DxOMark scores for 5DMkIII out - total score 81, 5DMkII had 79

[Fishnose]

Now I'm not emotionally attached to this conversation at all, but to be honest, FishNose, with posts like this, you sound like you work for DxO... a full disclosure would be appreciated.

LOL
I found out about what they do and how they do it by reading up on their site and watching the cnet video about their methodology (the link in in a couple of places around here in these DxO threads, not sure where I saw it).

Precisely because I started wondering how on earth they arrive at the numbers they publish.

 

[Fishnose]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

(on that other board some guys who have a certain degree of in with Canon got the impression Canon got caught with their pants down, they though Nikon and SOny would dribble sensor stuff out much more slowly and thought they could just sit around on the sensor tech and not bother as much and more just focus on fixing body performance and then they saw the D800 and were like.... oh. Guess they they brought what they had right away instead of dribbling it out slowly.

Really surprises me that Canon missed this. You need to be 100% wide-awake to succeed in a busines like this. It's BIG money. Didn't Canon have any idea?

After all, the high-res sensor in question had been out and in field testing for some time, I believe - and the release was seriously delayed by first the tsunami and then the Thai floods. So in fact it's nothing new at all, it's not like Nikon got something brand new from the sensor factory, stuck it in a body and pushed it out on the market. The camera has been in the hands of some big names since last spring. Maybe even longer.

Would you believe, there are plenty of Nikonians that complain that the D800 is already old technology since it took so long from development/initial testing to release. Many of them shut up after the DxO figures for the D800 were released, but still, it's ridiculous.

Didn't Canon care, or were they fast alseep, or complacent and arrogant, did they make a marketing blunder, do they have trouble developing sufficiently good new sensors themselves - or is it all of the above?
Wakey wakey...

 

[marekjoz]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

(on that other board some guys who have a certain degree of in with Canon got the impression Canon got caught with their pants down, they though Nikon and SOny would dribble sensor stuff out much more slowly and thought they could just sit around on the sensor tech and not bother as much and more just focus on fixing body performance and then they saw the D800 and were like.... oh. Guess they they brought what they had right away instead of dribbling it out slowly.

Really surprises me that Canon missed this. You need to be 100% wide-awake to succeed in a busines like this. It's BIG money. Didn't Canon have any idea?

After all, the high-res sensor in question had been out and in field testing for some time, I believe - and the release was seriously delayed by first the tsunami and then the Thai floods. So in fact it's nothing new at all, it's not like Nikon got something brand new from the sensor factory, stuck it in a body and pushed it out on the market. The camera has been in the hands of some big names since last spring. Maybe even longer.

Would you believe, there are plenty of Nikonians that complain that the D800 is already old technology since it took so long from development/initial testing to release. Many of them shut up after the DxO figures for the D800 were released, but still, it's ridiculous.

Didn't Canon care, or were they fast alseep, or complacent and arrogant, did they make a marketing blunder, do they have trouble developing sufficiently good new sensors themselves - or is it all of the above?
Wakey wakey...

@Fishnose - I see you like to comment others' posts just to write that 5d3 is crap and Canon is crap. So here you have mine - 5d3 is great. Go on!

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

Also for those who claim all the DxO charts and graphs are nonsense as all technical charts are since charts and numbers never have anything to do with reality see here, some rather clear demonstrations of reality by an excellent professional photographer (brace yourself though since Canon really has be totally dusted for low ISO image quality, and this guy is not a troll, he an established pro and a long time Canon shooter):
http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html

(to be fair if you shoot something where you don't need lots of MP and the scene doesn't have a wide difference between the bright and dark, then the difference won't matter at all)

Good grief! Fred's comparison is a total shocker for Canon. D800 is a generation ahead here.
Canon has a lot of work to do!!!! I hope they're working overtime in a big way.

