After DPREVIEW of D800 would you still get the Canon 5d mark iii?

[revup67]

All in all, no matter ..it still sounds more proper to tell people you "shoot out of a Canon". Whoever heard of shooting out of a Nikon..what's that anyway?? sounds like a pea shooter.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Radiating - the fanboyism and ignorance you illustrate is beyond sad. No matter how much you want to convince yourself that MKIII is worth the money... it is NOT!

It may not be for you but you can't tell someone else that it's not for them.

Value for money is subjective. I wouldn't expect everyone to see the value in a $100 meal compared to a $5 one. That's because it is personal.

I consider the 5d3 to have been good value for money. It solves nearly all of my problems. It could be £200-£300 cheaper maybe but at that level I don't care. That is my personal view. I respect that your personal view is different.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

No matter how much you want to convince yourself that MKIII is worth the money... it is NOT!

Maybe not YOUR money.

 

[briansquibb]

I believe 95% of people will be happy

Of the remaining 5% 95% will be unhappy because of the misinformation clouding their judgement - and they would not be able to distinguish between d800 and 5DIII pictures

The IQ of modern cameras is getting so good that it is getting to the point where the human eye can't note significant differences in the final images

It is getting harder and harder for the manufacturers to produce new products with significant improvements so that even minimal improvements such as on board HDR will cost more and more

 

[weixing]

Hi,
IMHO, Nikon D800 and Canon 5DIII are design for different usage... Nikon D800 sacrifice high iso performance for high resolution while Canon 5DIII sacrifice resolution for high iso performance.

So, what is your most importance requirement? If the answer is high resolution, go for Nikon D800. If the answer is good high iso performance, go for Canon 5DMIII. If you need both, wait or may be you can check with the military equipment supplier... ha ha ha

For me, I'll wait for 7DII, 70D or whatever it's called. If that model doesn't meet my expectation, I'll save the money and get the EF 300mm F2.8L IS II USM.

Have a nice day.

 

[WarStreet]

If I would buy it again ? YES !! ;D First of all, I have bought a 5D III due to it's strong points and has nothing to do with the D800. It was from day one that I knew that the D800 is a fantastic camera, but comparing strong and weak points overall they are really on the same level, but the 5DIII strong points are much more important to me. Dpreview shows that the 5DIII is even better than I thought compared to the D800.

After reading the comparisons with the 5DIII and comparing the graphs which already include the 5DIII measurements, confirms that the D800 is a great camera, but the review also shows how impressive the 5DIII is. It will be interesting to read the 5DIII review when ready.

Two days ago I was processing with ACR 7.1 a 5DIII ISO 25600 image of an Aztec statue in a low lit museum handheld, and was really impressed at how easy it was to clean up the image without much detail loss. Yes, the detail starting point of the image was lower compared to an ISO 100, but the noise reduction managed to remove the noise easily without any extra detail sacrifice.

This made me think, the DXO measurements of RAW data shows that the 5DIII, D800 and D4 have similar noise capability, with a near negligible edge for the D4 at some ISO's. When we look camera JPG images, the 5DIII shows that it manage to perform even better compared to the competition and we always used to think that Canon JPG engine is just better. I was going to open a new thread about this, but after seeing Radiating post, I think it is good to mention it here because it is exactly what I was thinking about. Is it really the characteristics of the noise of the 5DIII which makes it easier to clean it up that well with software, rather than just the Canon JPG engine being good ?

In short, I am really impressed with this camera and I am still at early stages with it. It is true that there are some stupid omissions, of which I hope some will be fixed with a firmware update. Also, I think that the 5DIII should be priced similar as the D800.

 

[docsmith]

How has no one pointed out that the 7D scored an 84% and the D800 scored an 82%. The 7D wins!!!! It must be the best camera.

Oh wait, you mean total scores are oversimplifications.....and I should look at the feature set of a camera against my intended use and then use the review to see how well the camera does what I need it to do?

Oops...my bad... ;D

I've been couped up due to bad weather reading a lot of threads beginning to get worked up about the "best" camera and even thinking about switches brands....then, I went outside and took a few pictures.

I feel much better now. 8)

 

[vbi]

Yes. I have Canon lenses, flashes and PW radio triggers that all together cost way more than a new body. No way I can dump that investment.

On top of that I see no compelling reason to upgrade my 5D2 to either the D800 or the 5D3.

 

[UrbanVoyeur]

How has no one pointed out that the 7D scored an 84% and the D800 scored an 82%. The 7D wins!!!! It must be the best camera.

