HUGE difference between the 5d Mark 3 and D800 RAWs... I mean... HUUGEE

[3kramd5]

... now lets say you take the D800, reduce it to meet the 5d3, the D800 probably is a lot closer in noise, but details would probably be a lot closer if not the same. .

That's how I looked at the IR stills. D800 still looked better at 5D dimensions.

I'm holding on to my pre order slot, but not ruling out returning the mk3.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

You can not take images from 1 that is pretty much from Raw and compared to another that is upsampled by close to 30% and expect to make a true judge of sharpness.

Sure you can. All you have to do is decide ahead of time what 'conclusion' you want your 'test' to show, and then design your test accordingly. :

Exactly. I have a saying when it comes to technology demos......

"Any company presentation of a product's advanced technological feature or performance is indistinguishable from a rigged demo."

 

[jaduffy007]

Jpeg comparisons are the only way 5d3 even competes. Canon's jpeg engine is applying a lot of NR...and well done overall. One can nitpick about smearing of detail or adjusting Nikon settings to match, blah, blah, blah....but I think Canon's jpegs look good and better than D800.

Comparing raw images shows the iso performance to be almost identical between the two cameras...yet the D800 has 36MP and a "huge" DR advantage. Yes, HUUUUUGE. Like 1.5 to 2 stops more! D800 detail and DR really does bump up against MFD quality. And $500 less than 5d3. Sorry, but this really isn't debatable.

IMO...why choose 5d3? If one could say it's a choice between the D800's detail and DR vs the 5d3's 1.5 extra stops of useable iso...ok, that would be a legit choice. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. As a raw shooter, I see no advantage to the 5d3..and yet see significant D800 advantages.

By no means do I think the 5d3 sucks. It's a 5d2 with excellent AF...what's not to like? Yet, that's the result of 3.5 years of development?? My perspective is driven by what I see as Canon's falling behind in sensor tech (Sony). Sony makes a 36mp sensor that equals Canon 's 22mp in raw iso performance?! That Canon addressed better iso predominantly through their jpeg engine vs the sensor reinforces this... significantly so. This appears to be true of the 1D X as well. I'm starting to think in 5 years...we may all be jumping ship for Sony.

 

[Loswr]

I'm starting to think in 5 years...we may all be jumping ship for Sony.

...and using what for lenses? :

 

[tonyp]

Why choose it?!!? Umm.. I'm invested in Canon primes...

 

[CanonLITA]

By the same token, another poster raised an excellent point that the lenses used will also make a big difference as I expect the quality of say a 70-200 L2.8 IS II will produce a different image than a 24-105 F/4.

By that degree, Camera to Camera comparisons can be very selective between different brands, where as at least within a brand, lens performance and difference can be mitigated.

IMO the comparison should be done with the same (3rd party, read Zeiss) lens, assuming that the mount itself does not affect the result.

 

[maxxevv]

IMO the comparison should be done with the same (3rd party, read Zeiss) lens, assuming that the mount itself does not affect the result.

That's true. A consistent lens by a third party would create a far fairer/equitable test comparison.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

Comparing raw images shows the iso performance to be almost identical between the two cameras...yet the D800 has 36MP and a "huge" DR advantage. Yes, HUUUUUGE. Like 2 stops more!

Perhaps my eyes are broken but I am not seeing any DR differences in that set. Looking at the black and white pieces of cloth that are near each other, both cameras show roughly the same amount of variation. The D800 shows more details in the fabric but that's expected due to the resolution.

If I missed something, please correct me.

 

[awinphoto]

Comparing raw images shows the iso performance to be almost identical between the two cameras...yet the D800 has 36MP and a "huge" DR advantage. Yes, HUUUUUGE. Like 2 stops more!

Perhaps my eyes are broken but I am not seeing any DR differences in that set. Looking at the black and white pieces of cloth that are near each other, both cameras show roughly the same amount of variation. The D800 shows more details in the fabric but that's expected due to the resolution.