While that is totally true, for the vast majority of people it is irrelevant since they don't push shadows to the level that the d800 will allow you. And when I say "vast majority" remember that only a few thousand people visit sites like these. Most will never even find out that it's a "problem". He also notes that there is an issue with the live view on the d800 out of interest...

You could say that, if people have it, they will use it and that may well be true. I know I push shadows 2 stops at times - but never more than that. Would I push shadows further than that if I could? Well, I might underexpose by a stop to give less CA against pure white skies. Other than that, no.

So, the question for Canon is ... do we spend money and time on something people *might* need or do we spend money and time on something people *do* need? It's a really hard question to answer. That's what marketing departments are supposed to answer.

Personally I think people would be much happier if Canon had pushed the low ISO shadow quality even 1 stop. That would put it in line with the D4. I think people are upset that it's literally not moved compared with the 5d2. Everything else in the specs has improved except that one figure.

 

[Fishnose]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

@Fishnose - I see you like to comment others' posts just to write that 5d3 is crap and Canon is crap. So here you have mine - 5d3 is great. Go on!

Oh, really? Where in this post did I say 5D3 is crap? Anyway my point is, Canon needs to WAKE UP.
I use both, by the way - I have no brand preference, only features & usability preference. I couldn't care less about the name on the product.

 

[Fishnose]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

While that is totally true, for the vast majority of people it is irrelevant since they don't push shadows to the level that the d800 will allow you. And when I say "vast majority" remember that only a few thousand people visit sites like these. Most will never even find out that it's a "problem". He also notes that there is an issue with the live view on the d800 out of interest...

You could say that, if people have it, they will use it and that may well be true. I know I push shadows 2 stops at times - but never more than that. Would I push shadows further than that if I could? Well, I might underexpose by a stop to give less CA against pure white skies. Other than that, no.

So, the question for Canon is ... do we spend money and time on something people *might* need or do we spend money and time on something people *do* need? It's a really hard question to answer. That's what marketing departments are supposed to answer.

Personally I think people would be much happier if Canon had pushed the low ISO shadow quality even 1 stop. That would put it in line with the D4. I think people are upset that it's literally not moved compared with the 5d2. Everything else in the specs has improved except that one figure.

Pushing shadows was only one aspect of his tests. He also looks at moiré and resolution.
Interesting that he upsized the 5D3 images to 36MP to compare, rather than the usual method of downsizing D800 to 22MP to compare. Both have disadvantages one way or another, maybe the best is to meet halfway? 8)

You said: "So, the question for Canon is ... do we spend money and time on something people *might* need or do we spend money and time on something people *do* need? It's a really hard question to answer"

Not really. Since the 5D3 is supposed to be a pro camera and apparently replaces all high-end models for everything other than pure sports/action (1Dx), it has to do everything exactly right other than high fps and extreme ISO.
If not, what Canon model do the pros go to?

 

[briansquibb]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

Not really. Since the 5D3 is supposed to be a pro camera and apparently replaces all high-end models for everything other than pure sports/action (1Dx), it has to do everything exactly right other than high fps and extreme ISO.
If not, what Canon model do the pros go to?

The 5DIII replaces the 5DII

The 1DX replaces the 1D4 and the 1DS3. The 1D4 is the top sports camera. The 1Ds3 is the top studio camera. This is the way that it will be until the 1DX is released.

The 5DIII does not replace the high end models.

 

[Fishnose]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

The 5DIII replaces the 5DII

The 1DX replaces the 1D4 and the 1DS3. The 1D4 is the top sports camera. The 1Ds3 is the top studio camera. This is the way that it will be until the 1DX is released.

The 5DIII does not replace the high end models.

The 1Dx is a reality already, they're just having some last minute problems. Announced 6 months ago. So your lineup is relevant for a couple more months. And then what? Is the 18MP 1Dx supposed to replace the 21MP 1D4 in the studio?

