D800 v. 5D3 threads: What should Canon's takeaway be?

[t.linn]

For those of us who remain a little envious of the D800's sensor (and I already know there are those who could care less), is it the superior dynamic range of the D800 sensor, the superior resolution of the D800 sensor, or both?

I ask because, for me, it is strictly the dynamic range that I covet. Being able to pull clean shadow detail out of total darkness is a big deal for me. As for the extra megapixels, I would rather have better low light sensitivity if I had to choose. It would be disappointing if Canon looked at the many D800 v. 5D3 discussions and concluded that any dissatisfaction on the part of Canon users is due to the disparity in resolution. That's not it. Not for me. But I wonder to what extent that is true for everyone else. Thoughts?

 

[Tcapp]

For those of us who remain a little envious of the D800's sensor (and I already know there are those who could care less), is it the superior dynamic range of the D800 sensor, the superior resolution of the D800 sensor, or both?

I ask because, for me, it is strictly the dynamic range that I covet. Being able to pull clean shadow detail out of total darkness is a big deal for me. As for the extra megapixels, I would rather have better low light sensitivity if I had to choose. It would be disappointing if Canon looked at the many D800 v. 5D3 discussions and concluded that any dissatisfaction on the part of Canon users is due to the disparity in resolution. That's not it. Not for me. But I wonder to what extent that is true for everyone else. Thoughts?

I agree that greater dynamic range would be best. More DR has no downside, with more MP you have to deal with bigger files. I would love more DR at all iso's not just low. But yea, that d800 shadow recovery is AMAZING.

 

[drjlo]

Canon will "take away" nothing, nada, zilch, UNLESS their sales numbers suffer on a significant scale, period.

 

[jordanbstead]

DR should almost always take the cake. To be honest, IMO, 12 MP is perfect as far as resolution goes. The original 5D, D3, D3s... they all had it right. Hell, I shoot my Mk II on sRAW (10 MP) constantly. I've never once had a lust for more resolution and my images run in print every day.

Thank God the Mk III didn't up the resolution - at least for the work I do.

 

[V8Beast]

Canon will "take away" nothing, nada, zilch, UNLESS their sales numbers suffer on a significant scale, period.

Exactly. Sales figures speak much louder than tech geeks complaining online. Most people threatening to switch systems won't do it. Those that do jump ship to Nikon for DR purposes will be offset of Nikon D700 users jumping ship to Canon since they were expecting a baby D4, but instead got a camera with triple the resolution and a slower burst rate.

The D800 is a mighty fine camera, so if DR is such an important factor that it warrants switching systems, just do it and call it a day. That seems to make more sense than living in denial and/or complaining incessantly

 

[takoman46]

I definitely do not need the 36mp and agree that the dynamic range comparison between the D800 and Hasselblad H4D in shadow recovery was quite impressive. But I still wouldn't trade my 5D3 for a D800. The low light advantage and AF system is solid gold in value to me. If the 5D3 had the same or better dynamic range than the D800, then the D800 would be nothing more than a 36mp door stopper in my opinion.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

For those of us who remain a little envious of the D800's sensor (and I already know there are those who could care less), is it the superior dynamic range of the D800 sensor, the superior resolution of the D800 sensor, or both?

I ask because, for me, it is strictly the dynamic range that I covet. Being able to pull clean shadow detail out of total darkness is a big deal for me. As for the extra megapixels, I would rather have better low light sensitivity if I had to choose. It would be disappointing if Canon looked at the many D800 v. 5D3 discussions and concluded that any dissatisfaction on the part of Canon users is due to the disparity in resolution. That's not it. Not for me. But I wonder to what extent that is true for everyone else. Thoughts?

both but more the dynamic range (especially since more MP would cripple the FF frame rate a bit and since Canon won't do, for whatever reason, APS-C and APS-H crops at higher speed, that would be a huge knock for a high MP Canon, although it shouldn't be since nothing stops them from making faster crop modes, of course maintaing it at FF is even nicer)

so both, definitely want more MP and more DR, but at this point I'm not willing to give up 6fps for more MP and I'll take the more MP as soon as they can be delivered at 6fps.

rather a shame the 5D3 didnt get to D4 levels of DR, that would've been some camera

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

If we look back at the past couple of years, it is clear that overall Canon has improved on most of the top complaints about the 5D2. More FPS, better AF, better low light capability and better sealing. DR was also mentioned, but overall it was drowned by other issues. Perhaps it was taken for granted that they will improve it upon the 5D2 or it can be argued that the AF for instance should have been better to begin with but in the end it does seem that the most vocal requests were answered.

