Canon 5D3 vs. Nikon D600

[RLPhoto]

read what you wrote again , any Nikon camera

Thats right, any nikon camera.

then read my answer again about the time it takes to evaluate a AF system

Read my answer again, I've already have. You know your quite naive that the 51-point system is almost exactly the same from the D3-D700 system. They use a multi-cam 3500 Series AF system, which is good but old already which the canon 61-point system make it show its age.

I've always felt its AF was hesitant, while the canon just hits period.

The burden of proof is on you, and many others have already agreed that the 61-Point AF system is the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[RLPhoto]

You are not saying anything

http://xerodigital.ca/canon-1dx-nikon-d4-compare-wedding-photogrpahers/
The 5D3 is 99% the same AF performance as the 1DX.

Nothing more needs to be said to you.

 

[awinphoto]

I am expecting the "I am rubber, you are glue" argument pretty soon. =) Lets face it, there are people who will always prefer one system over the other, but from the vast majority of review websites, the 5d3 does beat the D800 in speed and accuracy while the d800 was more consistent, but always a hair off... that being said, the 5d3 would then beat the D600, and the D600 does beat the new canon camera.... the rest is pure semantics.

 

[dunkers]

Nikon and Canon have two different visions of how an AF system should be and function, and with what parameters. There are differences in response, starting up , stopping down and loops to hit the target in different scenes. Canon have chosen for example up to f-5, 6, Nikon to F-8.
It would take a very long time to test out which of the systems is generally best, it is probably not doable.
There are reports that the Canon's AF seems faster but the number of keepers at moving subject is greater in Nikon, after some time when colleagues have tried out made we usually emerge which camera produces the best keepers in similar situations, as it emerged with 1dmk3 and d3

First off, the D600's AF system is NOT the same as that found in the D4 or D800. The d600 only has 39 af points, which is essentially a "revamped" D7000 AF. If you look around enough, you will

I primarily shoot sports so AF is critical for me. That being said, a few weeks ago I was shooting volleyball alongside a D4 user. He was switching between his 24-70 and 70-200. I was using my 5d3 paired with my 70-200. When reviewing photos between plays he kept complaining that his D4 kept missing. Mind you this is volleyball, which is a hard sport to shoot in and of itself. However, even for the simplest shots i.e. when the players were serving (nobody else in the frame), his D4 had trouble locking on.

Nearly all of my shots were keepers. Anything I missed was simply user error. I find myself having a hard time in post-processing because its hard to pick out which ones to keep and which to delete.

Shooting through the net, my 5D3 had no problem locking on to the players. His D4 on the other hand, not so much. And from what I keep hearing, Canon's new 61 AF system just works and does it brilliantly. The D4 on the other hand works, but doesn't do anything extraordinary.


On another note, the D600 is capable of shooting sports. I met a guy who had a D4, a D800, and a D600. He was testing out the D600 to see its capabilities as a backup sports body. He seemed to be happy with it. However, he was NOT happy that it did not have a dedicated back-button AF.

The d600 was too small small for my hands (even the 5D3 is a little small for me) and I never liked the button layout/ergonomics of Nikon bodies. The 5D3 is thicker and feels much beefier in my hands. The grip on the Nikon is too small and narrow, which makes my fingers feel very cramped.

Somebody mentioned earlier that people who've used the systems long enough prefer one over the other simply due to ergonomics. I've had my fair share of uses of Nikon bodies and they just don't feel right in my big hands.

Both systems perform so similarly in real world situations (stop oogling over the specs) that it doesn't really matter which system you use. I'm pretty sure that before whatever new camera came along you had absolutely no problems getting the necessary shots.

 

[bdunbar79]

Nikon and Canon have two different visions of how an AF system should be and function, and with what parameters. There are differences in response, starting up , stopping down and loops to hit the target in different scenes. Canon have chosen for example up to f-5, 6, Nikon to F-8.
It would take a very long time to test out which of the systems is generally best, it is probably not doable.
There are reports that the Canon's AF seems faster but the number of keepers at moving subject is greater in Nikon, after some time when colleagues have tried out made we usually emerge which camera produces the best keepers in similar situations, as it emerged with 1dmk3 and d3

First off, the D600's AF system is NOT the same as that found in the D4 or D800. The d600 only has 39 af points, which is essentially a "revamped" D7000 AF. If you look around enough, you will

I primarily shoot sports so AF is critical for me. That being said, a few weeks ago I was shooting volleyball alongside a D4 user. He was switching between his 24-70 and 70-200. I was using my 5d3 paired with my 70-200. When reviewing photos between plays he kept complaining that his D4 kept missing. Mind you this is volleyball, which is a hard sport to shoot in and of itself. However, even for the simplest shots i.e. when the players were serving (nobody else in the frame), his D4 had trouble locking on.

