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

[paul13walnut5]

Is there really any newbs who will go straight to a D800 or 5D3?

I would have thought that folk who were serious enough, demanding enough or even just the aspirational enough would already be shooting on something.  And if they are serious, demanding or aspirational then surely they will also have the nice f2.8 zooms or top primes to go with it?

However, I think there is some logic to the point about the 5D2 still being a great camera.  The 5D3 didn't fix faults on the 5D2, it created a whole new camera... folk who needed the speed would have moved on from a 5D2 long ago.

Maybe thats where the aspirational bit comes in.   Titlest clubs don't make you a pro golfer, and all that...

[TrumpetPower!]

<sigh />

The D800 wins on megapickle count and the fact that, at ISO 100, you can push the shadows by four stops to get ISO 1600-equivalent noise whereas if you try that on the 5DIII you might get ISO 6400-equivalent noise in your pushed-four-stops shadows.

That's it.

Every other metric, starting with white balance and color rendition (which have a much bigger impact on image quality) and continuing on through framerate, autofocus performance, and all the rest...the 5DIII smokes the D800.

So, sure. If you're shooting in bad light and / or underexposing your images and if you're also printing bigger than 36" x 54" and if you've adapted a Canon TS-E lens to your Nikon and if you're too cheap to go to medium format...then the D800 is the choice for you. Or, of course, if you're already heavily invested in Nikon glass.

Existing Nikonians aside, that leaves, like, nobody except for a small handful who get their jollies by making underexposed out-of-focus extreme macro images of the insides of lens caps.

Cheers,

b&

[peederj]

Megapickles are quite tasty, because their dynamic range expands as they shrink.

If you don't have the storage bandwidth then OK they are not for you. But the D800's Sony sensor is a terrific achievement that Canon has no match for right now. Nor can Canon match the RX100 sensor in that form factor. Everything else, including subjective image quality out-of-camera, I award to Canon 5D3 and am not selling mine.

[AvTvM]

However, I think there is some logic to the point about the 5D2 still being a great camera.  The 5D3 didn't fix faults on the 5D2, it created a whole new camera... folk who needed the speed would have moved on from a 5D2 long ago.

I happen to disagree here. As the III vs. II indicates, the 5D3 is only a fix to the 5D2. Same body (still no popup master flash!), pretty much the same sensor capabilities (no fix for comparatively poor  DR at all ISOs) and fixed AF, which was already severely underspec'ed way back in the 5D1 and not improved in the 5D2 (essentially the 20D AF module adapted for FF).
That said,  not much wrong with the 5D 3 except  the price. And Nikon coming out with the D800 at the same time. 

BUT then ... the D800 ... is not just a fix to the D700. This truly is a completely new camera.   

[marekjoz]

So the battle 5d3 vs d800 begins again :-)
I think it requires separate forum at 5D3vsD800.com - the domain is still free!!!

EDIT: I'm going out for 5 hours to shoot a little and hope to find here at least 5 pages more of this hot discussion after I'm back :-)

[robbymack]

I love topics such as this as it gets the fanboys into a tizzy on either side of the fence. Bottom line for 99.9% of the those in the market for either of these cameras the choice should be clear depending on how much you have invested in glass and what your needs are.  for landscapers the d800 is a probably the better option. for event pros, then it's no contest, the 5diii.  For the 1%ers to whom money is no object, they will just hire their own professional who's already made these decisions.

[justsomedude]

<sigh />The D800 wins on megapickle count and the fact that, at ISO 100, you can push the shadows by four stops to get ISO 1600-equivalent noise whereas if you try that on the 5DIII you might get ISO 6400-equivalent noise in your pushed-four-stops shadows.

That's it.

That's it?  That's quite a lot.  But in reality this discussion has occurred a million times since both cameras were released - and I guess we need to do it again. 

The review posted by the OP isn't far off base.  A lot of Canon loyalists - me being one of them - felt the 5D3 was more of a dot upgrade than a complete overhaul.  I'm not complaining, but let's be frank, the 5D3 is really a 5D MarkII.2.  The AF and burst upgrades are nice improvements, and the new ISOs are great, but there's no honest photographer who can say he's not jealous of the D800's dynamic range and megapixel count.  And for those who don't always need 36MP, the Nikon crop mode allows for shooting smaller sized files. 