The 1Ds3 is nearly 5 years old.
Even if they do release a replacement for the 1Ds3 (highly unlikely from what I understand), the 5D3 is still a pro camera and must stand up to pro demands, no? That's what this particular discussion was about.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

You said: "So, the question for Canon is ... do we spend money and time on something people *might* need or do we spend money and time on something people *do* need? It's a really hard question to answer"

Not really. Since the 5D3 is supposed to be a pro camera and apparently replaces all high-end models for everything other than pure sports/action (1Dx), it has to do everything exactly right other than high fps and extreme ISO.
If not, what Canon model do the pros go to?

Until this latest generation photographers haven't even been able to push shadows that much. It's a relatively new feature. So pros can't have been doing this until the d800 / d4 came along.

No camera does everything. As a wedding photographer pro, which Nikon do you go with? D800 - too big files with no small RAW option. D4 - too expensive. D700 - too old. D3S - too low res. Don't believe that Nikon has everything perfect...

If the 5d3 has one serious Achilles Heel - low ISO DR - then it's probably the best overall camera out there.

Are you familiar with bell curves? Here's how I personally see the situation. More people are in the middle than at either end. This shows what people NEED rather than what they WANT btw. Nikon services the left side (d3s) and right side (d800) much better than Canon, but IMO Canon services the middle better:

(this doesn't show anything about low ISO DR, but the same situation applies).

I also think you'll find that many, many pros will be quite happy with what the 5d3 gives. In fact loads of still using 1ds2's in studio and 5dc's for weddings. A lot of what people seem to think pros need is not reality. (I don't know about your needs or your status).

BTW I'm not taking away what Nikon have achieved. I'm just saying that the 5d3 feature set was decided upon and, if it had better low ISO DR, something else would almost certainly have to be missing. Manufacturers make their decisions... sometimes they get it right... sometimes wrong... time will tell on the 5d3.

 

[briansquibb]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

The 5DIII replaces the 5DII

The 1DX replaces the 1D4 and the 1DS3. The 1D4 is the top sports camera. The 1Ds3 is the top studio camera. This is the way that it will be until the 1DX is released.

The 5DIII does not replace the high end models.

The 1Dx is a reality already, they're just having some last minute problems. Announced 6 months ago. So your lineup is relevant for a couple more months. And then what? Is the 18MP 1Dx supposed to replace the 21MP 1D4 in the studio?

The 1Ds3 is nearly 5 years old.
Even if they do release a replacement for the 1Ds3 (highly unlikely from what I understand), the 5D3 is still a pro camera and must stand up to pro demands, no? That's what this particular discussion was about.

If you discuss something then getting the facts correct is important - I was mearly correcting your statement. Yes the 1Ds3 is 5 years old and the 5DIII is only its peer in IQ at low ISO. Canon have stated that the 1Ds3 replacement is the 1DX.

I would put the 5DIII as semi pro due to the lack of weatherproofing and lack of battery without grips - as you say it has to stand up to pro demands and that includes shooting in the rain or shooting for some time

 

[Fishnose]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

Until this latest generation photographers haven't even been able to push shadows that much. It's a relatively new feature. So pros can't have been doing this until the d800 / d4 came along.

No, this was the realm of MF. Advanced functions and demands migrate down the range with every generation.

No camera does everything. As a wedding photographer pro, which Nikon do you go with? D800 - too big files with no small RAW option. D4 - too expensive. D700 - too old. D3S - too low res. Don't believe that Nikon has everything perfect...

Absoutely. As was discussed in another thread, the 5D3 silent shutter is a VERY useful option for weddings.
The D800 'silent shutter' consists of.... keeping your finger pressed down on the shutter button (when in so-called quiet-shutter release mode) after the shot is taken, so the mirror stays up until you can drop your camera and quietly 'let go'! Clonk.
Uh, no. Not good enough.

And the possiblity to choose smaller (in MP) RAWS like you can with the jpgs would have been a cool function. Maybe next generation?

If the 5d3 has one serious Achilles Heel - low ISO DR - then it's probably the best overall camera out there.