Nearly all of my shots were keepers. Anything I missed was simply user error. I find myself having a hard time in post-processing because its hard to pick out which ones to keep and which to delete.

Shooting through the net, my 5D3 had no problem locking on to the players. His D4 on the other hand, not so much. And from what I keep hearing, Canon's new 61 AF system just works and does it brilliantly. The D4 on the other hand works, but doesn't do anything extraordinary.


On another note, the D600 is capable of shooting sports. I met a guy who had a D4, a D800, and a D600. He was testing out the D600 to see its capabilities as a backup sports body. He seemed to be happy with it. However, he was NOT happy that it did not have a dedicated back-button AF.

The d600 was too small small for my hands (even the 5D3 is a little small for me) and I never liked the button layout/ergonomics of Nikon bodies. The 5D3 is thicker and feels much beefier in my hands. The grip on the Nikon is too small and narrow, which makes my fingers feel very cramped.

Somebody mentioned earlier that people who've used the systems long enough prefer one over the other simply due to ergonomics. I've had my fair share of uses of Nikon bodies and they just don't feel right in my big hands.

Both systems perform so similarly in real world situations (stop oogling over the specs) that it doesn't really matter which system you use. I'm pretty sure that before whatever new camera came along you had absolutely no problems getting the necessary shots.

One of the biggest complaints of my fellow user is that even in low ISO, primarily a game whereby it is very sunny and one team has white jerseys, the D4 shows a higher OOF rate than the 1DX (which is 0). The 1D Mark IV had this same problem. Furthermore, the 1DX beats the living crap out of the D4 where football lighting is low. So Canon wins with the top end at least, thus eliminating validity of those claiming that ALL Nikon cameras outperform their respective Canon counterparts.

The only metric I go by is keepers when I get home on my computer, and so far yes, the 5D3 and 1D4 have had a fair share of misses, but the 1DX I have had absolutely no misses.

 

[jrista]

Nikon and Canon have two different visions of how an AF system should be and function, and with what parameters. There are differences in response, starting up , stopping down and loops to hit the target in different scenes. Canon have chosen for example up to f-5, 6, Nikon to F-8.
It would take a very long time to test out which of the systems is generally best, it is probably not doable.
There are reports that the Canon's AF seems faster but the number of keepers at moving subject is greater in Nikon, after some time when colleagues have tried out made we usually emerge which camera produces the best keepers in similar situations, as it emerged with 1dmk3 and d3

First off, the D600's AF system is NOT the same as that found in the D4 or D800. The d600 only has 39 af points, which is essentially a "revamped" D7000 AF. If you look around enough, you will

I primarily shoot sports so AF is critical for me. That being said, a few weeks ago I was shooting volleyball alongside a D4 user. He was switching between his 24-70 and 70-200. I was using my 5d3 paired with my 70-200. When reviewing photos between plays he kept complaining that his D4 kept missing. Mind you this is volleyball, which is a hard sport to shoot in and of itself. However, even for the simplest shots i.e. when the players were serving (nobody else in the frame), his D4 had trouble locking on.

Nearly all of my shots were keepers. Anything I missed was simply user error. I find myself having a hard time in post-processing because its hard to pick out which ones to keep and which to delete.

Shooting through the net, my 5D3 had no problem locking on to the players. His D4 on the other hand, not so much. And from what I keep hearing, Canon's new 61 AF system just works and does it brilliantly. The D4 on the other hand works, but doesn't do anything extraordinary.


On another note, the D600 is capable of shooting sports. I met a guy who had a D4, a D800, and a D600. He was testing out the D600 to see its capabilities as a backup sports body. He seemed to be happy with it. However, he was NOT happy that it did not have a dedicated back-button AF.

The d600 was too small small for my hands (even the 5D3 is a little small for me) and I never liked the button layout/ergonomics of Nikon bodies. The 5D3 is thicker and feels much beefier in my hands. The grip on the Nikon is too small and narrow, which makes my fingers feel very cramped.

Somebody mentioned earlier that people who've used the systems long enough prefer one over the other simply due to ergonomics. I've had my fair share of uses of Nikon bodies and they just don't feel right in my big hands.

Both systems perform so similarly in real world situations (stop oogling over the specs) that it doesn't really matter which system you use. I'm pretty sure that before whatever new camera came along you had absolutely no problems getting the necessary shots.

One of the biggest complaints of my fellow user is that even in low ISO, primarily a game whereby it is very sunny and one team has white jerseys, the D4 shows a higher OOF rate than the 1DX (which is 0). The 1D Mark IV had this same problem. Furthermore, the 1DX beats the living crap out of the D4 where football lighting is low. So Canon wins with the top end at least, thus eliminating validity of those claiming that ALL Nikon cameras outperform their respective Canon counterparts.

