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

[Chuck Alaimo]

ugggggg... Said it before and will say it again. My response to all this is to stop sending my clients a proof gallery, and instead, send my shots to a lab where they will analyze it and send me a 500 page detailed report on the image, with histogram graphs and 3lots of science and tech info ---then i will pass this 500 page report to my clients and they can choose their prints from that...

Yes, thats really sarcastic, but from what I see and hear here it sounds like thats what your clients want, or you want. Who cares about the actual image in question... theres a lot of math in photography, and in music and in art --- but are most artists mathematicians? Does an artist bust out a graphing calculator before they envision the image they wish to create?

There is another segment of market research here to consider ---and this i think will drive what happens in the professional market more than forum posts ---where are the images going, what are people doing with them. If more national geographic pictures have canon gear attached to them than nikon, then why would canon spend a boat load of r&d money on improving DR? If more acclaimed artists are selling more printed works off of canon gear, then again why spend r&d $$$? And then theres the wedding photography market ---which is really what the mk3 is geared too ---for that yeah nikon may have more wow results from the day time part of the ceremony, but even nikon pros who have used the mk3 praise its low light abilities and admit that canon has the edge there. That's what will drive the pro market...

But with all that said, the rebel line and the nikon equivalent, that's whats really making both canon and nikon cash. And in that race, hate to say it, MP's will win over anything else, because most people buying a rebel don't even know what DR is, or why it matters. MP's though, we know thats important because it says it on the box!!!

Sad to say it, but in terms of profit, its the low end that wins. For the higher end pro/emerging pro market, its more about prestige - look at this wow shot by so and so taken on a such and such...

Lastly, I should remind all of you of these 2 videos -

Canon 5D MK III vs Nikon D800 with Nathan Elson

Canon 5D Mark III vs. Nikon D800 Part 2 with Mike Drew

Bottom line of both of these videos is ----if you are already on canon, there really isn't any need to switch, and, if your already on nikon, there is no need to switch ----overall consensus, most people would be more than happy with either camera.

Anyway you hack it though, it brings me back to the very sarcastic beginning ---if your meeting with a client, arethey going to look at your images and feel you out as a person? Or are they going to ask you about DR, or ask to see a DxO report on your camera, or an MFT chart on your lenses? I don't think I'm too far off in saying that for most people in most fields of photography a client chooses them based on the images in the portfolio, the personality of the tog, and the cost for the session/disk/prints.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Anyway you hack it though, it brings me back to the very sarcastic beginning ---if your meeting with a client, arethey going to look at your images and feel you out as a person? Or are they going to ask you about DR, or ask to see a DxO report on your camera, or an MFT chart on your lenses? I don't think I'm too far off in saying that for most people in most fields of photography a client chooses them based on the images in the portfolio, the personality of the tog, and the cost for the session/disk/prints.

Is this directed at me? If so, I don't sell on tech. Ever. That doesn't mean *I* don't care about it though. I push my gear in order to stay at the forefront of photography. There's nothing special about not being interested in all elements of photography - tech, content (expressions, background etc), lighting, composition etc. I'll never stop pushing. That's who I am.

My clients hire me because I have a fantastic portfolio (to their tastes) and a personality they want on their wedding day. They often stretch their budgets for me.

If it wasn't directed at me, the points still stand

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

A solution for increased dynamic range on the sensor is to learn how to light properly.
[...]
After all, photography is actually about making exposures WITH LIGHT.

I have to agree here. Owned a 30D before, now have a 5D3. I don't see how the increase in dynamic range between the two has improved my photography and neither believe any further increase would do so.

If your subject is well-lit, the DR of any recent DSLR should suffice. If light gets too harsh outdoors, then it is time to stop anyway, because you'll have other quality issues than DR. And even in those cases where light is good but uneven, e. g. indoors with sun-beams falling in, I never thought a few burned spots hurt a photo that is good otherwise. Here is an example: http://www.the-ninth.com/index.php?mode=display&area=gallery&aid=27&page=2&pid=593.

Cheers, Robert

Some of the more beautiful sights I've witnessed have had extremes in dynamic range. With more dynamic range you don't need to just pack up the camera and forget it.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Anyway you hack it though, it brings me back to the very sarcastic beginning ---if your meeting with a client, arethey going to look at your images and feel you out as a person? Or are they going to ask you about DR, or ask to see a DxO report on your camera, or an MFT chart on your lenses? I don't think I'm too far off in saying that for most people in most fields of photography a client chooses them based on the images in the portfolio, the personality of the tog, and the cost for the session/disk/prints.

You assuming that all photography is simply commercial/portrait based client model....

