Aglet said:
LOL, indeed!
I do kind of like the machine-gun stutter of the 1D X, though. It's loud, scary, and makes people turn heads. ;P
Upvote
0
Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?
- Thread starter ramonjsantiago
- Start date
LOL, indeed!
I do kind of like the machine-gun stutter of the 1D X, though. It's loud, scary, and makes people turn heads. ;P
jakeymate said:
I realize this was directed at jrista and neuro, but...5D3 v D800 I would say the 5D3 is the better overall camera by a small margin. 5D3 v D810 is a wash.
If you have Canon lenses obviously the 5D3 is the superior camera. If you have Nikon lenses the 810 is superior. There is nothing in either that would make me jump brands.
Upvote
0
jakeymate said:
LOL, I've written so many deeply detailed statements that make my case that it's beyond ridiculous. I believe I've earned the right not to have to explain it all again. How about providing more yourself, beyond simply:
You strongly disagree....WHY? BESIDES sensor IQ....what makes the D800 or D810 a superior camera overall than the 5D III? What makes the Nikon ECOSYSTEM better than the Canon ecosystem?
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics said:
Canon's user interface is 20 generations ahead of Nikon ;D
If Nikon built a true successor to the D700, I might have bought it. Interestingly, Canon built the true successor to the D700 in the 5D3, so I bought it instead ;D
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
Yeah you're right and he sounds like my brother when he became a born again christian - 'I have found god and I need to preach the good word to you sinners'. ;D
At the end of it all he's just another fanboy selectively choosing arguments (a rumored D750, add a battery grip to increase frame rate, ignoring AF specifics) to justify his purchase to anyone that wants to listen . And so far not one thing he's said proves the OPs original premise - that the 5Diii is 2 generations behind the D810.
Upvote
0
jrista said:
Besides sensor IQ?
I never said the D810 was superior overall (excluding sensor IQ). I said the Mk3 ISN'T superior overall.
There's a difference.
I'd say the D810 matches the Mk3 in all areas (bar rate button, memories on the dial), but adds the IQ of course, crop modes (when a client needs 5:4 images, crop modes are great), better autofocus on third party lenses (someone did explain to me why focus issues exist on Canon more than Nikon, but I can't remember why).
I've nothing against Canon digitals, I did after all use them for a decade, but these sweeping statements are just sad.
The Mk3 is a better 'overall' camera than the D810?
No, it's not.
What MAY be accurate is saying the Mk3 is a better 'all round' camera than the D800, while not being particularly the best at any one thing.
Best hi ISO? Nope. Best resolution? Nope. Best autofocus? Nope. Best dynamic range? Nope. Best video quality? Nope.
What one thing does the Mk3 do better than any other camera?
Nothing, but it can do everything very well. And that was it's advantage over the D800 for 2 years.
A wedding photographer would have been better off with a Mk3 than a D800 imho.
A studio based photographer, or a landscape photographer would have been better off with a D800.
Now the D800 has it's minor D810 upgrade, it's finally a great 'all round' camera too, while still holding the DR crown the resolution crown, the crop modes, etc.
I'm making the assumption you've spent time with the D810 to be so sure the Mk3 is still the better overall camera?
Upvote
0
Roo said:
Those are just spec facts. I never said ever that the mk3 was two generations behind as the OP postulated, so please don't put words in my mouth.
I simply corrected some very inaccurate statements regarding the cameras in question.
If you want my view, the Mk3 and D810 (minus IQ) are the same gen, now that the D810 has caught the Mk3.
IQ wise the D800 was a gen in front, but the D810 isn't really any different IQ wise (a hair sharper, and 64ISO is a bonus), so I'd ay IQ wise, the Mk3 is still just one gen behind, and could catch up, or pass, with the Mk4 if it arrives in the next 6-12 months, as any successor to the D810 won't be around till 2016.
Is that a fanboy statement or just the general view?
