Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?

[Orangutan]

Nobody's denying that the Sony sensors test better in "edge case" circumstances - and it's somewhere between disingenuous and downright dishonest to suggest that we're saying anything to the contrary.

(Even though you'll notice the striking lack of Real World examples out there of images that only a Nikon/Sony camera - and definitely not a Canon camera - could produce. That's significant, don't you think?)

To be fair, I think jrista posted two reasonable examples: one was the room interior with bright window, and the other was a stream with bright sky. I've had trouble with both of those kinds of shots and, while there are ways to adapt to the situations, such as choosing time of day for minimal DR, his point is still valid: if you happen to be at one of these locations at that time of day, those two shots would benefit from the D8xx sensor.

This harkens back to discussions on auto-focus and frame rate. We can focus manually, and we can time the shot correctly the first time to get excellent results; however, good AF and high frame rate will increase the range of circumstances where the chance of success is good. I definitely want better low ISO DR to find its way into Canon's cameras, but it's not enough to make me sell my gear and buy Nikon.

 

[PicaPica]

are you royal or why do you use the word "we"?

i have a life that´s why i don´t waste my time searching and quoting such comments i was refering to.

Speaking of "childish"...

The use of "we" in my post was completely correct - I'm part of the group that's challenging the DR whiners, and part of the group you called "childish".

i did not talked about you.
i did not even talked about the discussion in this thread.
i spoke about the CR forum in general.

 

[Loswr]

I can offer the following:
1.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR7Kjeq2aH4 with links to samples and additional info /main points. more accurate and flexible
2.) http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2014/07/02/nikon-d810-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii-comparison-full-frame-dslrs/3/ /main point advantage for wildlife photography (just one of many such remarks around)
3.) http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d810.htm#comp /main point much better autofocus for portraits (also lots of these around)

1) Northrup's "sports test" was a joke. Heck, even his wife (? I assume she is) called it a 'moving portrait'. As I stated, a ~60% hit rate in that scenario is ridiculously low – something I'd expect even an entry-level dSLR to beat in that 'test'. It's already been pointed out that he had a setting enabled which Canon warns against using with moving subject.

2) I don't see where DCW tests AF, they just list specs. I think you're over interpreting their statement about wildlife, which applies specifically to f/8 TC combos. They also incompletely describe the 5DIII's f/8 AF, which is the center point with 4 surrounding assist points. Still, the 11 f/8 AF points are a nice advantage for an f/4 supertele with a 2x TC or an f/5.6 lens with a 1.4x TC (that advantage would be even better for bird/wildlife shooters if Nikon had a 400/5.6 like Canon!). By the way, did you notice their conclusion? In it, they state, "The Canon 5D Mark III remains a hugely desirable camera and is still arguably the better all-rounder. It offers slightly faster continuous shooting, albeit with smaller resolution files, more cross-type AF sensors and class-leading video quality." Interesting that a review you link to support the contention that the D810 has better AF mentions a 5DIII AF advantage in concluding that the 5DIII is a better all-around camera. Given that, it seems you have not only read a review that suggests the 5DIII has better AF, you provided the link yourself.

3) You're citing KR to support your assertion? Really?? KR's goal is to make money from web traffic. He makes outrageous claims to further that goal, then later makes equally outrageous but diametrically opposed statements to further it further. I've read enough of KR to know better than to rely on his information, particularly as far as technical matters are concerned.

 

[Maui5150]

Most importantly... Lets keep comparing an 2 year old camera to one that was just released. The fact that it is in the ballpark in most area and better in other... Shesh...

Northrup is a clown... While he bashes the 5D MK III as being an amateur camera only and that Pros like him should be using Nikon, he proves he does not use the Canon as evident by his settings.

The 810 is a decent camera, so is the 5D MK III. Is the 810 better? In some areas maybe, I would expect that for a camera that is two years newer... and while the D5MKIV may be 6 months or even a year out, I wonder is when this leap frogs the 810 if the Nikon folks will be stammering that it is a newer camera so of course it will be better.

If I was a new buyer maybe I would look at the two and choose the 810 over the 5DMKIII. Don't know. There is not enough of a difference to make me want to switch.

But what remains constant... wait another year to 18 months and both sides will have better cameras... In the end, that cannot be a bad thing... Expensive to swap bodies again and again, but that has always been the case

 

[Plainsman]

How much is Canon paying you to suffer and defend the brand? If the threads bug you, don't read them. Better yet, go out and take some shots. As far as I can tell, the D810 is a Nikon-version of the 5D3, but with a substantially better sensor. It's natural that people want more oomph out of their cameras and its natural for them to look at competing brands for validation of their choices. Seriously, go out and take shots.

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.

"...bullsh*t"

"...sweet FA..."

Your words.....just about describe your rather aggressive over the top rant apparently in "defence" of Canon!
I bet Canon have never heard of you.
Just try and be a bit more open minded and less fanatical in your next post.

 

[reczey]

Canon wins with its lenses, and AF system. Nikon may have bodies (at the moment) with higher resolution, but they do not have the lenses to resolve. Canon has developed extremely great zooms in the meanwhile to get ready for a higher resolution AFTER they have completed the development of appropriate lenses.