 

[stevenrrmanir]

lower sales will be expected and they will change the way they release the bodies... right now they are milking this dead animal... once the $$$ stop coming in as budgeted, they will get a nice wake up call... until then, you the customer are losing out!

 

[Loswr]

lower sales will be expected and they will change the way they release the bodies...once the $$$ stop coming in as budgeted, they will get a nice wake up call...

With foreknowledge like that, you must be filthy rich from the stock market and/or lottery. So, why do you care about any of this, rich dude?

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Anyway you hack it though, it brings me back to the very sarcastic beginning ---if your meeting with a client, arethey going to look at your images and feel you out as a person? Or are they going to ask you about DR, or ask to see a DxO report on your camera, or an MFT chart on your lenses? I don't think I'm too far off in saying that for most people in most fields of photography a client chooses them based on the images in the portfolio, the personality of the tog, and the cost for the session/disk/prints.

Is this directed at me? If so, I don't sell on tech. Ever. That doesn't mean *I* don't care about it though. I push my gear in order to stay at the forefront of photography. There's nothing special about not being interested in all elements of photography - tech, content (expressions, background etc), lighting, composition etc. I'll never stop pushing. That's who I am.

My clients hire me because I have a fantastic portfolio (to their tastes) and a personality they want on their wedding day. They often stretch their budgets for me.

If it wasn't directed at me, the points still stand

Wasn't directed towards any single person, more to the its all about tech and thats that vibe I've been seeing on many threads here, not just this one - and when its really becoming apparent in mk3 vs d800 debate. the general opinion from pros that I have seen strikes me as being at odds with what us general folk are saying on the forums, hence why i relinked those 2 videos where it does show that both are fantastic cameras.

Not trying to tell anyone to get either camera, just that all this reliance on tech data over what the image says to the end client gets real silly...hence the extreme sarcasm with sending lab reports instead of images....

The funnier thing is that when I was getting my start, only just 2 years ago, the local pros I spoke with told me its not about the gear, its about the eye and the heart of the tog behind the gear. At that point I was using a rebel xsi with max ISO of 1600 (usable ISO of 400, things got real murky above 400). Does gear play a part? Yeah, but when you get to the level of d800 vs mk3, which cam has the real edge gets real blurry, and very specific. Thats the source of the sarcasm. The vast majority of clients want an image that speaks to them, an image that captures a moment - there is an intangible there that no amount of stops of DR can change.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Anyway you hack it though, it brings me back to the very sarcastic beginning ---if your meeting with a client, arethey going to look at your images and feel you out as a person? Or are they going to ask you about DR, or ask to see a DxO report on your camera, or an MFT chart on your lenses? I don't think I'm too far off in saying that for most people in most fields of photography a client chooses them based on the images in the portfolio, the personality of the tog, and the cost for the session/disk/prints.

You assuming that all photography is simply commercial/portrait based client model....

No, I also shoot art as well. And with art more is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not saying more DR isn't a good thing.

Either way, even if your a hobbyist, if you take a shot do you send it off to a lab and have it tests for its technical correctness? Or do you slap it on your computer, PP it and enjoy it, or hate it?

These are two different cameras. the mk3 is a low light monster that also handles most other forms of photography from landscape to sports to studio very well. The d800 is a landscape monster that can hold its own in low light and does well in the studio. If you lean towards the landscapes, then you have a choice to make. One thing is certain, the d800 is the d800 and the mk3 is the mk3...that ain't changing, do you buy either, well thats entirely up to you.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

The funnier thing is that when I was getting my start, only just 2 years ago, the local pros I spoke with told me its not about the gear, its about the eye and the heart of the tog behind the gear. At that point I was using a rebel xsi with max ISO of 1600 (usable ISO of 400, things got real murky above 400). Does gear play a part? Yeah, but when you get to the level of d800 vs mk3, which cam has the real edge gets real blurry, and very specific. Thats the source of the sarcasm. The vast majority of clients want an image that speaks to them, an image that captures a moment - there is an intangible there that no amount of stops of DR can change.

This is both true and untrue. Pros tend to say "gear doesn't matter" when in actual fact what they mean is to deliver the images I need to deliver to keep my business going, this gear is what I need. At a very basic level, that may be an image that captures a moment or that speaks to a customer, but achieving that is only a 5 on the 1-10 scale of wedding photography. It's something that a competent photographer can achieve in a couple of years.

However, if you want to deliver something different and unique and your gear won't do that, it becomes a problem.

