sure what i'll do with a 36mp file I'd most likely also shoot at under 10mp on the D800..kinda pointless to get it don't you think..

[scrappydog]

I wish i had the money….i'd have gotten BOTH the 5D3 and D800E

This is the combo I want.  I want the D800E for landscapes only and 5D3 for everything else.

[gecko]

The D800 has left the station..........and Canon passengers are standing on the platform with only a rumour of their train coming.......sometime. 

[psolberg]

The image from the Canon sensor is as noisy as all hell (splotchy? banded?) whereas the Nikon one is noise free. That tells me that Canon still haven't fixed the noise issues that were integral with the 5D2.

Yes I was quite shocked by it too. That EXMOR sensor is ridiculously for that.

I wish i had the money….i'd have gotten BOTH the 5D3 and D800E
I love the detail on the Nikon but i also love the ISO on the Canon..if only i had both cameras haha..
Again, i guess Canon shooters will stay with Canon and Nikon with Nikon…it's just like the Mac vs PC argument…and i use both daily so…i wish i could do the same for cameras..if only someone made universal lenses (no adapters)
However i must admit something, even on the 5D3, i'm shooting at mJpg and mRaw..i;m not sure what i'll do with a 36mp file I'd most likely also shoot at under 10mp on the D800..kinda pointless to get it don't you think..

I'm not  The D800 is the 5DmkIII camera I was hoping canon would make so that's why I'm getting a D800. Nikon has had a fast FPS low MP, full frame body with real AF that is under 3K since 2008. But that's not what I'm after. I mostly shoot in good gorgeous big and soft light and low ISO and what the most detail, DR, and quality possible. Maybe canon will win me back in a few years with the 5Dmk4. But for now, nothing canon makes even remotely approaches the quality of output of the D800 at that price point.

[skitron]

From that review, it is this page:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html

That is most interesting. Why?

Because about half way down, they take the same shot from the D800/5D3 and 100% crop of the shadows.

The image from the Canon sensor is as noisy as all hell (splotchy? banded?) whereas the Nikon one is noise free. That tells me that Canon still haven't fixed the noise issues that were integral with the 5D2.

All that post did was make me go test my lowly 5D2 the same way, push shadows the same degree, and conclude one of two things:

Either Lightroom totally blows chunks,

OR

FM is not a site I will be visiting again due to lack of credibility.

Sorry, but recovering shadows with Capture One 6 gave me very pleasing results with 5D2 with none of the artifacts I see on the FM post. The D800 is better than what I get from my 5D2, but the difference is nothing even remotely like what is posted on that site.

[sarangiman]

God pixel peepers are a joke. Ansel Adams surely never questioned this type of crap.

That's pretty comical, especially if you've read any of Ansel Adams' (very scientific) writing.

skitron: I'm not at all surprised by your observations. I own the 5Dc, 5DII, & 5DIII, & have taken numerous photos with friends' 5D/5DII. Banding often varies from body to body, I find. For example, it's not too offensive on my own 5DII. But it's easily seen on my 5DIII, albeit only in the vertical direction (landscape orientation).

As for comments on having two systems: Nikon for landscapes & Canon for everything else... true extended DR is extremely useful for landscapes, but often I find myself wanting to lift shadows in other types of photography where something wasn't ideal (wrong exposure b/c of backlight, flash created unwanted shadow because of suboptimal placement, or I don't have time/ability for an off-camera flash setup yet want the background landscape as well as the people in the shot). For these types of shots, the Nikon would undoubtedly be more forgiving. In fact, low read noise downstream of ISO gain application allows for more aggressive exposure compensation in post (i.e. I believe the D800 is a step in the direction of the theoretical ISO-less camera).

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I shot a Stouffer Transmission Wedge (13.2 stops DR total) with a 5DII, 5DIII, & a D7000.

The 5DIII required 1/3EV less exposure than 5DII to keep any channel (meaning: green, since that blows first) from blowing out in the brightest patch of the wedge. The D7000 needed 2/3EV less exposure than 5DII (i.e. 1/3EV less exposure than 5DIII) to keep any channel from blowing out.

Well, I'm sure this ensures you pick the right camera for all those NatGeo contest winning Stouffer Transmission Wedge pictures everybody is clamoring for!! Call the NY times!! Wedge pictures here, get yer wedge pictures here!!

God pixel peepers are a joke. Ansel Adams surely never questioned this type of crap.

Ironic you mention Ansel Adams who was the ultimate pixel peeper of his time and someone who spent countless hours doing special dark room processing and picking the right films and manipulating them in every possible effort to handle dynamic range better. 

He was a total tech head and he spent endless hours in the wet lab.

He was the guy who questioned that sort of stuff MORE than perhaps anyone of his time. 

He was an artist AND a tech head.

[MattBicePhotography]

From that review, it is this page:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html

That is most interesting. Why?

Because about half way down, they take the same shot from the D800/5D3 and 100% crop of the shadows.

The image from the Canon sensor is as noisy as all hell (splotchy? banded?) whereas the Nikon one is noise free. That tells me that Canon still haven't fixed the noise issues that were integral with the 5D2.

All that post did was make me go test my lowly 5D2 the same way, push shadows the same degree, and conclude one of two things:

Either Lightroom totally blows chunks,

OR

FM is not a site I will be visiting again due to lack of credibility.

Sorry, but recovering shadows with Capture One 6 gave me very pleasing results with 5D2 with none of the artifacts I see on the FM post. The D800 is better than what I get from my 5D2, but the difference is nothing even remotely like what is posted on that site.

Amen,

Let me blow your mind a little. Converted using DPP and pushed in CS5.5



AND......




obviously these could not have been taken by a 5D3.............

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattbicephotography/ here is my photostream so you can go look at the pictures at full size. I think LR4.1 RC certainly works better with Nikon.

[V8Beast]

Ironic you mention Ansel Adams who was the ultimate pixel peeper of his time and someone who spent countless hours doing special dark room processing and picking the right films and manipulating them in every possible effort to handle dynamic range better. 

He was a total tech head and he spent endless hours in the wet lab.

He was the guy who questioned that sort of stuff MORE than perhaps anyone of his time. 

He was an artist AND a tech head.

That's kinda the point. Tech heads are often poor photographers, and great photographers are often clueless when it comes to the technical aspects of photography. The best photogs are both artists and tech heads like you say, but unfortunately, there seems to be an overwhelming number of tech heads around these parts

[sarangiman]

Matt, that's very interesting! Do you think DPP is just doing more noise reduction, or perhaps using the top rows of the RAW data to offset vertical banding? Those shadows look much cleaner than what LR is producing, as you yourself have noted.

I haven't even tried DPP yet... perhaps it is time to.

[Fishnose]

That's kinda the point. Tech heads are often poor photographers, and great photographers are often clueless when it comes to the technical aspects of photography. The best photogs are both artists and tech heads like you say, but unfortunately, there seems to be an overwhelming number of tech heads around these parts

Uh, no. There is no correlation whatsoever between techiness (or not) and artistry.

Being a tech head and being artistic are in no way connected. You can be one or the other, or both, or neither.

[sarangiman]

Uh, no. There is no correlation whatsoever between techiness (or not) and artistry.

Being a tech head and being artistic are in no way connected. You can be one or the other, or both, or neither.

+1.

These posts attacking so-called 'tech heads' on a forum topic initially started to discuss the low ISO sensor performance of the 5DIII vs. the D800 baffle me. It's just noise injected into an otherwise intelligent conversation where we're just trying to understand & discuss the magnitude of the differences between these sensors.

Let's keep the conversation productive.