Are you familiar with bell curves? Here's how I personally see the situation. More people are in the middle than at either end. This shows what people NEED rather than what they WANT btw. Nikon services the left side (d3s) and right side (d800) much better than Canon, but IMO Canon services the middle better:

(this doesn't show anything about low ISO DR, but the same situation applies).

I also think you'll find that many, many pros will be quite happy with what the 5d3 gives. In fact loads of still using 1ds2's in studio and 5dc's for weddings. A lot of what people seem to think pros need is not reality. (I don't know about your needs or your status).

BTW I'm not taking away what Nikon have achieved. I'm just saying that the 5d3 feature set was decided upon and, if it had better low ISO DR, something else would almost certainly have to be missing. Manufacturers make their decisions... sometimes they get it right... sometimes wrong... time will tell on the 5d3.

I'm absolutely NOT saying and never will that the 5D3 is not good enough, or any such thing. Of course it's a bloody marvellous camera. My criticisms concerning Canon are almost entirely concerning marketing strategy, or lack of it. They dropped the ball.

A lot of what people seem to think pros need is not reality

Of course. But when a new model is released after about 4 years, one does expect a big bump up. And pros look at the list of functions and improvements when considering a new camera just as much as anyone else.

 

[jrista]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

Until this latest generation photographers haven't even been able to push shadows that much. It's a relatively new feature. So pros can't have been doing this until the d800 / d4 came along.

I would dispute the fundamental accuracy of that statement. Sony sensors, which have been used in Nikon cameras for several years now, have been allowing a LOT of shadow pushing ever since they were introduced. The D800 is not the first camera to allow this degree of shadow manipulation...the first was the D7000 which is already a couple years old, and just as good (from a hardware capabilities level...and at that, possibly even a touch better still than the D800.) There are several other cameras from Nikon that allow well over an additional stop of DR beyond what Canon is capable of.

So no, considerable shadow lifting is not a brand spankin new feature, its at least a few years old, if not nearly as old as the 5D II itself. Canon is not just a generation behind here. We are entering SoNikon's second generation of cameras that offer much better DR than the vast majority of other cameras...and Canon is just falling farther behind now. Not that that is a life-ending deal for Canon, it certainly isn't, and the 5D III is still an excellent camera. But Canon cannot continue to ignore the problem. They can't just sit on their rear ends for another four years. They really have to start competing, and really need to produce a sensor capable of more than around 11 stops of DR.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

the first was the D7000 which is already a couple years old, and just as good (from a hardware capabilities level...and at that, possibly even a touch better still than the D800.) There are several other cameras from Nikon that allow well over an additional stop of DR beyond what Canon is capable of.

I forget about crop cameras. Yes - the D7000 was the first to allow particularly large amounts of shadow pushing.

I don't believe before that there was much though.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

Not that that is a life-ending deal for Canon, it certainly isn't, and the 5D III is still an excellent camera. But Canon cannot continue to ignore the problem. They can't just sit on their rear ends for another four years. They really have to start competing, and really need to produce a sensor capable of more than around 11 stops of DR.

I think this is where we fundamentally disagree. If Canon don't "answer" the DR issue what will happen? A few thousand people who visit forums will take a slightly dimmer view on the camera. Some will switch brands.

Now don't get me wrong - I want them to give better shadow quality. However, if they don't I doubt they'll notice much more than a tiny dent.

Put it another way - I spoke to my pro retailer today. It was relatively new info for them that the d800 has fantastic shadow detail and the 5d3 has much less. I think people who visit forums a lot have a very different view of products. They pour over stats and forget there is a much MUCH wider world of photography that just doesn't care. They use a camera to take relatively simple photos. Many use JPEG too.

 

[jrista]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

Not that that is a life-ending deal for Canon, it certainly isn't, and the 5D III is still an excellent camera. But Canon cannot continue to ignore the problem. They can't just sit on their rear ends for another four years. They really have to start competing, and really need to produce a sensor capable of more than around 11 stops of DR.