Upvote
0
Both Nikon and Canon are leading edge companies that produce world-class cameras and have their loyal followers.
I shoot Canon and my wife shoots Nikon. It gives me the advantage of getting to play around with her equipment without fear of spending money and regretting it later. She shoots with the D7XXX (D7000/D7100) series and they are amazing cameras that produce outstanding images.
I shoot with the 7D and while the 7D out guns the D7XXX series in many ways, the image quality alone from the Nikons is a very compelling reason to switch. 2 of the biggest reasons why I have not switched are 1) I already have years or use and thousands invested in my equipment, $$$ I will never get back if I try and sell my camera gear and 2) I personally cannot stand the ergonomics of the Nikon bodies that I have tried so far. (I have not used ALL of the Nikon offerings so my thoughts could change if I used say the D810....) I have larger hands and the D7XXX bodies are uncomfortable for me to hold and operate. The Canon prosumer class offerings feel much more comfortable in my hands and feel more solidly built.
Truth be told, they both make outstanding cameras and it's the photographer that makes the shot, not his or her equipment.
D
I shoot Canon and my wife shoots Nikon. It gives me the advantage of getting to play around with her equipment without fear of spending money and regretting it later. She shoots with the D7XXX (D7000/D7100) series and they are amazing cameras that produce outstanding images.
I shoot with the 7D and while the 7D out guns the D7XXX series in many ways, the image quality alone from the Nikons is a very compelling reason to switch. 2 of the biggest reasons why I have not switched are 1) I already have years or use and thousands invested in my equipment, $$$ I will never get back if I try and sell my camera gear and 2) I personally cannot stand the ergonomics of the Nikon bodies that I have tried so far. (I have not used ALL of the Nikon offerings so my thoughts could change if I used say the D810....) I have larger hands and the D7XXX bodies are uncomfortable for me to hold and operate. The Canon prosumer class offerings feel much more comfortable in my hands and feel more solidly built.
Truth be told, they both make outstanding cameras and it's the photographer that makes the shot, not his or her equipment.
D
Upvote
0
That's true. Often, perhaps even predominantly, the key to best photo isn't IQ, DR, AF, MP, or all the other mechanical variables but is ABV.*gbchriste said:
*Asshole Behind Viewfinder
Upvote
0
Particularly when they are as stupid and meaningless as they usually end up being.dilbert said:
Upvote
0
Hey mackguyver
You caused me to have the same epiphany about my own photographic deficiencies.
Let me know what you finally decide on, I'll send you a "T" shirt advertising your camera choice. Can't guarantee better pics, but maybe you will do better with the ladies?
(a little levity to lighten the malignant tone of this well worn thread)
sek
You caused me to have the same epiphany about my own photographic deficiencies.
Let me know what you finally decide on, I'll send you a "T" shirt advertising your camera choice. Can't guarantee better pics, but maybe you will do better with the ladies?
(a little levity to lighten the malignant tone of this well worn thread)
sek
mackguyver said:
Upvote
0
jakeymate said:
I'm not sure I would say that. Canon has been in the top five most innovative companies of decades now. They file some 3000-4000 patents a year these days:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e02480ae93e9
Keep in mind, Canon is a company with a massive presence in "imaging" in general, from general photography and printing to video and cinematography to medical imaging to CMOS fabrication. Canon has been winning awards for being one of the worlds most innovative companies for years. The difference between Canon and Sony's sensor division is that Canon has such a broadly sweeping focus in imaging...where as Sony went so deeply into debt to build their 20 billion dollar plus CIS monstrosity that their bond status is now junk. Sony is apparently betting a significant portion of the company on their sensor play...so it's not surprising that they are innovating in CIS specifically more than Canon is.
I personally wish Canon would funnel more of their R&D budget into improving still photography IQ...but they seem to have a different focus right now.
Upvote
0
jrista said:
That's exactly how they've stayed so far ahead of Nikon, who don't have that diversity. It's nothing to do with the quality of the cameras of the last 2-3 years, it's massive brand recognition.
