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

[seekn]

"In the end it was clear that natural talent mattered a real lot, experience mattered a lot to a real lot and equipment matter a fair amount.

Poor talent and very little experience were the most detrimental but equipment was not something to laugh off. Shooters, at ALL levels, instantly became better or worse depending upon which body they shot with. The difference was quite clear. And the ones going to the better camera were instantly better despite not even having time to settle into how to even use it the best.

Contrary to many claims there was no such thing as the equipment being 'too good' for a shooter. Even the least talented and least experienced instantly had a better take with the better equipment. All the talk about needing to improve yourself before you improve your equipment is just nonsense. That said improving yourself certainly IS very important and it does make the greater difference overall in many cases.

Both of the pros had hoped to get away with getting an xxD body but after the trial swap they were all like umm yeah.... no way in heck, my take rate instantly went down, equipment matters, definitely matters. And all those who hadn't used 1 series before were suddenly lusting after better equipment and complaining about how no small bodies from Canon had decent AF."

Two points here. I disagree with you about recommending to people that you dont need to improve yourself before you improve your equipment. Yes, having good gear is important and may make your sessions easier and more fruitful, however there is a definite learning curve in photography. Having a beginner grab a 600 ex flash over a 430ex or something to me is more gear than they need. Yes having the 600 with more power may give them more shots, but 90% of the features will go unused. It is basically a waste of money. Just like if all these photo enthusiasts run to the 800 and only upload pics to flickr and frame home photos. Its overkill for MANY (not all).
Also, you mention how the AF was so important to even the beginners and that is true. But that also shows you how it is not all about one specific detail. Yes, the 800 has more resolution, better IQ, more DR, but is that what will help people just breaking into the FF dslr market? Or is it high ISO, better AF, creative mode shooting (or whatever they call it) etc?
I totally agree- buy what you can afford, plan for the future, but you also need to be realistic. People are always wanting the best, the 36 mp, the carbon fiber, the fastest write speed, ... only you can really answer if you REALLY need it.
I saw someone post a pic of their work on these forums and showed how the extra DR helped him sell prints and he said that the DR put money in his pocket? Really? I truly think he sold those shots because they were well composed, well lit, well processed and the subject liked the way they looked in it. Did it matter that you could see more reflections in his or her glasses ? I highly doubt it, although the tog has convinced himself that it was the selling point.
I am guilty of this too - I buy everything under the sun lol - i loove gadgets. But honestly, do I need every little thing haha - probably not, but I convince my wife I do.
[/quote]

 

[Longvision]

OK, I have only read part of this long thread, but here's my take :

I still own a 5Dc, passed the 5DII upgrade, since I didn't feel a need for extra resolution and was mostly interested in better AF, which did not happen on the 5DII.

So, as you might expect, I believe Canon should improve the DR of its sensors, not the resolution.

That being said, the 5DIII is everything I would have liked to see in the 5DII. So this time I will upgrade.

Sure, low iso DR matters and Canon deserve all the flak it is getting for not improving it. However, as I don't shoot much at 100iso and do a lot at 800 and above, I guess I am less affected by it than many. Certainly it would be good to have higher DR at high iso (much more important in my eyes than higher resolution).

One thing that gets surprisingly little attention is the silent mode in the 5DIII. For me, this is a huge improvement in a dslr. Mechanical noise has ruined more shots in my experience than lack of DR, simply because I had to stop shooting. It's distressing how little DR there is in a picture you do NOT take !!!

In an ideal world, I would like the DR of the D800, the silent mode, frame rate and AF of the 5DIII. I would also like the nikon 12-24mm in ef mount, along with my beloved 135/2.0L.

But as this is not an ideal world, as I have quite a bit of an investment in canon L glass, as photography is not my profession, as there is no way I can justify spending the amount to own two systems, I'll have to settle for the lesser alternative : just one lowly 5DIII.

Strangely enough, this is not making me particularly unhappy

Still, canon should be working on DR, and not just at low iso.

 

[awinphoto]

"In the end it was clear that natural talent mattered a real lot, experience mattered a lot to a real lot and equipment matter a fair amount.

Poor talent and very little experience were the most detrimental but equipment was not something to laugh off. Shooters, at ALL levels, instantly became better or worse depending upon which body they shot with. The difference was quite clear. And the ones going to the better camera were instantly better despite not even having time to settle into how to even use it the best.

Contrary to many claims there was no such thing as the equipment being 'too good' for a shooter. Even the least talented and least experienced instantly had a better take with the better equipment. All the talk about needing to improve yourself before you improve your equipment is just nonsense. That said improving yourself certainly IS very important and it does make the greater difference overall in many cases.

Both of the pros had hoped to get away with getting an xxD body but after the trial swap they were all like umm yeah.... no way in heck, my take rate instantly went down, equipment matters, definitely matters. And all those who hadn't used 1 series before were suddenly lusting after better equipment and complaining about how no small bodies from Canon had decent AF."