If I missed something, please correct me.

It's slightly argued that the extra detail is an effect of the extra DR, as well as the fact that the nikon image was as is and not upscaled like the Canon.

 

[wrack_of_lamb]

That's true. A consistent lens by a third party would create a far fairer/equitable test comparison.

The exif data indicates that both cameras used the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro EF at f8.0. Now if you want to debate the differences between the Canon mount version and the Nikon mount version...

 

[awinphoto]

That's true. A consistent lens by a third party would create a far fairer/equitable test comparison.

The exif data indicates that both cameras used the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro EF at f8.0. Now if you want to debate the differences between the Canon mount version and the Nikon mount version...

Heck that and sample to sample variations of the same mount type.... Sigma can be good if you get good copies but can be a headache getting that good copy

 

[JustinTArthur]

I've been doing some comparison at 25600 ISO, as I'm targeting nightlife photography in my purchase decision. For me, with noise reductions all the way down, and down-scaling the D800 sample, I can barely tell a difference between the two—that's with taking the raws, processing with the Adobe libs and not applying any luminance NR, color NR, sharpening, or tone adjustment. The white wall was a little noisier on the D800, but that could easily be from a slightly darker capture. This comparison is the first two attachments.

Strangely, applying Lightroom 4's color noise reduction at level 25 to either yields significantly better neutral darks for me on the D800 sample. The latter 2 attached examples are taken from the raws processed with LR4, clean/linear settings except for color NR 25. You can see a bit of purple/green separation on the 5D Mark III sample. Do any of you know why LR's NR would be better on the D800's sample? Was there simply less noise to deal with? Maybe related to the extra MP? This comparison is the latter 2 attachments.

 

[awinphoto]

I've been doing some comparison at 25600 ISO, as I'm targeting nightlife photography in my purchase decision. For me, with noise reductions all the way down, and down-scaling the D800 sample, I can barely tell a difference between the two—that's with taking the raws, processing with the Adobe libs and not applying any luminance NR, color NR, sharpening, or tone adjustment. The white wall was a little noisier on the D800, but that could easily be from a slightly darker capture. This comparison is the first two attachments.

Strangely, applying Lightroom 4's color noise reduction at level 25 to either yields significantly better neutral darks for me on the D800 sample. The latter 2 attached examples are taken from the raws processed with LR4, clean/linear settings except for color NR 25. You can see a bit of purple/green separation on the 5D Mark III sample. Do any of you know why LR's NR would be better on the D800's sample? Was there simply less noise to deal with? Maybe related to the extra MP? This comparison is the latter 2 attachments.

Hard to tell, but the D800 looks like it has more magenta in the overall scene, but i can be wrong... i guess it's a subjective thing whether you like that or not...

 

[Marsu42]

Do any of you know why LR's NR would be better on the D800's sample?

It seems that LR's noise reduction algorithm is more optimized for one sensor type than the other - actually, this fits with the fact that many people seem to get better nr results out of Canon's own software than Adobe's. Let's hope Adobe continues to work on this...

 

[awinphoto]

Do any of you know why LR's NR would be better on the D800's sample?

It seems that LR's noise reduction algorithm is more optimized for one sensor type than the other - actually, this fits with the fact that many people seem to get better nr results out of Canon's own software than Adobe's. Let's hope Adobe continues to work on this...

Also I dont know if Canon sends out the raw info to adobe and the likes before the camera release but in prior releases adobe had to wait a few weeks before they had ACR's for the new canon cameras... and the current ACR is just a beta so it could be optimized even more to suit better to the new camera.

 

[vuilang]

Who is getting tired of all BS of 5d3 vs d800?
you not only buy a camera.. YOU BUY THE SYSTEM.. Which one work better for you? pixel peeping wont help anything.

 

[Marsu42]

Why choose it?!!? Umm.. I'm invested in Canon primes...