Wise strategy.

Facts speak for themselves, all these people can't be wrong!

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/canon-most-widely-used-camera-system-at-the-latest-world-cup/

 

[mmenno]

This is all a terribly fun read

Brand x vs brand y always brings out the best in people

My humble 2 cents:
It is an objective fact that nikon/sony sensors offer better DR, and anyone that has shot even a few frames on both brand's recent models and pushed the files in post knows. This CAN be a problem in some cases, which don't depend on the photographer's skill at all. Simply put, If I had the choice between two sensors, one with reasonably clean shadows at low iso and one with severe banding, I'd know which one I would pick.
However, DR is just one point on a very long list of pros and cons a camera can have, and is in no way the end all be all of image quality. Let alone the shooting experience and the overal system one would buy into. If nikon truly made the better camera/system overall for the last few years, then canon couldn't have been as complacent as they have been in their upgrades, sensor-wise.

 

[dtaylor]

i like the idea but i would like to see a resize to A4 at 360PPI (4209x2976 pixels).

Just go for 16x20. You would be lucky to see a difference in 1% of cases. Seriously. The paper you choose to print on will have more of an impact.

 

[dtaylor]

are you royal or why do you use the word "we"?

The royal we...man.

"fact" is also.. that if canon "had" the better sensors the fanboys here would be all over it.

They might bring it up. But they wouldn't be on Nikon Rumors starting post after post about it.

it's somewhere between disingenuous and downright dishonest to suggest that all people who want better DR saying that it´s all that matters.

No, but they've built it up in their minds into something it is not and talk about little else. That's why I tell people to actually do the tests, rent the equipment, try it out. The first time you push shadows from an Exmor RAW it is impressive. Then you get some some images under your belt and you realize that it's better and occasionally useful, but in less extreme cases it's not as different in print as you imagined. And in more extreme cases you're not fighting noise, but mud, and you need to HDR to get the detail you really want any way.

DxO and the various reviewers who think turning all NR off...sometimes only on the Canon file!...is clever are doing a real disservice to the photographic community at large.

 

[Kahuna]

For the most part, this is a wonderful site with some extremely talented photographers that are willing to share their knowledge of the art. Then there are threads like this one, initiated for the sole purpose to agitate.

Pitiful waste of time.

 

[Loswr]

The only reason you can insult Tony Northrup is because his test was easy to follow and absolutely transparent - far above the level of what most others offer. Your counter claim here is just that - an unsubstantiated claim to be taken at face value. Hardly the best basis for such harsh words.

I called his test a joke, do you construe that as insulting him? But...

Northrup is a clown... While he bashes the 5D MK III as being an amateur camera only and that Pros like him should be using Nikon, he proves he does not use the Canon as evident by his settings.

Perhaps not a clown, but his motivation is the same as KR's – driving Internet traffic to his site for profit. He's not doing reviews for the benefit of the photography community, he's doing them for personal gain. Making intentionally inflammatory statements (even knowing they're false) is part of their game, thus Northrup's takeaways on the 5DIII vs D810: the D810 is vastly superior, but: "If you have a Mark III and you're not a pro, it's probably not worth switching," and, "If you're putting photos on Facebook...it probably won't make much difference."

The 5DIII isn't good enough for pros, but it's probably ok for posting to Facebook. Yeah, that sounds like a fair and balanced review. But you can go right on believing it as 'evidence'. :

 

[David Hull]

Perhaps you believe everything on the Internet is authoritative? Take Tony Northrup's YouTube "review"…in his "sports" test, which consisted of a subject walking sedately toward him, he reported a keeper percentage in the low 60s from the 5DIII. What a joke, but I suspect you believed every word.

No. I carefully compare all the info I can get and try to draw an informed decision based on the broadest possible basis. You can see a - short - list of comparison reviews I have posted above on the AF question. I have in fact not seen a single comparison test out there that makes the claim that the 5DIII AF is better than the 810 AF. Please post as I would like to read them too if they in fact exist.

I take note of your experience. But it would be more believable if you did not feel compelled to ridicule those who have carefully documented their results and presented them for us all to evaluate. Having made many reviews myself I know how painstakingly long time it takes and how much effort goes into trying to make them as error-free as possible.

The only reason you can insult Tony Northrup is because his test was easy to follow and absolutely transparent - far above the level of what most others offer. Your counter claim here is just that - an unsubstantiated claim to be taken at face value. Hardly the best basis for such harsh words.

The Northrup review is pretty biased, IMO, a bit like his mind was made up and he was out to prove a point. That is the trouble with most of these so-called reviews. I can't speak too much for his AF evaluation except to say that the camera works for me and I have no issues with it. However, his commentary on the noise performance of the camera was complete hype and just about as bogus as the best of them. Which calls into question the rest of it for me.