I think this is where we fundamentally disagree. If Canon don't "answer" the DR issue what will happen? A few thousand people who visit forums will take a slightly dimmer view on the camera. Some will switch brands.

Now don't get me wrong - I want them to give better shadow quality. However, if they don't I doubt they'll notice much more than a tiny dent.

Put it another way - I spoke to my pro retailer today. It was relatively new info for them that the d800 has fantastic shadow detail and the 5d3 has much less. I think people who visit forums a lot have a very different view of products. They pour over stats and forget there is a much MUCH wider world of photography that just doesn't care. They use a camera to take relatively simple photos. Many use JPEG too.

I think the idea that only people who visit forums like this care about DR and need more DR is a fallacy. I think the people who visit these types of forums and complain about it are only a representative sample of such, and the actual numbers are far greater. Dynamic range is not just some obscure concept that only tech heads know about...its a meaningful aspect of IQ that many people who are serious about their photography, including professionals, need. Assuming Nikon can improve their supply, I think they will gain quite a few customers from Canon over such a relatively small issue, and I think the dent could be pretty large. I think many people will also simply hold off on upgrading, and wait. The longer Canon lets the problem go on, the greater the likelyhood that they will lose customers, either simply by people not upgrading, or losing them to other brands (and not necessarily just Nikon...Sony of course will have high DR counterparts, Pentax also uses Sony sensors, etc.) The competition, at large, now that were into the second generation of the era of Exmor, will only continue to accelerate their lead beyond Canon. Canon is falling behind on more fronts than just DR and overall IQ as well, there are quite a few areas of very heated competition, such as mirrorless, which Canon is simply not addressing.

No, the issues are not nearly as large as people make it out to be, and in reality are not really that big of a deal, but that is the issue with perception...and bad perceptions can kill. If Canon doesn't have something truly competitive in another generation, its not just going to be a few nuts in a few forums blabbing about the D800's amazing DR. It'll be Canonites all over complaining about the general superiority of Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and potentially other brands on not just the DR front, but just about every front.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

I think the idea that only people who visit forums like this care about DR and need more DR is a fallacy. I think the people who visit these types of forums and complain about it are only a representative sample of such, and the actual numbers are far greater. Dynamic range is not just some obscure concept that only tech heads know about...its a meaningful aspect of IQ that many people who are serious about their photography, including professionals, need. Assuming Nikon can improve their supply, I think they will gain quite a few customers from Canon over such a relatively small issue, and I think the dent could be pretty large. I think many people will also simply hold off on upgrading, and wait. The longer Canon lets the problem go on, the greater the likelyhood that they will lose customers, either simply by people not upgrading, or losing them to other brands (and not necessarily just Nikon...Sony of course will have high DR counterparts, Pentax also uses Sony sensors, etc.) The competition, at large, now that were into the second generation of the era of Exmor, will only continue to accelerate their lead beyond Canon. Canon is falling behind on more fronts than just DR and overall IQ as well, there are quite a few areas of very heated competition, such as mirrorless, which Canon is simply not addressing.

No, the issues are not nearly as large as people make it out to be, and in reality are not really that big of a deal, but that is the issue with perception...and bad perceptions can kill. If Canon doesn't have something truly competitive in another generation, its not just going to be a few nuts in a few forums blabbing about the D800's amazing DR. It'll be Canonites all over complaining about the general superiority of Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and potentially other brands on not just the DR front, but just about every front.

I don't completely agree.. and I don't completely disagree either. There's sectors of the market that care, and sectors that don't. And some inbetween. I think the people who care most are the gearheads on here and dpreview etc... I think a lot of working pros just don't care - not one bit. There's people inbetween too I'm sure.

If Canon continue to fall behind, what will happen is the question? I'm sure Canon themselves are asking this question. However, I personally think you believe it's something a lot of people notice or care about. I disagree. I've heard very VERY few of my photographer friends (and I have a lot) talk about poor quality shadows.