Canon owns you :->

I hope there aren't that many people around who are bound to buy any body that Canon releases. The only way to make Canon think again about their strategy "double the price and see what happens" is if they cannot sell their full output of 5d3 at 3500 bucks.

Who is getting tired of all BS of 5d3 vs d800? you not only buy a camera.. YOU BUY THE SYSTEM..

The whole D800 vs 5d3 issue wouldn't be that heated if the 5d3 would be a little cheaper than the D800 and people would think Canon is pricing their gear according to technical quality, not just market value generated by a demand of people who are unable to choose.

I'd think more about investing in Canon gear if I'd trust Canon's long term strategy more - but seeing the last lens releases for video or high end, and now the 5d3 update after 3,5 years of development, I'll keep my money for the time being.

 

[sarangiman]

Yeah, JustinTArthur, that's what I'm seeing too. Posted this on another thread but it's relevant here: I don't seem to come to the same conclusion as people claiming that while the D800 has higher resolution & DR, the 5DIII holds up better at higher ISOs.

Here are my comparisons of 5DIII vs D800 at ISO 25,600:
http://cl.ly/F1ud/5DIII_vs_D800-ISO25600.png
http://cl.ly/F2Ui/5DIII_vs_D800-ISO25600-2.png

I don't see any difference between the two cameras at ISO 25,600. Both RAWs were opened in ACR 6.7, identical settings, then D800 was downsized to 5760px horizontal (same as 5DIII) using 'Bicubic' (not sharper, not smoother).

These are 100% crops.

If anything, the D800 looks a little cleaner to me but, really, it's a wash. Minus the fact that D800 has better resolution & DR.

Honestly I would've expected better ISO performance for the 5DIII given the higher inherent SNR of each pixel, which should decrease shot noise. But maybe read noise (higher for Canon?) has that much of an effect...

 

[awinphoto]

Why choose it?!!? Umm.. I'm invested in Canon primes...

Canon owns you :->

I hope there aren't that many people around who are bound to buy any body that Canon releases. The only way to make Canon think again about their strategy "double the price and see what happens" is if they cannot sell their full output of 5d3 at 3500 bucks.

Who is getting tired of all BS of 5d3 vs d800? you not only buy a camera.. YOU BUY THE SYSTEM..

The whole D800 vs 5d3 issue wouldn't be that heated if the 5d3 would be a little cheaper than the D800 and people would think Canon is pricing their gear according to technical quality, not just market value generated by a demand of people who are unable to choose.

I'd think more about investing in Canon gear if I'd trust Canon's long term strategy more - but seeing the last lens releases for video or high end, and now the 5d3 update after 3,5 years of development, I'll keep my money for the time being.

Well class leading AF, 100% VF, accelerometers, higher sensitive sensors for ISO, digic 5+, 6FPS, in camera HDR, more robust body and weather sealing, faster response times, 2 cards, no sony to shovel extra money into R&D, this doesn't come for free... Let alone damage to facilities, possible insurance claims and or negative effects thereof... all that gets passed on to the consumer in some way shape or form... Sucks but the improvements puts this camera in a whole new class of camera compared to the 5d2.

 

[meli]

I hope there aren't that many people around who are bound to buy any body that Canon releases. The only way to make Canon think again about their strategy "double the price and see what happens" is if they cannot sell their full output of 5d3 at 3500 bucks.

Who is getting tired of all BS of 5d3 vs d800? you not only buy a camera.. YOU BUY THE SYSTEM..

The whole D800 vs 5d3 issue wouldn't be that heated if the 5d3 would be a little cheaper than the D800 and people would think Canon is pricing their gear according to technical quality, not just market value generated by a demand of people who are unable to choose.

I'd think more about investing in Canon gear if I'd trust Canon's long term strategy more - but seeing the last lens releases for video or high end, and now the 5d3 update after 3,5 years of development, I'll keep my money for the time being.

+1