Up the game

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have a D800 on order, but after following the Nikon forums and editing some of the raw images on my I7 equiped PC with plenty of memory and fast SSD, I'm beginning to wonder. 
 
Besides cameras that don't focus, cameras that lockup (workaround reportedly doesn't work), batteries that overheat or explode, editing is extremely slow on the 50+ mp raw images I downloaded, no way could I edit 1500 or 3000 images in a reasonable time, I have to wait 30 sec or more for a simple edit like NR to update and let me proceed.  I did workout a method that works, downsize the images to the same size as my 5D MK III, but then, they are not much better, and even with downsizing, high ISO 12800 images are noticibly noisier than my 5D MK III.
 
As long as buyers are paying a premium for them, I'll probably just resell mine when it arrives and get a 1D X.
 

[UrbanVoyeur]

The 5DMkIII is disappointing precisely because it is a very good body, with an excellent feature set, joined to a less than impressive sensor that is well behind the competition.

It was easier with film - you picked a body on one set of criteria and the film on another, selecting the best tool in each category. Taking advantage of film improvements was painless.

Now we have to trust that our system manufacturer will always give us the best digital "film" (sensor) in each body revision. When they don't, we are faced with the unpalatable choice of taking a loss on thousands of dollars in glass, or hoping they get their sensor act together in next revision, before they (and we) fall too far behind.

[V8Beast]

The 5DMkIII is disappointing precisely because it is a very good body, with an excellent feature set, joined to a less than impressive sensor that is well behind the competition.

It depends what you need. The 5DII was a great sensor encased in a POS body. The 5DIII is a great sensor encased in a great body. Sure it lags behind the D800 in DR, but it's still a very capable piece of hardware.

If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.

For those who value DR above all else, Nikon offers some great options. Everyone's busy humping the D800's 14.4 stops of DR, but the D7000 gets you 13.9 stops for $1,200, and the D5100 gets you 13.6 stops for $700. It seems there are some affordable ways to get all that delicious Nikon DR, so I don't see why the DR lovers are so upset? As a Canon shooter, if DR was the most important element of performance for my shooting needs, I'd be thrilled that Nikon had such affordable options, and pick up some Nikon gear. That's the beauty of competition.

For the millions of landscape photographers that have come out of nowhere lately, you can pick up a D5100 and a 14-24 for less than the price of a D800, and have almost as much DR. That seems like a much more practical way to get your DR fix than complaining about how much Canon sensors suck.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It is not very surprising i.m.o. The 5D3's sensor technology seems to be basically the same as with the first 5D. It improved very marginally every generation after that.

While Nikon brings out innovative and impressive features together with their (Sony's) awesome Exmor sensor, Canon looks like they are very much focused on video over stills.

And on video they are mostly focused on what can we leave out (user chose for bitrates, clean hdmi, focus peaking, zebra strips, zoom modes, at least it seems ML can add that back other than the zoom modes) to protect C-line and the video division's pride now. They take internal protectionism way too far.

I mean the 5D3 does fix a ton of stuff that was weak on the 5D2 though.

[Aglet]

It depends what you need. The 5DII was a great sensor encased in a POS body. The 5DIII is a great sensor encased in a great body. Sure it lags behind the D800 in DR, but it's still a very capable piece of hardware.

If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.

For those who value DR above all else, Nikon offers some great options. Everyone's busy humping the D800's 14.4 stops of DR, but the D7000 gets you 13.9 stops for $1,200, and the D5100 gets you 13.6 stops for $700. It seems there are some affordable ways to get all that delicious Nikon DR, so I don't see why the DR lovers are so upset? As a Canon shooter, if DR was the most important element of performance for my shooting needs, I'd be thrilled that Nikon had such affordable options, and pick up some Nikon gear. That's the beauty of competition.

For the millions of landscape photographers that have come out of nowhere lately, you can pick up a D5100 and a 14-24 for less than the price of a D800, and have almost as much DR. That seems like a much more practical way to get your DR fix than complaining about how much Canon sensors suck.

well stated and thanks for bringing that up.

I don't know why the Canon vs Nikon argument often goes to the "switch brands" end even for those who appreciate the merits of more DR.
If Canon shooters need a body with more DR and can afford a D800 and some glass to go with it, fabulous.  Sometimes you need that extra performance in a FF body. But as you stated, there are low cost alternatives with 2 crop Nikons and the Pentax K5 too.

I've got a pile of Canon gear and it serves the majority of my purposes just fine, even tho I like to b!tch about the shadow noise and lack of DR when I need to push them.  So I now have a little D5100 Nikon and picked up some cheap but capable 2nd-hand glass for it to do the high DR shots in most of the kinds of scenes where I'll need it.  I'd sure love if the 7D had the 5100's IQ but until Canon can provide such a product I'll need a mix of brands in my bag.  I'm still looking forward to getting a D800, might even switch my order to the D800e.  Until then I use a 5D2, 7D and even a 40D to their limits.  After all the testing I did I now know where to expect disappointment instead of it sometimes being an unpleasant surprise and work around it as much as possible of just accept the limitations.

This isn't a decision with the gravity of choosing which arm to cut off, merely knowing that if you need more DR you CAN get it with a complete kit that costs less than the cheapest Canon L lens.  Hard not to justify if you can benefit from it.  Not every shot needs to be done on a FF body.