Yeah, there is something strange going on with their scores. I wonder if the bar keeps moving higher - if the 7D would score a 65% if reviewed today vs the 2012 cameras.

 

[caMARYnon]

Yes. I have Canon lenses, flashes and PW radio triggers that all together cost way more than a new body. No way I can dump that investment.

On top of that I see no compelling reason to upgrade my 5D2 to either the D800 or the 5D3.

Agreed

 

[WarStreet]

Scores are relative to their respective category, and time. It is very difficult to describe something so vast with just a magic number. I don't care about personal opinion weighted numbers. The real review and comparisons are far more revealing. The same goes for DXO, their weighted indexes are not of much help, but they do it to generate traffic since it attracts more people.

 

[superotaku78]

I'm a 5D Mark II shooter and love the IQ of Canon full-frame. I've looked through countless real world shots of the 5D Mark III and D800 and for me the Canon provides a more pleasing image almost everytime. Of course this is completely subjective, but I haven't been impressed with the "Nikon look" since my beloved D50. I really wanted to like the D800 and considered switching based on specs and the fact that I'm not that invested in the Canon system; however, just can't get past Nikon colour and the different ergonomics.

 

[psolberg]

Well, I switched to a brand new D800 before the review, but clearly I'm not surprised they liked the camera.
Surely if resolution isn't as important as frame rate for anybody, the D700 or 5DmkIII are better options instead of the 5DmkII/D800 by far which are aimed at a different market.

Yes i have ordered the 5d III because there is not a single thing the d800 is better at. At least not a visible thing. The 5dIII is by far the more versatile camera.

Well it all depends. if you don't find the cleaner shadows at in the D800 better: see
http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html
or if you don't find the still images having less moire on the D800 better: see
http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html
Or if you don't find the broader dynamic range (14 stops) of the D800 better
or if you don't find the 4:2:2 uncompressed HDMI out option, in addition to better detailed output which is closer to true 1080p than the 5DmkIII, and crop video modes of the D800 better
or you don't find the higher level of detail found in 36MP, higher crop versatility, and option to sample down to control noise when needed better.
or if you don't find the ability to focus with f/8 lenses on the D800 better.
or if you don't find the face detection, full color 91K zone metering/AF system (similar to the 1DX) system better.
or if you don't find Nikon's translucent out of the way viewfinder focus point that let you see what you're shooting better.

If you neglect all those things at which is better, then yeah, it has not a single thing which is better at : : : Yet there are plenty of things the D800 is better at even if you don't think they are. That's just a fact.

Versatility depends on what you shoot for not everybody shoots the same just because they call themselves a photographer. The needs of versatility for a studio/landscape/portrait photographer are totally different than the needs of versatility for a sports/journalist photographer. For me, for all the things the 5DIII does better, it doesn't do them THAT much better to offset the things it DOESN'T do better. I'm sure some are in the exact opposite side of the fence. And that's fine. If we all shot the same thing, it would make for a boring world.

Choice is great and I'm glad I can choose the D800 as it is the most versatile for me. If the 5Dmk4 is better and the D900 dissapoints, I'll switch. What's the big deal. It's just a tool, not a wife. 8)

 

[UrbanVoyeur]

If you had read dpreview's commentary on how they score a camera, you'd know how they score cameras.

Given that it seems you haven't, I thoroughly recommend that you do.

I did. It didn't quite answer my question of whether the 7D would still score a 84% today as it did 3 years ago. I will take up the question in their forums, where it is more appropriate.

 

[psolberg]

Not worse, it just shows the motion blur more than lower res. And if you crop, which I assume is one of two reasons why people want 36 mp, you still can see it better, that's a fact.

Zoom them both in to 100% crop at the same settings and it becomes obvious. It's not that 36 mp is more prone to motion blur, it's just that the higher level of detail reveals it.

And to say the 36 image is no worse than 22 at 22 is a pointless point, why would you buy a 36 to use it at 22?

Normalize res and all this, what a waste.

"oh look, the 5d3 is no better at focusing than the 5d2 when I use an f5,6 lens and aim at a completely white surface, man, Canon has failed and left it all in the hands of nikon"

you're not getting the point. First of all, he is talking about the same image cropped the SAME WAY. aka composition wise and ratio wise. It is nonsense to compare two different crops because it isn't the same composition. Let's take the crop nonsense out of the equation. If you print an 8x10 from both full size, or similarly cropped files, the print process will normalize the image ANYWAYS. Motion blur will be recorded the same on both sensors, and print identical on both prints. Yes if you zoom 100% on your PC, you see more blur. But do you sell 100% crops of your screen? Who gives a crap how they look. Ok let's say you do such trivial thing. So in order to compare the two, you'd have to UPSCALE the 22MP image which will guess what? amplify the motion blur. So you see, in the end, MP doesn't matter whatsoever in motion blur in the sense that it can NEVER get worse. HOWEVER if you have proper technique, you can get BETTER results than with the 22MP sensor. Same goes for diffraction. In order to compare the two images you have to normalize it, which equalizes the level of diffraction.