Two points here. I disagree with you about recommending to people that you dont need to improve yourself before you improve your equipment. Yes, having good gear is important and may make your sessions easier and more fruitful, however there is a definite learning curve in photography. Having a beginner grab a 600 ex flash over a 430ex or something to me is more gear than they need. Yes having the 600 with more power may give them more shots, but 90% of the features will go unused. It is basically a waste of money. Just like if all these photo enthusiasts run to the 800 and only upload pics to flickr and frame home photos. Its overkill for MANY (not all).
Also, you mention how the AF was so important to even the beginners and that is true. But that also shows you how it is not all about one specific detail. Yes, the 800 has more resolution, better IQ, more DR, but is that what will help people just breaking into the FF dslr market? Or is it high ISO, better AF, creative mode shooting (or whatever they call it) etc?
I totally agree- buy what you can afford, plan for the future, but you also need to be realistic. People are always wanting the best, the 36 mp, the carbon fiber, the fastest write speed, ... only you can really answer if you REALLY need it.
I saw someone post a pic of their work on these forums and showed how the extra DR helped him sell prints and he said that the DR put money in his pocket? Really? I truly think he sold those shots because they were well composed, well lit, well processed and the subject liked the way they looked in it. Did it matter that you could see more reflections in his or her glasses ? I highly doubt it, although the tog has convinced himself that it was the selling point.
I am guilty of this too - I buy everything under the sun lol - i loove gadgets. But honestly, do I need every little thing haha - probably not, but I convince my wife I do.

[/quote]

I kinda have to agree.. when I first started as a student going pro i started with 1 camera, the 10D, a crappy 29-80mm, 75-300 non IS POC, and a 50mm macro, yes, all budget lenses... at the time I could have splurged and went for the first gen 1d for $4000 at the time, the lovely 4MP camera, but then i would be lense-less and what's the point in that? Of course the pixel density and the camera made those crappy lenses seem formidable, and now i've upgrade into the arsenal that i have today. Working with the lower gear, building my chops, and outgrowing each of the camera/lenses has led me to appreciate my next gear and my next evolution in photography, I think even more than people who jump in the game with huge cash flow and buy the best right off the bat... They never had to struggle, they never had to overcome their gear, they never had to rise above and I find they tend to go on CR and gripe about gear more than others... Hence the 5d3 comes out and all of a sudden, to some, it's not enough. I'm fully aware of those issues but in the grand scheme of things, it really, to me, isn't a big deal. Of course I see Nuero's equipment list, brianquibbs gear, etc and i'm envious of what they have, but in the end, I know I can do what I want to do with what I have and I will keep making money doing what I love. There will always be that hotter/sexier girlfriend out there, but as long as your current girl satisfies you, whats the point in fretting?

 

[briansquibb]

Of course I see Nuero's equipment list, brianquibbs gear, etc and i'm envious of what they have,

I am very carefull to choose the right gear and am not on the leading edge of technology.

My photography doesn't earn me any money so I buy kit specifically for my requirements rather than to generate income. At this point in time I have no plans for a 1DX or a 5DIII as I feel that they will suit me less than the 1D4 and the 1DS3 which are my main bodies.

The 7D is just for taking street photos and as a spare.

I chose these cameras as they have the features that make my life simple and they work well for me. The 1DS3 is my best ever general purpose camera - I shoot a lot of close ups and the IQ is stunning, far better than its predecessor, the 5DII - mostly in skin tones (of course the pro AF and AF point linked metering helps a LOT)

I set myself a target for kit and have been working towards it for 2 years now - dont be envious of me - just decide what you really need and work towards it without compromise.

 

[skitron]

I disagree with you about recommending to people that you dont need to improve yourself before you improve your equipment. Yes, having good gear is important and may make your sessions easier and more fruitful, however there is a definite learning curve...

I used to have this same discussion in audio circles about audio gear. The bottom line is I've heard some really good records made with really cheap gear and massive engineering talent. I've also heard some really bad records made with uber-gear and little engineering talent. It's really no different in photgraphy. Not to say uber-gear and massive talent isn't the best combination...just that talent dominates the equation is all.

 

[Tcapp]

I disagree with you about recommending to people that you dont need to improve yourself before you improve your equipment. Yes, having good gear is important and may make your sessions easier and more fruitful, however there is a definite learning curve...

I used to have this same discussion in audio circles about audio gear. The bottom line is I've heard some really good records made with really cheap gear and massive engineering talent. I've also heard some really bad records made with uber-gear and little engineering talent. It's really no different in photgraphy. Not to say uber-gear and massive talent isn't the best combination...just that talent dominates the equation is all.

Very very true.

But in some circumstances, better equipment is better than talent. I don't care how good you are, try to get a good candle light portrait handheld with a slow zoom on a rebel and you will fail, but a 5d3 with a 50 1.2 or a good tripod, and even an amateur can put it on green mode and get a decent shot.

But yea, im most cases, talent trumps gear 9/10 times.

 

[Michael7]

A someone who has, and continues to shoot strictly Canon, there are two things I come away with here:

1. Canon is damaging its reputation with $3500 cameras that can't auto focus with F8 lenses. This is an incredibly petulant feature-lock meant to make people purchase far more expensive lenses to obtain desired reach. It falls in line with their bitterly-cheap refusal to include lens hoods with non-L lenses. Also, their lens warranties fall far short of their competitor's.

2. Better sensor. Canon's images seem a hair off the last few years. There's a "waxy" look in all the bodies post-5D II.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

But in some circumstances, better equipment is better than talent. I don't care how good you are, try to get a good candle light portrait handheld with a slow zoom on a rebel and you will fail, but a 5d3 with a 50 1.2 or a good tripod, and even an amateur can put it on green mode and get a decent shot.

But yea, im most cases, talent trumps gear 9/10 times.

A good photographer that knows the limits of whatever equipment he is using would probably find a way to make an interesting photo even if it will be blurred or not exposed "correctly". On the other hand, an amateur that knows nothing but green mode will at best get a technically correct snapshot. Exposed correctly (overexposed for the scene), sharp and boring.

 

[FunkyCamera]

Their takeaway should be "keep being AWESOME, keep totally spanking Nikon".