I'd point you to http://jonaspeterson.com/. He's made himself one of the top wedding photographers in the world through his style - but part of that style is gear and part of it is post processing. He decided on a different, quirky vision for his work and went out and sold it. He pushes DR pretty hard as far as I can tell - very bright brights and dark darks, so ask him if his gear matters and he'd say yes!.

However, did the gear do this for him? No, it came from his heart. He needed the tools to deliver that vision though - low DOF & TS lenses and a vintage PP effect.

Now maybe someone will take a d800 and shoot it on -1EV aperture priority all day (when ISO <800) and pull highlights and push shadows as much as possible to produce a kind of HDR effect. Maybe people will want to buy it. Maybe they won't. The point is though that, if that was your vision, you can only do that successfully with the d800.

Fundamentally... new gear is only important when it's holding your vision back but also new equipment brings about new opportunities. Spotting and taking advantage of those opportunities can give you a business boost. Or it can give you nothing.

Photographers need to follow the career path they want. Do you want to be producing 5/10's or do you want to set the world alight? Both answer are right - there is no wrong - it's just what you want. Most produce 5/10's. A few go on to set the world alight.

(and while we're talking, marketing is incredibly important too of course)

 

[awinphoto]

Now maybe someone will take a d800 and shoot it on -1EV aperture priority all day (when ISO <800) and pull highlights and push shadows as much as possible to produce a kind of HDR effect. Maybe people will want to buy it. Maybe they won't. The point is though that, if that was your vision, you can only do that successfully with the d800.

Fundamentally... new gear is only important when it's holding your vision back but also new equipment brings about new opportunities. Spotting and taking advantage of those opportunities can give you a business boost. Or it can give you nothing.

Photographers need to follow the career path they want. Do you want to be producing 5/10's or do you want to set the world alight? Both answer are right - there is no wrong - it's just what you want. Most produce 5/10's. A few go on to set the world alight.

(and while we're talking, marketing is incredibly important too of course)

Equipment is important to help you when your current gear is holding you back. With that being said, pro's have for years gotten excellent photos with pin hole cameras. Of course it takes great skill by doing so, and great gear makes it that much easier, but by buying a D800 or a 5d3 for that matter isn't going to make a bad photographer a good photographer. In that essence it is about the photographer, his skill and his vision, and not so much the gear.

Also, good gear can also help you and hurt you if you let it get you complacent (such as machine gun firing a moment rather than waiting for the right moment to fire)... I think the real world differences between the cameras are so minor it's not worth really fretting over, such as in chucks video, they said an ever slight advantage canon for AF, ever slight advantage for nikon for DR... Also depending on which medium you output to will also determine whether any of the extra benifit of the DR will show, especially after you tweek the D800 file to give it "pop" instead of a flat image. Also with filters such as topaz adjust, adding DR cleanly is so easy and quick, it's nice to add when and only when I want it, rather than being spoon-fed it every time I shoot...

Of course it's going to come down to personal taste, personal expectation and vision... some will choose the nikon 800 because they are shooting nikon and only will shoot nikon and visa versa for canon. There will be nikon shooters shooting canon because of file size, high iso, and other factors and then there will be canon shooter shooting nikon because of the desire for the most DR possible and dont have a budget for medium format. No one choice is any more right or wrong than others, but in the end lab numbers and specs may seem large on paper, but in real life, it's really more closer than most people are giving either camera credit for.

 

[ybrankov]

I really hope this doesn't sound rude, but this is exactly what Canon wants, right? You are invested heavily in Canon to the extent that switching becomes a non-option. You are also willing to spend big dollars to overcome the previous model's defects. ...

I was thinking about switching. IMO, the option to switch is always there regardless of how heavily invested you are. Fortunately, the glass doesn't depreciate much. You can sell it and buy the other camp's gear with no big financial penalty.

Also if one is very heavily invested in one of the camps, one's got enough money to afford to use gear from both camps.

 

[KeithR]

and kicks its ass in almost every way.

Correction - in just about (or actually, depending on personal needs) no way.

Those of us who shoot with the 7D have seen all of this - all of it - already.

When the D7000/Pentax K-5/Sony A580(?) came out with the Sony sensor, exactly the same noises were made by vociferous, 7D-using malcontents as are being made now about the 5D Mk III compared to the D800: "we can't shoot without the [D7000/D800 - delete as necessary] low ISO DR"; "Canon can't make sensors"; "They're doomed"/"I'm jumping ship"/"Canon need to wise up..." - on and on.

Ad nauseam.

It's like Groundhog Day without the jokes.