Many people try to argue, "hey - you don't need that DR or those MPs!"  And for the average editorial, wedding, action, portrait and photojourn shooter, that's entirely true.  And this is where I agree that the two bodies serve almost two separate classes of customer, 1) the wedding/portrait or general shooter, and 2) the studio or landscape shooter.  Without a doubt the D800 has become the go to for serious landscape photographers or those looking to expand their commercial work in the studio.  The megapixels are what editors and graphic designers are looking for in the commercial realm, and the DR and huge print sizes make landscapers giddy with joy.  And in those regards, the 5D3 just cannot compete.  No way, no how, so let's not pretend that it can.

That said, the wedding/event/portrait shooter doesn't need or want 36MP and that's where the 5D3 shines.  I would never even consider taking a D800 on a event or wedding gig!  Can you imaging trying to handle 800 36MP photo files in post?  NO THANK YOU! 

So each camera is incredible, and each serve their respective markets incredibly well.  But to totally discount reviews because of our own Canon bias is a little silly.  And besides, if we all weren't so jealous of the D800's capabilities, there wouldn't be rumors of Canon dropping a high MP body early next year.

Let's be adults and face the facts... Nikon caught Canon off guard with the D800.  Canon is listening to its user base, and will respond accordingly.  Just hold tight - we'll get our DR and MPs soon enough.

[bdunbar79]

Ok, if the 5D2 and 5D3 have relatively poor DR as some say, at all ISO's, what about the 1Ds3?  Does that have poor DR?

[justsomedude]

Ok, if the 5D2 and 5D3 have relatively poor DR as some say, at all ISO's, what about the 1Ds3?  Does that have poor DR?

It's all relative, and in that respect I don't think "poor" is the correct term.  The 5D3 has great dynamic range; it just isn't as good as the the D800's.

[bdunbar79]

gotcha

[dilbert]

Actually, no. A 20 year-old-intern would have included a "lol" somewhere and other crap. The person that wrote this review has been writing camera reviews for years for a newspaper and is old enough to have used film SLRs.

.
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]

[rpt]

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...    )

New sensor?

 
Sorry, could not help it. No offence 

[Sony]

However, I think there is some logic to the point about the 5D2 still being a great camera.  The 5D3 didn't fix faults on the 5D2, it created a whole new camera... folk who needed the speed would have moved on from a 5D2 long ago.

I happen to disagree here. As the III vs. II indicates, the 5D3 is only a fix to the 5D2. Same body (still no popup master flash!), pretty much the same sensor capabilities (no fix for comparatively poor  DR at all ISOs) and fixed AF, which was already severely underspec'ed way back in the 5D1 and not improved in the 5D2 (essentially the 20D AF module adapted for FF).
That said,  not much wrong with the 5D 3 except  the price. And Nikon coming out with the D800 at the same time. 

BUT then ... the D800 ... is not just a fix to the D700. This truly is a completely new camera.   

I have 5diii. My brother has d700 + d800. His PoV: The 2 Nikons not much different except MPs and the prices. I believe him!
Have anyone used Auto ISO in 5diii? I love it! It was in my dream for along time. I use it most of the time now whenever Im in low light without tripod. Try it you will love it.

[Razor2012]

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]

Lol why do people always want to compare old tech?  Ok superior ergonomics?  I played with a D800 at a trade show and IMO the ergs weren't that great.  For one thing the camera felt small in my hand and I could not get a good grip on it.  In regards to luxurious feel, nothing really jumped out at me, to be expected at this price point.  To make it short, I'll gladly pay the extra 500 bucks for superior AF and high ISO.

[paul13walnut5]

@AvTvM

I happen to disagree here. As the III vs. II indicates, the 5D3 is only a fix to the 5D2. Same body (still no popup master flash!), pretty much the same sensor capabilities (no fix for comparatively poor  DR at all ISOs) and fixed AF, which was already severely underspec'ed way back in the 5D1 and not improved in the 5D2 (essentially the 20D AF module adapted for FF).
That said,  not much wrong with the 5D 3 except  the price. And Nikon coming out with the D800 at the same time. 

New AF, new processor, more speed = significant under the hood development.
The 5D3 now appeals to a wider base of users on spec (although probably not on price) in that it's a camera that can be used for portraiture, landscape and sports without compromise.
 
Sorry you didn't get your megapixels man.  Gonna need to learn to cope with that one I'm afraid.