1dx, or d800e?

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I bought a D800 to see what it could do, and a D800E will be similar. For landscape use where DR and lots of fine detail are needed, the camera really shines (assuming you have a supurb lens for it). Thats the rub, you have a very small selection of Nikon lenses that will let you get that maximum resolution from the camera, the 14-24 should do that, or you can get a Zeiss 21mm. Just don't try to find a equivalent to a 135mm L or 100-400mmL, for example.

 

[Tcapp]

I bought a D800 to see what it could do, and a D800E will be similar. For landscape use where DR and lots of fine detail are needed, the camera really shines (assuming you have a supurb lens for it). Thats the rub, you have a very small selection of Nikon lenses that will let you get that maximum resolution from the camera, the 14-24 should do that, or you can get a Zeiss 21mm. Just don't try to find a equivalent to a 135mm L or 100-400mmL, for example.

I'm wondering if the Nikon 24 1.4 and the sigma 85 1.4 have the resolving power to give me all those beautiful details.

 

[Viggo]

I've always bought and wanted better cameras, always been somewhat unhappy with everything. From 400d and the 5d, through the 5d2, 1d3 and 1d4 and the 5d3. Kind of big issues for me with all of them. Then I bought the 1d X, last camera i'll ever buy, do not even remotely care what Canon will replace with it.. Mind>Blown.... every single aspect from build and layout to IQ and functions. I can't stress enough how different from the 5d3 it is...

 

[Tcapp]

I've always bought and wanted better cameras, always been somewhat unhappy with everything. From 400d and the 5d, through the 5d2, 1d3 and 1d4 and the 5d3. Kind of big issues for me with all of them. Then I bought the 1d X, last camera i'll ever buy, do not even remotely care what Canon will replace with it.. Mind>Blown.... every single aspect from build and layout to IQ and functions. I can't stress enough how different from the 5d3 it is...

Is the banding really improved over the 5d3? I do like to push my shadows a lot, so that is one thing that has been bugging me about my 5d3. I shoot almost exclusively with natural light, so that is a big deal for me. And I know the d800e is amazing at pushing shadows.

 

[Viggo]

I've always bought and wanted better cameras, always been somewhat unhappy with everything. From 400d and the 5d, through the 5d2, 1d3 and 1d4 and the 5d3. Kind of big issues for me with all of them. Then I bought the 1d X, last camera i'll ever buy, do not even remotely care what Canon will replace with it.. Mind>Blown.... every single aspect from build and layout to IQ and functions. I can't stress enough how different from the 5d3 it is...

Is the banding really improved over the 5d3? I do like to push my shadows a lot, so that is one thing that has been bugging me about my 5d3. I shoot almost exclusively with natural light, so that is a big deal for me. And I know the d800e is amazing at pushing shadows.

Yeah, I can push the X-files (nerdyhumor) a lot more.

If I want the best possible shadows expose for them and pull down the highlights. For absolute shadowpush the d800 might be better, I don't know. I guess if that is on top of your list of important things. Look into the d800. For me I can get everything as good as I want, so I don't see why I could want a d800 just to push shadows 5 stops....

 

[Tcapp]

I've always bought and wanted better cameras, always been somewhat unhappy with everything. From 400d and the 5d, through the 5d2, 1d3 and 1d4 and the 5d3. Kind of big issues for me with all of them. Then I bought the 1d X, last camera i'll ever buy, do not even remotely care what Canon will replace with it.. Mind>Blown.... every single aspect from build and layout to IQ and functions. I can't stress enough how different from the 5d3 it is...

Is the banding really improved over the 5d3? I do like to push my shadows a lot, so that is one thing that has been bugging me about my 5d3. I shoot almost exclusively with natural light, so that is a big deal for me. And I know the d800e is amazing at pushing shadows.

Yeah, I can push the X-files (nerdyhumor) a lot more.

If I want the best possible shadows expose for them and pull down the highlights. For absolute shadowpush the d800 might be better, I don't know. I guess if that is on top of your list of important things. Look into the d800. For me I can get everything as good as I want, so I don't see why I could want a d800 just to push shadows 5 stops....

Hehe. x-files.

But the 1dx might be too heavy for a hike at night, a "star trek" if you will.

Sorry, that was a stretch.

But on a more serious note, I think the 1dx might be the best option... Although it is a little more expensive...

 

[Berswiss]

Coming back to the original question I would go for the 1Dx and stay away from the D800 or D800e. I have both Nikon and Canon for professional reasons and I am not a fan of one specific brand but.... I love my D3x as well as the D4 but the D800 has some major issues from my point of view. When the AF works and when all the conditions are respected you get great shots and prints. The main issue if the AF performance. It's quite interesting to see that a lot of tests show that the 24-120 or even the 28-300 are better than the 24-70 on the D800 !!! Don' t even try to use a Zeiss with a d800 because the AF assistance is useless. And so on ...
The 1Dx is the best body I ever used in my life. I am coming back from a couple of months on the Silk Road and I stopped using my 5DMkIII after some time. The new 24-70 is outstanding, the 85F1.2 too and the 70-200 is as good as the Nikon. Now, I use my MkIII with the new 40mm as a street camera and the 1DX for serious work.