Well guess what? I still see ten 7Ds in use to every one of the D7000/K-5/A580 triumvirate I see in the field; I've yet to see a single image from the Nikon, the Pentax or the Sony that I couldn't recreate; I've still seen thousands of 7D images that have taken my breath away; and I've yet to lose a single shot from my 7D that I would have made if only I'd had the Sony sensor.

So the take-away message for Canon is this: some people - a tiny, insignificant, but very vocal subset of the customerbase - are only happy when they're bitching about something, and Canon will still sell truckloads of cameras despite what that subset has to say about it, because the rest of us will simply get on with figuring out how to equalise these - in truth, pretty piddling and easy to address - Sony sensor "superiorities".

It happened over the 7D, and it'll happen with the 5D Mk III.

 

[ybrankov]

Personally, I am getting more and more disappointed with Canon's strategy of trickling feature upgrades out to market:
1. it took canon 4-5 years after Nikon to release a -2EV focusing sensor;
2. the old 9 point focus sensor has been used for probably more than 10 years before it was finally upgraded (starting 7D);
3. Canon's dynamic range has been lagging as compared to Nikon for about 10 years now and Canon do not look like they're getting a clue;
4. D800 clearly looks like the better camera of the two, yet 5D III is $500 more expensive. What are canon thinking?

Whether this is all a result of lagging engineering or marketing strategy it does not matter. The fact is, my patience is wearing thin.
I really like the jag wheel in the back of their cameras and their lens lineup, but the way things are going I will be buying my D800 soon and most likely gradually switch camps.

 

[KeithR]

When the competition are THREE usable stops better, yeah it does need some fixing.

Except that's not true, of course - those three stops can be significantly equalised if you know how (and it isn't hard).

 

[ybrankov]

Correction - in just about (or actually, depending on personal needs) no way.

Those of us who shoot with the 7D have seen all of this - all of it - already.

When the D7000/Pentax K-5/Sony A580(?) came out with the Sony sensor, exactly the same noises were made by vociferous, 7D-using malcontents as are being made now about the 5D Mk III compared to the D800: "we can't shoot without the [D7000/D800 - delete as necessary] low ISO DR"; "Canon can't make sensors"; "They're doomed"/"I'm jumping ship"/"Canon need to wise up..." - on and on.

It depends on how you interpret the facts. This noise was created once and Cannon did not seem to address it. It goes on now too and Canon will most likely ignore it again. The question becomes how many times Canon will have the credit to ignore it until its sales seriously dip?

Do you remember a company called Nokia? Some people already forgot about it. Nokia was the number 1 cell phone manufacturer until about 4-5 years ago. It was too proud to listen to market demand and trends and here was when Apple and Google did it right. Proud Nokia is nowhere near the top now after pure outsiders like Apple and Google entered the segment and reshaped it to an unrecognizable degree. They kicked Nokia's asses so badly that not only Nokia lost the race but it's highly questionable whether Nokia will even survive it.

At the end, I don't care much. I suspect that I will be a proud owner of a D800 in conjunction with my 5DII and all current gear. I will use both camps. And, there is no way I am buying 5DIII given its current performance, let alone the price. If you believe in Canon, you may choose to support them and pay more for an inferior product.

 

[awinphoto]

Personally, I am getting more and more disappointed with Canon's strategy of trickling feature upgrades out to market:
1. it took canon 4-5 years after Nikon to release a -2EV focusing sensor;
2. the old 9 point focus sensor has been used for probably more than 10 years before it was finally upgraded (starting 7D);
3. Canon's dynamic range has been lagging as compared to Nikon for about 10 years now and Canon do not look like they're getting a clue;
4. D800 clearly looks like the better camera of the two, yet 5D III is $500 more expensive. What are canon thinking?

Whether this is all a result of lagging engineering or marketing strategy it does not matter. The fact is, my patience is wearing thin.
I really like the jag wheel in the back of their cameras and their lens lineup, but the way things are going I will be buying my D800 soon and most likely gradually switch camps.

I suspect your dates are a wee bit off... Canon used nikon as a whipping board up until about the 40D, which was when nikon started edging nikon digitally... This was in sensors, DR, and such... remember for the longest time nikon kept using CCD's instead of CMOS sensor and nikon suffered for it. As for the 9pt AF... it was in play since at least the D60... i cant recall if the D30 had it or the old 7 pt system.. Before that in the film era you either had a pro 35 with the 3's and the 5's and the 1's, or you had the elans and rebels, each having anywhere from 3 to 7 points... It was bad that they used the 9pt as it's bread and butter for so long, but at least they have learned from there ways, or so it seems...

and in which ways is the D800 CLEARLY the better camera? AF? nope. high ISO? nope. DR? slightly. HDR? Silent Shooting? Movie? Ergonomics? Battery? DR Past ISO 800? nope nope nope nope nope nope... This is the overraction that proves ones ignorance to the facts... But in the end, what do I care what you buy? Enjoy your D800 and maybe one day we can have a proper shoot off to fully determine which is king.