 

[mb66energy]

For me: DR, DR and DR are the most important aspects of a camera.

I like to shoot contra light (macro, landscape) and I would like to have clean 16 bit DR to avoid HDR fiddeling.

If I look at 12 x 16 inch prints from 10MP images (40D) there is absolutely enough resulution just in 10MP. Light, lens and exposure have much more to do with visual sharpness of images than MP on the sensor!

 

[sharka23]

both is nice to have... - but more important for me is definately the resolution!!
my wishlist:
the excellent 5dIII body with:
32-42 MP(i think that´s the absolut MAX you get out of the best L-lenses), +DR, low ISO performance!, 1/400 flash sync.

please soon

 

[sharka23]

and not to forget: 16bit raw output.
to get even closer to MF.

 

[Canon-F1]

work an the analog digital converter.

reduce the read noise to get better dynamic range.
reducing read noise will be good for pushing shadows too.

 

[te4o]

Canon has to be future proof: if the Mark III had the DR of the Sony Exmor what would they sell you in four years? A wise parent always reserves part of the presents for the next occasion...

 

[birtembuk]

Canon will "take away" nothing, nada, zilch, UNLESS their sales numbers suffer on a significant scale, period.

Yep, nichts, rien, niente.

 

[docsmith]

Wow...I think I am in agreement with just about every post.... ;D

I doubt Canon will take away much. Unless it begins to affect their sales or the select photographers that they listen too begin to say something.

What I would like Canon to take away is to reduce the read noise to give shadows as clean as the D800 and expand DR. Hopefully that is as simple as improving the analog/digital converter.

 

[meli]

Canon has to be future proof: if the Mark III had the DR of the Sony Exmor what would they sell you in four years? A wise parent always reserves part of the presents for the next occasion...

well to a lot of canon people around here including me, they probably sell nothing at all for the next 4 years, how's that working for Canon? You can't really pick parents but sure as hell you can pick companies..

i wont be selling my Canon equipment anytime soon and I'm still shooting happily with my 5d2 but i will invest in D800 plus a couple of lenses.

 

[Canon-F1]

well to a lot of canon people around here including me, they probably sell nothing at all for the next 4 years, how's that working for Canon? .

lets wait and see... not all hope is lost.

 

[smirkypants]

There's nothing revolutionary in the 5D3. It's a very safe, very conservative camera. Having owned one for a couple of weeks, it really does feel almost exactly like owning a 7D with better IQ. There's nothing revolutionary about it. Canon needs to learn to push the envelope and to exceed expectations.

 

[pdirestajr]

There's nothing revolutionary in the 5D3. It's a very safe, very conservative camera. Having owned one for a couple of weeks, it really does feel almost exactly like owning a 7D with better IQ. There's nothing revolutionary about it. Canon needs to learn to push the envelope and to exceed expectations.

But since it is just an "update" of the 5D series (with LOTS of updates) why does it have to be revolutionary? Why can't it be what it is, a 5D refresh. And wouldn't incorporating the top of the line focusing system into a consumer camera count as a big deal?

The 5D is an incredibly successful sub-brand for Canon, it was & always will be revolutionary. Perhaps they will release a new brand to be revolutionary in a new way.

 

[!Xabbu]

Canon has to be future proof: if the Mark III had the DR of the Sony Exmor what would they sell you in four years? A wise parent always reserves part of the presents for the next occasion...

So, you think Sony won't improve their Exmor over the next four years? I'm pretty sure they will (unless they go bankrupt). From a pure technical standpoint it seems like Canon is about one generation behind in sensor technology and it will be damn hard to catch up. Just my 2 cents...