 

[Tcapp]

Coming back to the original question I would go for the 1Dx and stay away from the D800 or D800e. I have both Nikon and Canon for professional reasons and I am not a fan of one specific brand but.... I love my D3x as well as the D4 but the D800 has some major issues from my point of view. When the AF works and when all the conditions are respected you get great shots and prints. The main issue if the AF performance. It's quite interesting to see that a lot of tests show that the 24-120 or even the 28-300 are better than the 24-70 on the D800 !!! Don' t even try to use a Zeiss with a d800 because the AF assistance is useless. And so on ...
The 1Dx is the best body I ever used in my life. I am coming back from a couple of months on the Silk Road and I stopped using my 5DMkIII after some time. The new 24-70 is outstanding, the 85F1.2 too and the 70-200 is as good as the Nikon. Now, I use my MkIII with the new 40mm as a street camera and the 1DX for serious work.

I think I may go for that 1dx.

But just to be clear, if I did go for the d800, I wouldn't be putting much stress on the AF system. I would only af for still, posed portraits, and live view MF for landscape, cityscape, and any other "scape" i feel like shooting.

You guys do make a good argument in favor of the 1dx though. The price is just a hard pill to swallow.

 

[Jan van Holten]

The only down side to the 1DX I heard on these forums compared to the 5D3 was its shutter noise was louder than that of the 5D3. I think you should consider that...

I don't have experience with the 5D3, but compared to the 1D4 it is much less.
You have to find out yourself, do you really need the big megapixel. Or is it more the idea. To whom you accountable explain.

 

[JBeckwith]

This one makes by far the most sense to me:

You have two awesome cameras already. yes the 1dx is hot but its the lens that makes it. Think of that 200f/2 at f/2 slicing your subject out. Sharp as all get out. You'd be creating photos that not a lot of others will be able to. As a wedding photographer myself, why not set yourself apart by providing higher quality of work with a lens like that? 5d3 is perfect for the wedding world. Yes its not 12 fps, but do you need that? Are you missing the moment by not blasting it to death?

If you got the nikon, you'd have a different set of lenses to deal with as well and I see that as a huge pain in the ass.

If you're looking to really improve your portfolio, you already have the cameras to do it so a great lens is the obvious choice. If you just want to have fun and burst people to death, then by all means maybe the 1DX is the way to go.

 

[bdunbar79]

I own both, 1DX and 5D3. Let me say this. At high ISO, say 12,800, I can still print 8 x 10's or better with very fine detail and no noise with the 1DX with minimal processing, whereras the 5D3 requires a lot more post processing. Also, the 1DX files can pull more shadow detail and highlight recovery. Despite having 3 less MP's, the prints are substantially better. My Nikon buddies who shoot sports, ie D4, say they wish they had a 1DX instead when they look at my RAW files and prints.

I have no experience with the D800/E.

The 1dx makes the D4 look like a toy. Sharper, better focus, better resolution, better lens mount, faster frame rate...

But one thing that the 1dx seems to do that makes me scratch my head is that it exposes differently. I've seen photos that were taken at the same time, same settings, same lens, but the 1dx is about a third stop darker. If I need to expose longer on the 1dx vs the 5d3, to me that defeats the point of the 1dx's cleaner ISO performance. You have any experience with this? Same thing with Nikon cameras, they seem to expose 1/3 to 1/2 stop brighter than canon at identical settings. That would be a pretty nice advantage it seems.

The 1DX auto ISO is annoying to be quite frank. If you want to print, and you had used auto ISO, you better either 1. stop using auto ISO and expose to the right, or 2. add quite a bit of exposure in post. It underexposes and this really shows up when you print 8 x 10's. The thing it safeguards against is blown highlights, and that is something you must consider. The 5D3's auto ISO I don't add much exposure in post. Now, keep in mind, this would be with the same general metering, within reason.

 

[Viggo]

I own both, 1DX and 5D3. Let me say this. At high ISO, say 12,800, I can still print 8 x 10's or better with very fine detail and no noise with the 1DX with minimal processing, whereras the 5D3 requires a lot more post processing. Also, the 1DX files can pull more shadow detail and highlight recovery. Despite having 3 less MP's, the prints are substantially better. My Nikon buddies who shoot sports, ie D4, say they wish they had a 1DX instead when they look at my RAW files and prints.

I have no experience with the D800/E.

The 1dx makes the D4 look like a toy. Sharper, better focus, better resolution, better lens mount, faster frame rate...