 

[awinphoto]

Correction - in just about (or actually, depending on personal needs) no way.

Those of us who shoot with the 7D have seen all of this - all of it - already.

When the D7000/Pentax K-5/Sony A580(?) came out with the Sony sensor, exactly the same noises were made by vociferous, 7D-using malcontents as are being made now about the 5D Mk III compared to the D800: "we can't shoot without the [D7000/D800 - delete as necessary] low ISO DR"; "Canon can't make sensors"; "They're doomed"/"I'm jumping ship"/"Canon need to wise up..." - on and on.

It depends on how you interpret the facts. This noise was created once and Cannon did not seem to address it. It goes on now too and Canon will most likely ignore it again. The question becomes how many times Canon will have the credit to ignore it until its sales seriously dip?

Do you remember a company called Nokia? Some people already forgot about it. Nokia was the number 1 cell phone manufacturer until about 4-5 years ago. It was too proud to listen to market demand and trends and here was when Apple and Google did it right. Proud Nokia is nowhere near the top now after pure outsiders like Apple and Google entered the segment and reshaped it to an unrecognizable degree. They kicked Nokia's asses so badly that not only Nokia lost the race but it's highly questionable whether Nokia will even survive it.

At the end, I don't care much. I suspect that I will be a proud owner of a D800 in conjunction with my 5DII and all current gear. I will use both camps. And, there is no way I am buying 5DIII given its current performance, let alone the price. If you believe in Canon, you may choose to support them and pay more for an inferior product.

And one last point to mention... you are saying nokia didn't listen the market and trends.... Canon, however, both the the 1dx, 5d3, and 7D, has listened to their customers and given a product they have been dreaming about... the 7d, fast AF (compared to the 9pt), FPS, 100% VF, weathersealing, commander, etc, the 5d3, reasonable MP, much improved AF, better low ISO, better sealing, 2 cards, 100% VF, etc, 1dx, TBD... Just because it isn't your dream camera doesn't mean it's not the camera they determined to be the target audience to be and satisfies 90-95% of those projected audiences...

 

[Razor2012]

Exactly. We can just just be thrilled with our new toys and have fun taking pics...or we can head over to the other camp and complain about all the shortcomings they have? Not.

 

[ybrankov]

and in which ways is the D800 CLEARLY the better camera? AF? nope. high ISO? nope. DR? slightly. HDR? Silent Shooting? Movie? Ergonomics? Battery? DR Past ISO 800? nope nope nope nope nope nope... This is the overraction that proves ones ignorance to the facts... But in the end, what do I care what you buy? Enjoy your D800 and maybe one day we can have a proper shoot off to fully determine which is king.

I honestly hope you're right about the overreaction part. For quite some time now however I've been piling up this feeling that i am not making the right choice and that I am being extorted. It was the usual insecure suspicion in the beginning but it kept on growing. I clearly feel taken advantage of now. Canon know well that they have a strong side with their lens lineup, clear EF compatibility, etc. However, their marketing department seems to carefully take care to extort their customers penny by penny for this. I don't like to be extorted. I am not sure anyone does.

As for D800, its image quality is not a bit better. It is WAY better. IQ (to me) is what counts FIRST. The differences in the areas where 5DIII has the edge are small to negligible. I am almost sure you'd like to have the D800's DR and shadow detail in your 5DIII, would you not? And then, aren't you asking yourself whether it's fair that you'd pay $500 more for a camera which lags quite a bit behind the competition in a specific area?

 

[ybrankov]

Exactly. We can just just be thrilled with our new toys and have fun taking pics...or we can head over to the other camp and complain about all the shortcomings they have? Not.

Oh, boy. I'm not *just* complaining about its shortcomings. IQ is the area I need most. I do low light photography, print design, and publishing. The color noise and lack of detail in the shadows, which cannon are so good at, hits me badly. The ink printing techniques are very prone to burning the highlights and darkening the shadows. This is exactly where canon's DR puts a bar in my wheels as compared to Nikon. If I open the shadows to compensate, I get color noise and bad IQ. Similar thing for the highlights, esp in strong light. Trust me, I've worked with professional scanners for quite some time now. The DR has been the main issue and a limiting factor there as well. I am amazed to see the advance Nikon has made in the area. I am not sure I can keep up clinging to canon anymore unless they dee up quickly.