5D3 review: If you don't own Canon, buy the Nikon D800

[dilbert]

From a local newspaper:

Verdict: This is a wonderful camera. If you hvae Canon lenses and want to move into the blissful realm of full-frame capture, then the 5D Mk III is for you. But the MkII is just as good for stills and costs $1600 less. If you already have a 5D Mk II (as we do), there is no pressing reason to upgrade. If you are starting from scratch with nothing invested in lenses and accessories, then look at the Nikon D800. It has superior ergonomics, a more luxurious feel and higher resolution sensor, and produces uncompressed video. And it is several hundred dollars cheaper.[/u]

[Stephen Melvin]

"But the MkII is just as good for stills and costs $1600 less."

They've clearly not used both cameras. Or perhaps they just shoot at ISO 100.

[ro_n]

... It has superior ergonomics, a more luxurious feel ...[/i][/u]

That lies in the hands of the bee holder.
 

[bdunbar79]

"But the MkII is just as good for stills and costs $1600 less."

They've clearly not used both cameras. Or perhaps they just shoot at ISO 100.

I've tried to argue this point time and time again.  The 5D2 isn't as good as anything regarding the 5D3.  The 5D2 isn't a bad camera.  The 5D3 just happens to be better, at everything.

[neuroanatomist]

I've tried to argue this point time and time again.  The 5D2 isn't as good as anything regarding the 5D3.  The 5D2 isn't a bad camera.  The 5D3 just happens to be better, at everything.

Landscape shot, tripod mounted, manually focused, ISO 100. How is the 5DIII better?

(If you say 'becuase it has one more MP', I'll scream...    )

[MK5GTI]

well, if you compare them like that, at IS100, i think the original 5D1 can do the same.....just with smaller resolution.

to make a camera advance is all about up top. and video stuff in today's market.

[dtaylor]

Nikon ergonomics make me want to scream, and I tend to roll my eyes when I hear stuff like "luxurious feel."

But the D800 sensor is simply better. For a lot of people these sensors are already well beyond their needs (and that's true for APS-C sensors as well). But a large print landscape artist has little reason to go with a 5D3 over a D800. There are some reasons in Canon's lens lineup, but it's hard to get past that sensor.

Where oh where is Canon's high MP body?

[Stephen Melvin]

I've tried to argue this point time and time again.  The 5D2 isn't as good as anything regarding the 5D3.  The 5D2 isn't a bad camera.  The 5D3 just happens to be better, at everything.

Landscape shot, tripod mounted, manually focused, ISO 100. How is the 5DIII better?

(If you say 'becuase it has one more MP', I'll scream...    )

Reduced shadow noise. You can push the files a lot more.

And one more MP.

You're welcome.

[marekjoz]

I've tried to argue this point time and time again.  The 5D2 isn't as good as anything regarding the 5D3.  The 5D2 isn't a bad camera.  The 5D3 just happens to be better, at everything.

Landscape shot, tripod mounted, manually focused, ISO 100. How is the 5DIII better?

(If you say 'becuase it has one more MP', I'll scream...    )

1. HDR if 5d2 without ML?
2. Less More pain if going to switch to N. (so stronger the believe it's better!) :-)

[awinphoto]

I've owned the 5d2, 5d3, and 7D, the latter two still in my bag... I can attest when you need ISO, when you need handling, AF, build, speed, responsiveness, features, even video is better if and when I ever need it...  Yes if you tripod mount and do landscape, just about any camera could be seen as good at ISO 100, but for just about anything else, the 5d3 is the clear champ..  nikon has a great sensor, but so far none of my clients has not cared how many stops of DR my photos have or if it's 36MP...  For me, personally, the 5d3 satisfies my every need and then some... I cant speak the same for your newspaper folks tho nor can mention their expert qualification to make sure statements other than their own personal preference... nothing more, nothing less

[JohanCruyff]

the Nikon D800 ... is several hundred dollars cheaper.[/i]

Is everyone so sure?

What is the price difference between
5DMkIII + 270EX Speedlite
and
D800 + a set of new CF cards + a new external HD + a PC(Mac) upgrade to handle its files?

[marekjoz]

the Nikon D800 ... is several hundred dollars cheaper.[/i]

Is everyone so sure?

What is the price difference between
5DMkIII + 270EX Speedlite
and
D800 + a set of new CF cards + a new external HD + a PC(Mac) upgrade to handle its files?

Landscape shooters are steady guys. They don't shoot hundreds of frames. They plan, wait, try and finally shoot. You don't need new computer hardware to handle it's files, because there will be less of them. When you go to sport event or shoot birds you have to review hundreds of files. Each is smaller, but compare it to max 10 frames from D800 made within a single photo session :-)

[bdunbar79]

I've tried to argue this point time and time again.  The 5D2 isn't as good as anything regarding the 5D3.  The 5D2 isn't a bad camera.  The 5D3 just happens to be better, at everything.

Landscape shot, tripod mounted, manually focused, ISO 100. How is the 5DIII better?

(If you say 'becuase it has one more MP', I'll scream...    )

1. HDR if 5d2 without ML?
2. Less More pain if going to switch to N. (so stronger the believe it's better!) :-)

No no no.  Not 1 MP better, it's 1000 pixels better   Just kidding.

You're right, under that narrow condition it would probably be equal.  I've never compared in landscape.  I'm wondering if you can pull out more detail with the 5D3?  You can with the 1DX vs. 5D3.  I personally like the many AF enhancements and auto ISO in M mode, like the 1D Mark IV.  I also like the in-cam ME and HDR.  I do NOT know if it can AF better/faster in lower light vs. 5D2. 

Personally if I'm shooting your conditions, I'm getting a 1Ds Mark III again

[heptagon]

Imagine a D800 with an EF lens mount released by Canon and called 8D. What would you think about it?

[distant.star]

.
That rather florid copy was probably written by a 20-year-old intern who fancies himself a "photojournalist."

From a local newspaper:

Verdict: This is a wonderful camera. If you hvae Canon lenses and want to move into the blissful realm of full-frame capture, then the 5D Mk III is for you. But the MkII is just as good for stills and costs $1600 less. If you already have a 5D Mk II (as we do), there is no pressing reason to upgrade. If you are starting from scratch with nothing invested in lenses and accessories, then look at the Nikon D800. It has superior ergonomics, a more luxurious feel and higher resolution sensor, and produces uncompressed video. And it is several hundred dollars cheaper.[/u]