But one thing that the 1dx seems to do that makes me scratch my head is that it exposes differently. I've seen photos that were taken at the same time, same settings, same lens, but the 1dx is about a third stop darker. If I need to expose longer on the 1dx vs the 5d3, to me that defeats the point of the 1dx's cleaner ISO performance. You have any experience with this? Same thing with Nikon cameras, they seem to expose 1/3 to 1/2 stop brighter than canon at identical settings. That would be a pretty nice advantage it seems.

The 1DX auto ISO is annoying to be quite frank. If you want to print, and you had used auto ISO, you better either 1. stop using auto ISO and expose to the right, or 2. add quite a bit of exposure in post. It underexposes and this really shows up when you print 8 x 10's. The thing it safeguards against is blown highlights, and that is something you must consider. The 5D3's auto ISO I don't add much exposure in post. Now, keep in mind, this would be with the same general metering, within reason.

Never hadde any issues like that with auto-iso. Maybe because I have moved the default 0 ev to +5/8?

 

[tron]

I wouldn't mess with both Canon and Nikon lenses. You have 2 good Canon bodies. Go for Canon glass.

 

[bdunbar79]

Thanks Viggo, yes, if you want to use auto ISO, you also as 3. change default to +5/8. Good catch.

 

[risc32]

So you guys like the 5dmk3's metering better than the 1dx? i've never really found any one meter to perform much better than any other, but i do remember a few on this site really talking up the 1dx's meter as such an improvement over the 5dmk3. hmmm. yeah, they all get tricked. lately i've been using my 5dmk3 with a +2/3 exp comp. your exp comp works to 5/8ths?

 

[Tcapp]

UPDATE.

I just went to the local camera store and played with:

1dx

D800e

200 F2 (nikon cause they didn't have the canon lens, but they are super similar).


Impressions.
1dx was awesome, but will take a lot of getting used to since all the buttons are in different places, but I'm sure that would be no problem.

d800e- hate the feel of that thing in my hands. Felt like I was going to drop it. SO smooth on the sides! Button layout was really weird, less intuitive than the 5d3. Not a deal breaker, especially considering the IQ that thing produces.

200 f2- nothing prepares you for how heavy and awkward that thing is. No way I would carry it around a wedding, and wouldn't be too excited about taking it along on an engagement shoot. It felt so unbalanced on the d800. That said, it produces some stunning bokeh, but for the price and especially the weight, I feel my 70-200 2.8 is II is good enough, at least for now.

I'll tell you more once i process the test shots i took.

 

[Studio1930]

UPDATE.

200 f2- nothing prepares you for how heavy and awkward that thing is. No way I would carry it around a wedding, and wouldn't be too excited about taking it along on an engagement shoot. It felt so unbalanced on the d800.

Yeah, a 200/f2 will be unbalanced on a non-pro body without a vertical grip. Put the 200/f2 on a 1 series body and you will notice a big difference (much more balanced). I would not judge the Nikon 200 f/2 on a d800 when you are thinking about getting the Canon 200 f/2 for a Canon body (possibly a 1Dx).

Normally, glass is a better investment than bodies and is kept longer. I would go with the 200 f/2 (which I own and use with a 1Dx).

 

[Fishnose]

UPDATE.
200 f2- nothing prepares you for how heavy and awkward that thing is. No way I would carry it around a wedding, and wouldn't be too excited about taking it along on an engagement shoot. It felt so unbalanced on the d800. That said, it produces some stunning bokeh, but for the price and especially the weight, I feel my 70-200 2.8 is II is good enough, at least for now.

LOL yes, your 70-200 sure is good enough. Forget about a fixed 200 at weddings. Huge lump to carry around and very limited in all the tight corners.
And the DOF at F/2 is so short the tip of her nose will be out of focus when her eyes are focused.

 

[Tcapp]

UPDATE.
200 f2- nothing prepares you for how heavy and awkward that thing is. No way I would carry it around a wedding, and wouldn't be too excited about taking it along on an engagement shoot. It felt so unbalanced on the d800. That said, it produces some stunning bokeh, but for the price and especially the weight, I feel my 70-200 2.8 is II is good enough, at least for now.

LOL yes, your 70-200 sure is good enough. Forget about a fixed 200 at weddings. Huge lump to carry around and very limited in all the tight corners.
And the DOF at F/2 is so short the tip of her nose will be out of focus when her eyes are focused.

That shallow DOF is EXACTLY why I want that lens. Not for candids of course, but for portraits of the couple. Like that all important photo of the couple walking hand in hand down the road...

 

[Viggo]

So you guys like the 5dmk3's metering better than the 1dx? i've never really found any one meter to perform much better than any other, but i do remember a few on this site really talking up the 1dx's meter as such an improvement over the 5dmk3. hmmm. yeah, they all get tricked. lately i've been using my 5dmk3 with a +2/3 exp comp. your exp comp works to 5/8ths?

You misunderstood, I overexpose on purpose, I like that for my images. And the metering is wayway better than anything I have ever tried.

Try the 5d3 with bright backlit subject and then do the same with the X, you'll notice the X is spot on and the 5d needs about 3 stops compensation.