The only metric I go by is keepers when I get home on my computer, and so far yes, the 5D3 and 1D4 have had a fair share of misses, but the 1DX I have had absolutely no misses.

Aye. I've heard the same thing from all the camera reviewers as well, including those who have historically been die-hard Nikon users: The 1D X AF system is unbeatable.

Even in the bird and wildlife photography arena, which is admittedly a lot smaller, both Canon and Nikon users have raved about the 1D X AF system. I've even read a couple reviews that indicate the 1D X's facial recognition works with animals and birds, often in profile. As bird photographer myself, I'd LOVE to get my hands on a 1D X, but as I don't make much money off of my photography, its really hard to justify the $7000 expenditure (especially on top of the $10k+ glass I'd need to go along with it.)

 

[picturesbyme]

Sorry (I shoot canon) but I have to ask...

why is the 5d3 vs the d600?
will be a 6d vs d800 "test" too?

I'm getting the popcorn...

 

[Tammy]

some of you fan boys are incredible. Canon can not handle f-8, Nikon can.

Nikon can not handle F/4 and faster lenses, Canon can.

Canon 5D3 41 cross type F4 and faster sensitive AF points (5 dual cross type), Nikon D800 0.

From what I read it is an autofocus design choice a manufacturer has to make. Focus on designing for performance at large apertures or small ones. Apparently, at this point in tech, you can't have excellence at both. The latest AF systems show a particular differing design, that is all.

If you shoot large aperture portraiture, etc, the Canon AF design of the 5D3 and 1DX etc are better suited. If you shoot birds/wildlife, Nikon's latest design is beneficial.

 

[Gadger]

I've got both the Canon 5D mk lll and the Nikon D600. Without the analysing between them, for me I bought the Nikon D600 to use while travelling, being ideal for lighter, smaller and reduced the lens weight.

My Canon lens 17-40 4L, 24-70 2.8L, 100-400 4/5.6L (also used to take the 70-200 2.8L IS, but stopped this lens a while ago due to the weight) to the Nikon lens setup of 16-35 F4 VR and 28-300 VR.

I've got a Virgin flight coming up with just 6KG handle luggage allowance and one bag only. I've been checked at the check-in and caught a couple of times, over the limit. Then having to quickly spread the weight between the hold suite cases, which I don't like letting my expensive Canon white lens going in the hold.

So for me its fit for purpose.

 

[bdunbar79]

The only metric I go by is keepers when I get home on my computer, and so far yes, the 5D3 and 1D4 have had a fair share of misses, but the 1DX I have had absolutely no misses.
[/quote]

Aye. I've heard the same thing from all the camera reviewers as well, including those who have historically been die-hard Nikon users: The 1D X AF system is unbeatable.

Even in the bird and wildlife photography arena, which is admittedly a lot smaller, both Canon and Nikon users have raved about the 1D X AF system. I've even read a couple reviews that indicate the 1D X's facial recognition works with animals and birds, often in profile. As bird photographer myself, I'd LOVE to get my hands on a 1D X, but as I don't make much money off of my photography, its really hard to justify the $7000 expenditure (especially on top of the $10k+ glass I'd need to go along with it.)
[/quote]

show me evidence
[/quote]

I don't owe you any evidence, because I really don't give a crap what you think, honestly. All I know is that I have a pair of 1DX's, I'm making money, and I'm not having any misses. I'm happy. Are you?

 

[Kernuak]

I'm surprised of the poor skills

I don't thnk you can judge skills from that vide. it was more about the impressions from someone who had always used Nikon cameras (along with a Canon shooter), but perhaps we could see your skills. Once you get past a certain point, cameras used are irrelevant. It's about how you use it and knowing how to use it to get the best out of it.

 

[Albi86]

I think Mikael Risedal has a point, in absolute terms, but he's taking it (or trying to) to a level of scientific precision that is of scarce relevance on the field. It's like arguing if you should put 100g or 101g of sugar in your cake.

Sony sensors perform better, we all know it. If someone had to upgrade to FF right now I would advise him to buy a D600 over a 6D, that's sure. The 5D3 is quite another camera though, with a set of features that are fundamental for the professional. That said, an amateur would find much more value on the D600, while the professional can't rely on it when it's time to nail the shot that makes you bring home the dinner.

My 2 cents.

 

[bdunbar79]

The only metric I go by is keepers when I get home on my computer, and so far yes, the 5D3 and 1D4 have had a fair share of misses, but the 1DX I have had absolutely no misses.

Aye. I've heard the same thing from all the camera reviewers as well, including those who have historically been die-hard Nikon users: The 1D X AF system is unbeatable.