Canon are still synonymous with quality cameras in many people's eyes.
Why did I buy my first Canon SLR when I joined a design company after my visual communication degree in 1992?
Nigel Mansell had Canon on his car and the fact that the best colour copiers were Canon. I used them a lot in design with the Fiery Postscript RIPs.
I actually didn't know much about their cameras then (I'd had Pentax till that point as everyone in college did) but Canon's reputation in imaging was unparalleled so I bought one of their cameras.
That reputation is still seeing them through. How long will that last?
Brand loyalty ain't what it used to be, and todays hot company is tomorrows museum piece. The landscape is changing, and it could change against both Nikon and Canon in the next decade if they don't keep pace with companies like Sony.
Canon may file a lot of patents, but in the last 3 years, the advancements in camera tech have not really come from Canon or Nikon imho.
Sigma, Sony, Toshiba, Red, Arri, Panasonic, Olympus etc have added far more new tech to this industry than Canon or Nikon have.
Canon owned DSLR video and a friend of mine bought a GH4 after seeing mine, and this week bought his 2nd one, as he shoots weddings.
He says he can't look at his 70D and 6D video footage after using the GH4 for a month or so, so he's switching.
This is from his Facebook page this week:
"August 26 near Gold Coast
Sooo I have decided to sell ALL of my Canon Photography gear as I am mainly shooting video I am going to panasonic!!
I have 6D,70D, 580 flash Canon 17-40 f4,50 f1.8 ,85 f1.8 ,70-200 f4,18-55kit, Sigma 18-35 f1.8, 50-500,1.4x, 12 batteries and LOTS more if your interested please let me know "
This would never have happened in 2009, but now it's getting commonplace. Eventually, that loss of Canon business will add up.
The 5D Mk3 could have been 4K in 2012, and then Canon would have owned DSLR video for years to come but they just let it go with a lacklustre DSLR video range and moving focus to expensive pro vid cameras.
Just my view, no flame war start intended
Upvote
0
This thread has made my brain swell with dumb minutiae.
jakeymate, please, don't wait to get banned from the site. Just leave and don't come back. You are a troll, plain and simple. Sorry to be honest here, but that sums it up. You enjoy stirring the pot with stupid stuff just for the attention, and with only ~15 posts to your current avatar, you add nothing but frustration.
Obviously you favor Nikon, a great system. Canon, also is a great system. Go to Nikonrumors.com and enjoy their company, and don't look back.
If you choose to stay, I promise that if I see your name, I won't read anything you write, as it offends me.
Regards.
sek
jakeymate, please, don't wait to get banned from the site. Just leave and don't come back. You are a troll, plain and simple. Sorry to be honest here, but that sums it up. You enjoy stirring the pot with stupid stuff just for the attention, and with only ~15 posts to your current avatar, you add nothing but frustration.
Obviously you favor Nikon, a great system. Canon, also is a great system. Go to Nikonrumors.com and enjoy their company, and don't look back.
If you choose to stay, I promise that if I see your name, I won't read anything you write, as it offends me.
Regards.
sek
Upvote
0
jakeymate said:
Jakey, since our last conversations here on CR I've dug out my old Pentax 67 system, blown the dust off it and have been shooting Portra 160. Honestly mate, your repeated posts arguing the minutiae between the Canon and Nikon sensors is trivial compared with a high quality scan of a well exposed 6x7 negative. The facts are you are still confined to the piddley little 2.4 x 3.6 image. If you want to see real tonal graduation, real improvement in DR, go get a 6x7 medium format system and shot some decent format sized film. You won't be arguing about the difference between Nikon and Canon digital FF anymore.
Looking at the stuff you shoot it could give your work a real 'here's something different' look to the common-or-garden digital images we're all used to seeing now.
Upvote
0
Sporgon said:
I agree entirely. I do have a trade background in reprographics and spent the 90's working on scans for MF and LF film.