I agree and understand that bad press is bad press. I also agree that slowly bad press will make it's way around the industry. The thing I disagree with fundamentally is that Canon have do something NOW. I think they could do another 1-2 generations of cameras and it wouldn't matter that much to them.

You have to remember why a lot of people stay with a system:
* It's comfortable
* It's costly to move
* It takes time to move so I lose money
* They like certain things about a system (my 50mm 1.2 for example)
* What I have is good enough

It takes A LOT to make someone move system IMO unless they're not particularly invested. I toyed with it due to the issues with the viewfinder on the 5d3 in bright light.

It gave me sweats just thinking about it and it's not something I would want to do.

Anyway - we could chat about this all day

 

[jrista]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

I think the idea that only people who visit forums like this care about DR and need more DR is a fallacy. I think the people who visit these types of forums and complain about it are only a representative sample of such, and the actual numbers are far greater. Dynamic range is not just some obscure concept that only tech heads know about...its a meaningful aspect of IQ that many people who are serious about their photography, including professionals, need. Assuming Nikon can improve their supply, I think they will gain quite a few customers from Canon over such a relatively small issue, and I think the dent could be pretty large. I think many people will also simply hold off on upgrading, and wait. The longer Canon lets the problem go on, the greater the likelyhood that they will lose customers, either simply by people not upgrading, or losing them to other brands (and not necessarily just Nikon...Sony of course will have high DR counterparts, Pentax also uses Sony sensors, etc.) The competition, at large, now that were into the second generation of the era of Exmor, will only continue to accelerate their lead beyond Canon. Canon is falling behind on more fronts than just DR and overall IQ as well, there are quite a few areas of very heated competition, such as mirrorless, which Canon is simply not addressing.

No, the issues are not nearly as large as people make it out to be, and in reality are not really that big of a deal, but that is the issue with perception...and bad perceptions can kill. If Canon doesn't have something truly competitive in another generation, its not just going to be a few nuts in a few forums blabbing about the D800's amazing DR. It'll be Canonites all over complaining about the general superiority of Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and potentially other brands on not just the DR front, but just about every front.

I don't completely agree.. and I don't completely disagree either. There's sectors of the market that care, and sectors that don't. And some inbetween. I think the people who care most are the gearheads on here and dpreview etc... I think a lot of working pros just don't care - not one bit. There's people inbetween too I'm sure.

If Canon continue to fall behind, what will happen is the question? I'm sure Canon themselves are asking this question. However, I personally think you believe it's something a lot of people notice or care about. I disagree. I've heard very VERY few of my photographer friends (and I have a lot) talk about poor quality shadows.

I agree and understand that bad press is bad press. I also agree that slowly bad press will make it's way around the industry. The thing I disagree with fundamentally is that Canon have do something NOW. I think they could do another 1-2 generations of cameras and it wouldn't matter that much to them.

You have to remember why a lot of people stay with a system:
* It's comfortable
* It's costly to move
* It takes time to move so I lose money
* They like certain things about a system (my 50mm 1.2 for example)
* What I have is good enough

It takes A LOT to make someone move system IMO unless they're not particularly invested. I toyed with it due to the issues with the viewfinder on the 5d3 in bright light.

It gave me sweats just thinking about it and it's not something I would want to do.

Anyway - we could chat about this all day

Totally agree about your points why people stay in the system. In that respect, and to your first point about there probably being three major groups: Those who care a lot, those who care some, and those who don't care, probably do mean that Canon could survive another couple generations without really doing anything significant with their IQ.

I know quite a few photographers, more online than in real life, but perhaps I just run with a more technical group who does seem to care in general about their IQ and how well the hardware caters to IQ. And, all things being equal, it really was not that much of an issue until the advent of the D800.