Even in the bird and wildlife photography arena, which is admittedly a lot smaller, both Canon and Nikon users have raved about the 1D X AF system. I've even read a couple reviews that indicate the 1D X's facial recognition works with animals and birds, often in profile. As bird photographer myself, I'd LOVE to get my hands on a 1D X, but as I don't make much money off of my photography, its really hard to justify the $7000 expenditure (especially on top of the $10k+ glass I'd need to go along with it.)

show me evidence
[/quote]

I don't owe you any evidence, because I really don't give a crap what you think, honestly. All I know is that I have a pair of 1DX's, I'm making money, and I'm not having any misses. I'm happy. Are you?
[/quote]

One thing are sure, the Sony sensors are unbeatable today, that we can measure.
I have not seen any AF tests who are valid so the statements like yours are highly subjective like Volvo is the best car etc

[/quote]

Yes, highly subjective. Again, I'm not interested in objective testing. I keep score via keepers and misses. That's what my work quality is based upon only; not lab testing.

 

[AdamJ]

I'm hoping things will escalate from bold type to CAPITAL BOLD TYPE, AND MAYBE FROM THERE TO REALLY BIG CAPITAL BOLD TYPE.

Then we'll know he's seriously annoyed.

 

[AdamJ]

Canon images have a "look" that Nikon can't quite match. Here are two pictures of my dog Scamp. Somehow, the Canon image is just more pleasing.

 

[wellfedCanuck]

Canon images have a "look" that Nikon can't quite match. Here are two pictures of my dog Scamp. Somehow, the Canon image is just more pleasing.

D800, camera only a mother could love...?

 

[darrellrhodesmiller]

After almost 6 months of internal debate (and renting the camera twice), i purchased a 5d MkIII last week. i'm no pro, its not my full time career, but i do make some income off my photography. The 5d MkIII isnt a perfect camera... i think its priced about 500.00 too high.. but i offset that 500.00 with credit card reward points. Nikon might have more mega-pixels. and higher dynamic range. All those specs sound amazing.. but in the end, i have a huge investment in canon lenses.. yes i could have sold them.. but that would take time.. lots of time. I also am very familiar with the canon interface and menu system.. dropping everything and moving to nikon is doable.. but is it worth the time? in my case i dont think so..

The nikon is probably a better camera.. but we're talking the difference between a porche and a ferrari.. and i'm honestly just driving around town. Looking at 500px and flickr.. there are plenty of truly breathtaking images coming out of both cameras. i will be happy to admit this camera is far more than i need.. and far more capable than i am. It does all i need, i see a CLEAR improvement over my 7D in low light situations. Its a far less noisy camera around ISO 2000 and above.

The tools any artist uses is very personal.. and important.. but at some point you have to stop worrying about which tool is just a little bit better.. and start doing the actual art.

 

[bchernicoff]

5dmk2 and d800 same exposure time, f-stop base iso
5dmk2 developed in camera raw and DPP and d800 in camera raw so that details/information can be seen equally in the white house wall and in the white towel in front of the garden house =high lights reproduction.
Then we look in the shadows, low levels , an area is selected in the low levels and auto contrast is laid, auto contrast are showing levels , details, noise in the selected area , no personal influence , photoshop is calculating the signal level from the pixels values. This is the results of 2-3 extra stops DR in low levels. And how to use it- it is up to the photographer and the skills to use photoshop
PS
I have lent the raw files to a number of talented members at dpreview , they have all checked and verified the results by them selves.

Great comparison of noise at 100% scale vs. 66.7%!

 

[Albi86]

5dmk2 and d800 same exposure time, f-stop base iso
5dmk2 developed in camera raw and DPP and d800 in camera raw so that details/information can be seen equally in the white house wall and in the white towel in front of the garden house =high lights reproduction.
Then we look in the shadows, low levels , an area is selected in the low levels and auto contrast is laid, auto contrast are showing levels , details, noise in the selected area , no personal influence , photoshop is calculating the signal level from the pixels values. This is the results of 2-3 extra stops DR in low levels. And how to use it- it is up to the photographer and the skills to use photoshop
PS
I have lent the raw files to a number of talented members at dpreview , they have all checked and verified the results by them selves.

Great comparison of noise at 100% scale vs. 66.7%!

Well, on this he's right. A fair comparison requires the same resolution.

 

[lucuias]

What is the point of comparison here.Canon 5D mark III is design with wedding photographer in mind where a body at half of 1dx price yet able to shoot in decent fast movements and high ISO capability.
In terms of high ISO,focusing tracking,focus point spread area and shooting at high speed(1/8000).Canon 5Dmark III beat Nikon D600.
As an experience photographer,I never had an image under expose more than 2 stop.In fact,I do sometimes over expose by 1 stop if I wanted to extract the shadow details via post.