Ever scanned an A4 neg to 500meg on a drum scanner?
That makes digital look like a toy.
But practicality is a major issue, as you know. Try doing a portrait session, with 30 final images, from a choice of 200 for the client, when you're shooting MF film, scanning it and all that.
It's just not commercially viable.
And I'm not arguing the minutiae. That happens every minute of every day on here.
I'm correcting all the inaccuracies and sweeping statements about it, which are frustrating to read day after day.
It's as if someone told some of those people, if you say if often enough, it will become true.
Upvote
0
quod said:
How about you don't wade in, missing the point by a country mile with worn-out, rote, flamebait clichés?
The folk here who "defend" (which, incidentally, is an immature, immotive characterisation of what's really going on here) Canon, do so:
Because they don't appreciate lies, half-truths and irrelevances presented as "facts" - much less as show-stopping, catastrophic failures by Canon.
Because they know, from their own use of Canon equipment, that it can achieve anything they need a camera to do - which is, images (not pixels) of the most sublime image quality anyone might possibly wish for.
Because the whining about Canon's "sub-standard" sensors says more about the whiners (and their own failings) than it does about the sensors.
Simply put, they "defend" because that's the proper reaction to the bullsh*t. Other people who (God help them) might choose to visit Canonrumors to get some useful information about the capabilities of Canon cameras deserve a balanced view that pushes back against the interminable DR crap.
And it'll continue to happen for as long as the DR whiners continue to push their DR agenda, and as long as that agenda continues to mean sweet FA for the vast majoiity of photographers out there in the Real World.
Upvote
0
Sporgon said:
Don't forget also, when you shoot natural light portraiture as part of most sessions, 160 just isn't going to cut it.
Today I shot from 64 ISO to 1600 ISO.
Sure, as you say a well exposed MF neg is amazing, but being stuck with 160 film is a world I'd never want to go back to, unless I was doing a single perfect portrait.
Upvote
0
Chuck Alaimo said:
To be fair Chuck, the D810 looks like a nice camera: hell, only three and a half years after the release of the 5D Mk III, it almost catches up with the capabilities of the Canon!
8)
Funny how the trolls always seem to miss little points like that, isn't it? It's taken Nikon a lifetime in DSLR terms just to get close to the all-round versatility and ability of the 5D Mk III, but that fact is entirely ignored by them (and let's be honest, that's piss-poor of Nikon) and instead of railing at Nikon for the dismal pace of their response, they spin it with the good old "oooh! But it's got a newer sensor..!" BS.
(And they call us defensive!
)Well yes, it does have a newer sensor - it's a much newer camera. So, y'know - duuuuhhhh...
It'll be interesting to see whether the same trolls come back in another three and a half years when the 5D Mk V has been out for a while with a much newer, better sensor than the D810's, to b*tch about the "old" Nikon...
Upvote
0
Keith_Reeder said:
I don't want an argument with such aggressive troll calling contributors, and this cam is before my Nikon time, but wasn't the D3s a pretty stunning all round camera that the Mk3 only just matched in 2012, 3 years after the D3s was released?
I'm just suggesting some balance and accuracy here, rather than sweeping statements.
When I had my 5D Mk2, I was always impressed by the D3s my fellow photographers used.
Not enough to switch from my Mk2, which I loved due to it's resolution and ergonomics, but the D3s was beautiful camera, and still is.
51 point focus, 12800 ISO, full frame of course, clean shadows etc. It could do anything really.
It's only flaw was the resolution, but I knew a lot of togs that would print great 20x3 inch inch wall arts for their clients from 12 meg.
There was little it couldn't do, if you exclude video of course.
Just because you call someone a troll, doesn't automatically make what they say wrong.
The way to do that is with polite balanced debate, using citations, first hand experience and facts where available.
It's so intellectually weak to just shout 'troll' when someone says something you don't agree with.
Upvote
0