Of particular interest was his wife's comment to me in a DPR thread that she felt that she "needed" the D800 because she did night photography. I have been doing night photography with Canon gear since the 20D and really never found it's sensor performance to be a serious limitation (as have many others -- you can find examples everywhere you want to look). To me this looks like pure hype and is very misleading when you take a scene and say "you may have trouble seeing this so I'll zoom in to 100% and lift the exposure slider several stops so you can see it clearly". You will notice that they didn't bother to show you what the resulting image (the full image) looked like from both pieces of equipment after that trick was pulled. That review is pure bologna, designed to make a point and nothing more. If you want objective reviews stick to imaging resource or DPR, good solid actionable information, devoid of the hype and bologna.

 

[Maui5150]

Perhaps not a clown, but his motivation is the same as KR's – driving Internet traffic to his site for profit.

I will take that one step further.

Either Tony Northrup is:

1) Incompetent as a photographer

2) Deceitful

Either one is bad in my book.

If he wants to do a review of two cameras, know how to set them up to get the most out of them, if he can't, then he is incompetent, should do more research on the cameras he is reviewing, and perhaps even learn a bit about photography. To demonstrate a glaring lack of knowledge of the Canon system and then make comments related to pro-usage either shows him to be a sham or an idiot.

Or

He can be a down right disingenuous pr&*k who intentionally took bad photos to tilt a review.

I have my ideas and others can form their own opinion.

And while KR is a tool, it is really not nice to throw him in the likes of Tony Northrup. TN aspires to one day be as suave and savvy as KR

 

[Aglet]

810 doesn't just approach the 5d3, in tech, it pulls out and passes it and flips the bird at it on the way by.

Yes, we all know you think "camera" = "sensor". Frame rate...5DIII > D810. AF system...5DIII > D810.

frame rate is not that big a deal for many uses
if you think 1 extra fps is significant on a general purpose FF, that's fine. 5fps is enough for me, even 4 fps is adequate.
I'm not trying to photograph a hummingbird's armpits.

as for the AF system, perhaps you didn't learn to make good use of Nikon's 3D tracking (with subject color?) where the high resolution metering sensor is providing focus tracking guidance to the PDAF system. With the 810's group AF feature added this should provide a very good hit rate for erratically moving targets, or poor motion tracking skills.

I can only visualize your testing of a D810 by handling it much like I'd handle my grandson's loaded diaper.

 

[KacperP]

1.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR7Kjeq2aH4 with links to samples and additional info /main points. more accurate and flexible

What was that? Why did he waited with that comparison so long?
Why didn't he warned us about this Nikon being better back in 2012?
.... oh.

 

[Loswr]

as for the AF system, perhaps you didn't learn to make good use of Nikon's 3D tracking (with subject color?) where the high resolution metering sensor is providing focus tracking guidance to the PDAF system. With the 810's group AF feature added this should provide a very good hit rate for erratically moving targets, or poor motion tracking skills.

I can only visualize your testing of a D810 by handling it much like I'd handle my grandson's loaded diaper.

You are free to visualize it however you want. Your comment may very well smell worse than the aforementioned diaper.

In fact, along with me when I tested the D810 was a friend who shoots with a D4s, mainly equestrian sports, I assume he could configure the D810's AF appropriately. He was thinking of getting a 5DIII because he hates having so much DR (I kid, of course).

My overall impression was that the D810 was a very capable camera. Pity there are no Nikon counterparts to my MP-E 65, handholdable 600/4, or the TS-E 17mm that's next on my to-buy list.

 

[KacperP]

1) Northrup's "sports test" was a joke. Heck, even his wife (? I assume she is) called it a 'moving portrait'. As I stated, a ~60% hit rate in that scenario is ridiculously low – something I'd expect even an entry-level dSLR to beat in that 'test'. It's already been pointed out that he had a setting enabled which Canon warns against using with moving subject.

That guy shamelessly admits inability to use proper settings on Canon, and sells it as a Canon fault.
If some of you are unaware, he also uses psychological salesman tricks. Entire video is made in a manner of shopping channel, like it's all scripted.
Guy has a role as knowlegeable expert.
Girl has a role of an observer waiting for answer, someone with whom viewer should identify. She gets convinced, that's that.
"How can you not agree with her you weirdo?"

 

[Aglet]

Pity there are no Nikon counterparts to my MP-E 65, handholdable 600/4, or the TS-E 17mm that's next on my to-buy list.

True, I would also like the extreme macro and TS lenses...
so, if I want them enough, I'll buy them and use them on a Canon body, or adapted to a Sony or other short-register mirrorless. FPN and DR rarely are issues with macro, tho I'd want that TS lens on an Exmor-based body for landscapin' cuz my pictures let the sun shine in (frame)
face it with a ;D
open up your aperture and LET THE SUN SHINE IN!

 

[Loswr]

tho I'd want that TS lens on an Exmor-based body for landscapin' cuz my pictures let the sun shine in (frame)

For me, I'd want an AA filter as my main use of the TS-E lens(es) is architecture, lots of potential for moiré.

 

[Loswr]

5DIII can do 132MP/sec
D810 can do 180MP/sec

D4s can do 176 MP/sec
1D X can do 252 MP/sec

Did you have a point?