[UrbanVoyeur]

If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.

I am quite the opposite. I'd snap it up. A body is just a vehicle to get the best sensor behind my L glass, nothing more. I don't need fancy metering or AF modes. I don't care about burst rate or weather sealing. I don't even care whether the AF works at less than f/2.8. The lenses I use regularly are all 2.8 or faster.

I just need the best "film". And by best I mean the sensor with the highest resolution, widest DR, widest color gamut and lowest noise in my primary shooting range - 100-800. More DR means I have more zones to work with before I clip. That's vital.

[1982chris911]

I have a D800 on order, but after following the Nikon forums and editing some of the raw images on my I7 equiped PC with plenty of memory and fast SSD, I'm beginning to wonder. 
 
Besides cameras that don't focus, cameras that lockup (workaround reportedly doesn't work), batteries that overheat or explode, editing is extremely slow on the 50+ mp raw images I downloaded, no way could I edit 1500 or 3000 images in a reasonable time, I have to wait 30 sec or more for a simple edit like NR to update and let me proceed.

I was saying this already some weeks ago ... and still there are a lot of wannabe D800 owners that say that the filesize of the camera is not a problem with a modern computer/mac ... But that is exactly what my feeling about the camera was when I had one in my hands ... great piece of tech IQ wise, but unpractical in so many other ways (when compared to the 5D MK III) ...
to some extend the D800 here also compares to MF cameras in this regard ...

[Viggo]

Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?

[Ivar]

The 5D2 was a revolutionary camera at the time announced.  I consider this pretty big deal.

Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?

[V8Beast]

I am quite the opposite. I'd snap it up. A body is just a vehicle to get the best sensor behind my L glass, nothing more. I don't need fancy metering or AF modes. I don't care about burst rate or weather sealing. I don't even care whether the AF works at less than f/2.8. The lenses I use regularly are all 2.8 or faster.

It sounds like the D800, or Nikon crop bodies like the D7000 or D5100, are the ideal tools for your needs, then. If DR impacts your images that much, and you're willing to deal with the hassle of switching systems, the choice seems pretty clear at this point Or you can just pick up some Nikon gear, go dual systems, and decide if you're going to go all Nikon at some point later down the road. I just don't see this issue as something to lose sleep over

[psolberg]

It is interesting that 5D3's comparison base is 5D2. D800 is being compared to Leica S2 and PhaseOne IQ180.

"5D3 is far better than 5D2, especially in handling, JPGs, and AF."

versus

"D800 comes close to MF like S2 and IQ180 in other aspects, but clearly fails in midtones."

yup. I look forward to the 5Dmk4. But having just switched to a D800, I see no reason to enjoy it for 4 more years. If the 5D4 is better, and if the D900 fails to impressed, I'll be back.

[UrbanVoyeur]

It sounds like the D800, or Nikon crop bodies like the D7000 or D5100, are the ideal tools for your needs, then. If DR impacts your images that much, and you're willing to deal with the hassle of switching systems, the choice seems pretty clear at this point Or you can just pick up some Nikon gear, go dual systems, and decide if you're going to go all Nikon at some point later down the road. I just don't see this issue as something to lose sleep over

L lenses and their Nikon equivalents are $2,000+ a piece. And it's not one body, it's two or three. It's not a small investment or a trivial decision. But yes, if Canon continues to lag behind on senor quality over the next few years, then switching will make be more attractive.

[altenae]

It sounds like the D800, or Nikon crop bodies like the D7000 or D5100, are the ideal tools for your needs, then. If DR impacts your images that much, and you're willing to deal with the hassle of switching systems, the choice seems pretty clear at this point Or you can just pick up some Nikon gear, go dual systems, and decide if you're going to go all Nikon at some point later down the road. I just don't see this issue as something to lose sleep over

L lenses and their Nikon equivalents are $2,000+ a piece. And it's not one body, it's two or three. It's not a small investment or a trivial decision. But yes, if Canon continues to lag behind on senor quality over the next few years, then switching will make be more attractive.

I would not call it "to lag behind"
Use both and you see what I mean.

Most of the time in real world photography there is more then only DR and the DXO numbers.

[Kernuak]

"D800 comes close to MF like S2 and IQ180 in other aspects, but clearly fails in midtones."

To me, midtones are far more important than DR. Ok, so you might be able to process the RAW to get more out of the midtones, but that takes time and processing power. I have a 3-4 year old Macbook and that struggles with the RAW files from the 5D MkII, a similar vintage machine. I upgraded my desktop around a year ago and recently replaced the Macbook to cope with the large files from my 5D MkII, but I'd hate to think how much more power I'd need to cope with the output from the D800.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Please name ONE thing that was better with the 5d2 than the 5d3?

Although my 5D MK III is definitely a improvement in almost all ways over my 5D MK II, here are some things not so good.
 
1. Price ($1300 premium)
 
2.  AF points that can see to put the active focus point on the subject in low light. 
 
3. Ability to use interchangable focus screens.
 
Otherwise, my 5D MK III performs very well, and the new sensor is worlds better, just pull up blacks 4 or more stops and see how clean it is.