 

[zim]

So I guess he must have done those low ISO tests after his visit to Yosemite otherwise he would have taken all those lovely pictures on a D800? oh wait there is that lens I suppose and that’s the point it’s a system, both are, with strengths and weaknesses. His conclusion is a balanced one.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_final.html

I do agree however about falling behind in sensor tech. If that continues to happen over time then that would be an issue. What’s easier for a company to do, improve a lens or improve a sensor?
Was also wondering is Sony and Nikon mated for life or is it a fixed term requiring negotiation?

 

[well_dunno]

Was also wondering is Sony and Nikon mated for life or is it a fixed term requiring negotiation?

I recall reading Nikon was planning or trying to produce their own sensors. The details of the agreement between Sony and Nikon are not known to many but out of what I have read, Sony gets the priority on using the APS-C sensors and Nikon gets priority on the FF sensors (priority of 6 months to a year are mentioned at sonyalpharumors)... If I am not mistaken, most of it is speculation though... I don't think it is a life long agreement but it is kept in place as it benefits both companies...

Cheers!

 

[psolberg]

Re: DxO results out for 5D3

You said: "So, the question for Canon is ... do we spend money and time on something people *might* need or do we spend money and time on something people *do* need? It's a really hard question to answer"

Not really. Since the 5D3 is supposed to be a pro camera and apparently replaces all high-end models for everything other than pure sports/action (1Dx), it has to do everything exactly right other than high fps and extreme ISO.
If not, what Canon model do the pros go to?

Until this latest generation photographers haven't even been able to push shadows that much. It's a relatively new feature. So pros can't have been doing this until the d800 / d4 came along.

No camera does everything. As a wedding photographer pro, which Nikon do you go with? D800 - too big files with no small RAW option. D4 - too expensive. D700 - too old. D3S - too low res. Don't believe that Nikon has everything perfect...

If the 5d3 has one serious Achilles Heel - low ISO DR - then it's probably the best overall camera out there.

Are you familiar with bell curves? Here's how I personally see the situation. More people are in the middle than at either end. This shows what people NEED rather than what they WANT btw. Nikon services the left side (d3s) and right side (d800) much better than Canon, but IMO Canon services the middle better:

(this doesn't show anything about low ISO DR, but the same situation applies).

I also think you'll find that many, many pros will be quite happy with what the 5d3 gives. In fact loads of still using 1ds2's in studio and 5dc's for weddings. A lot of what people seem to think pros need is not reality. (I don't know about your needs or your status).

BTW I'm not taking away what Nikon have achieved. I'm just saying that the 5d3 feature set was decided upon and, if it had better low ISO DR, something else would almost certainly have to be missing. Manufacturers make their decisions... sometimes they get it right... sometimes wrong... time will tell on the 5d3.

interesting but the problem is that 4 fps is sufficient for MOST people just as with the 5DmkII so that would put the D800 in the middle. Also the ISO levels of hte mk2 and D800 are sufficient for MOST people so that would also put the D800 in the middle. The same applies to the 5DmkII. So the real competition for the mk3 is the prior one more than anything AND the D800. Second your graph doesn't have price which would place the mk2 and D800 closer to the center than the mk3.

This is the fundamental problem with the 5D3. Price makes it go to the edges of the graph, high ISO and fast FPS make it more specialized pushing it further away from the center of the bell curve. The D800 is more of a traditional middle of the road camera with the exception of the high MP. This would push it towards the edge but given it isn't any more expensive, the resolution is essentially a non issue. The lower price helps it a lot bringing it towards the center.

In conclusion, you simply can't make a graph like that and infer anything because your basis is that the 5Dmk3 is more to the center when in fact the only center aspect of it is resolution. In every other aspect the D800 is closer to the center.

Then again your graph is too much of a generalization so we better stick to a much simpler answer: Shoot studio and landscape or portraits stick to the mk2 or D800. If you shoot action on a budget stick to the 8fps D700 or 6fps 5DIII. If you shoot action for a living go D4 or 1DX. It is a simple as using the right tool for the job. Neither is truly "general purpose" although most people will gravitate towards the cheaper camera which make the D700 and 5DmkII equal winners.