Here are some pluses of downscaling which aren't lost:
-tonal graduation. Because the 36MP has smaller sensels, it is able to capture more tones in a tone graduation over the same area. That is a plus at normal resolution. If you downscale it for comparison purposes (or print), then the algorithms will smooth out that tonal graduation far better than the tonal staircase you'll get with a lower 22MP sensor.
-aliasing/moire. The aliasing staircase will be more visible at native resolutions always. comparing the images at normalized resolutions (or print) will show the 36MP to be less aliased because the normalization process will smooth out the aliasing. This is similar to how video games do 2X AA. They render and a higher output and then resize down.
-detail. Because of the bayer pattern, final pixel values are derived. This creates softness. The higher resolution 36MP image normalized to the same resolution (or printed) will retain more detail since the affects of the de-bayering will be have less impact on detail since the sensels are finer. This is why the D800 images comparisons of detail look better downscaled than those of cameras at native resolution. Particularly the E version.

The bottom line is that if you print anything, the higher resolution sensor wins and it has nothing to do with cropping. If Nikon would produce a D4x with the 24MP D3200 sensor scaled up to 54MP, it would enjoy the same benefits.

Downscaling is FAR from a waste. It is a means to superb image quality. If you love image quality. You love megapixels
see:
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20120509_3-Nikon-WildSpeculation.html

Its a subscription site but some articles and comments are free. Like the D3 in 2007 started the low light race. The D800 in 2012 is starting (or re-igniting) the MP race.

 

[Dylan777]

I purchased the 5d3 a month ago and love it but sometimes the images can be soft and the focus system tricky. I was curious how dpreview can still say that the noise is even better controlled than the 5d3. Basically they do not say in anyway the 5d3 is better except the focus system and fps but really thats not much. Any thoughts?

I don't buy 5D III or lenses because of DPREVIEW.

My theory is simple. Buy it & test it - if YOU like it then keep it. If you DON'T like it....then return it within 30days.

If you trust DPREVIEW that much, than buy D800 and try it yourself. DPREVIEW is NOT the only site doing review on 5d III Vs D800.

 

[smithy]

There's no way I'm giving up my lenses and digital and film bodies to switch to a Nikon. I feel 'at one' with my Canon bodies, being able to intuitively know where the buttons are located. So instead of having to fiddle around with strange buttons and dials, I can starting shooting immediately with an EOS. When I tried a 5D3 at my camera store, it was simple to operate coming from a 40D and 1V.

Anyway, if I had enough money to switch systems entirely, I probably would just buy a completely separate Nikon setup and keep my EOS gear as well. That way I'd get to enjoy the best of both worlds. When Sony and Nikon's relationship eventually sours and they start suing each other, there will be a shift in the digital camera ecosystem. Competitors working together often end up this way. Like Apple and Microsoft, Apple and Samsung, Apple and....

 

[EvilTed]

Get the 5DMK3 because Ken Rockwell has both the 5DMK3 and the D800.
He doesn't always shoot with a DSLR, but when he does, he prefers the 5DMK3.

Stay thirsty my friends

ET

 

[RuneL]

I've shot a lot with a 5d2...and after 3 weeks with the D800, it isn't one iota more difficult to get sharp images. Btw, I print LARGE.

Try a Zeiss 100 f2, 85mm 1.4G or Nikon 200mm f2 and you will be able to fool 99% into thinking it's medium format.

It's that impressive.

I've a D800 on its way, but, I don't expect miracles. It is going to be much more difficult to get pixel sharp images than the 5D MK II or III, so if you can't get sharp images with the 5D MK III, you are going to be really frustrated with a D800.

I have a 7D, picked up a 1D MK IV yesterday, sold my 5D MK II and MK III, I'll likely buy a 1Dx, but thought I[d try a D800 along the way. (I can always resell it without losing anything.)

Meanwhile, I'll play with my new toy and get it ready for a low light job next week. i hope to be able top compare the D800 if it arrives as promised, and I can get some more capable Nikon lenses.

99% of idiots, maybe, not your customers, they will notice the lack of detail in your product, modeling, landscape shots or whatever you are doing.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

Not to mention that 99% of people don't even know what a Medium Format is.