Nikon D800 vs Canon 5d3 sample images.

[HurtinMinorKey]

Either way, both companies should be ashamed with the quality of photography skill demonstrated in these samples. Half the people on this site could do better.

 

[SK]

I'm assuming you are comparing sample images from canon website and nikon website.

D800 images are 20mb jpeg and 5D3 images are 5~10mb jpeg.

I agree that 5D3 images seem too soft, but still I won't change to Nikon just after comparing sample images...

 

[sandymandy]

Either way, both companies should be ashamed with the quality of photography skill demonstrated in these samples. Half the people on this site could do better.

Thats what struck me also. Its like they wanna promote their 5D mk iii to be like some newbie photographers first camera. Sample images look kinda....like..well....random snap shots. They should show off whats really possible with this camera. The camera is geared towards the more "pro" people i think. People who are willing to spend lots of money on their cameras. Im not sure if some photos of leafs or drinking glasses are gonna make an impression really in the targeted audience.. ;D

 

[EIREHotspur]

...and the opening line in a new DSLRs for Dummies would go a kinda like this.....

...The Canon 5D2 sold by the bucketload.....the Canon 5D3 is the update to that camera....

Don't you all think that the 5D3 has to be an improvement on that?

Have seen some spectacular shots from the 5D2 over the years.

Look the Canon people chose 4 guys on bikes in a warehouse to showcase their new cashcow.....you cannot judge the camera until you see some independant users get their hands on it.

I preordered yesterday.

 

[rj79in]

Either way, both companies should be ashamed with the quality of photography skill demonstrated in these samples. Half the people on this site could do better.

Thats what struck me also. Its like they wanna promote their 5D mk iii to be like some newbie photographers first camera. Sample images look kinda....like..well....random snap shots. They should show off whats really possible with this camera. The camera is geared towards the more "pro" people i think. People who are willing to spend lots of money on their cameras. Im not sure if some photos of leafs or drinking glasses are gonna make an impression really in the targeted audience.. ;D

Totally agree ... most people who will be buying the III will either be semi-pro / pro knowing a thing or two about photography. Canon should've known that the prospective buyers would have an discerning eye when it posted the sample pictures which, in all fairness can be bettered by a number of low end models in the Canon roster.

Why these samples? Who holds the answers? Probably some marketing guy wielding a powershot / coolpix.

 

[justsomedude]

For those looking to compare bodies/images, I agree with other posters who recommend waiting for the final versions to hit the market before doing serious analysis.

And while I admit that I am very impressed with the d800's low ISO images (they really are amazing), I suggest some of you check out the high ISO samples over at DP Review. The 6400 is incredible and will certainly be printable at larger sizes with some minimal NR applied...

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-low-light-iso-samples

6400 - http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/1779794.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1330975364&Signature=ewGdJM%2f87buRe3mBO3dtota8ruA%3d

12800 is more than useable - http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/1779795.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1330975263&Signature=b8czTmYoKCfKEI97z4qsGsP3JSI%3d

It looks like the d800 and 5D3 will satisfy two separate markets. I almost see the d800 as a high rez landscape camera, whereas the 5D3 will be an event, concert, portrait, and wedding photographer's dream. In my opinion, those high ISOs will set the 5D3 apart from any other dSLR in the price range.

 

[ashe]

A few more: http://blog.jeffascough.com/photographers/2012/03/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-review.html

 

[altenae]

Also like to see a CRISP 100 ISO image.
I also like to use the 5D MK III with 100 ISO also

Maybe it's not NR but a strong AA filter ??

I guess we have to wait and see....

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Look the Canon people chose 4 guys on bikes in a warehouse to showcase their new cashcow.....you cannot judge the camera until you see some independant users get their hands on it.

Nice

I envisioned Canon engineers being let out of a giant hamster cage , then told they have 1 hour to shoot something for the website. And if they don't return and upload the pictures in 1 hour, their explosive collars will surely detonate.

 

[RuneL]

Are we forgetting the lens?
Just looked at the picture of the woman in red. It's probably more about the lens (24-70 2.8L) it looks exactly the same as what my 1D IV delivers with than particular lens. Same soft-ish look. Running it through my sharpening routines it looks fine.
I don't see any real evidence of heavy noise reduction, maybe some retouching on the face of the model, but not anywhere else.
When not pixel peeping at 100% it is fine too.

I've scaled down and sharpened these (cropped the tiger), I think it looks pretty good. Originals:

Tiger: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/14.jpg
Woman in red: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/08.jpg

 

[rj79in]

Are we forgetting the lens?
Just looked at the picture of the woman in red. It's probably more about the lens (24-70 2.8L) it looks exactly the same as what my 1D IV delivers with than particular lens. Same soft-ish look. Running it through my sharpening routines it looks fine.
I don't see any real evidence of heavy noise reduction, maybe some retouching on the face of the model, but not anywhere else.
When not pixel peeping at 100% it is fine too.

I've scaled down and sharpened these (cropped the tiger), I think it looks pretty good. Originals:

Tiger: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/14.jpg
Woman in red: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/08.jpg

The point is ... with sample images Canon is trying to "Sell" this camera to you. You should be allowed to pixel peep at 100% to make a judgment. If one only had the sample images to go by how many will buy the "new" camera?

 

[altenae]

I agree they look good, but at 1600px width they should.
Don't get me wrong, but even a not sharp picture can look sharp at 1600 px.

 

[etg9]

The woman in the red trench has the focus (imho) missed. On the full version you can see her gloves are very much in focus while her face isn't. I think the samples in general were pretty weak and Canon does an inconsistent job posting good and bad samples for their products.

 

[RuneL]

Are we forgetting the lens?
Just looked at the picture of the woman in red. It's probably more about the lens (24-70 2.8L) it looks exactly the same as what my 1D IV delivers with than particular lens. Same soft-ish look. Running it through my sharpening routines it looks fine.
I don't see any real evidence of heavy noise reduction, maybe some retouching on the face of the model, but not anywhere else.
When not pixel peeping at 100% it is fine too.

I've scaled down and sharpened these (cropped the tiger), I think it looks pretty good. Originals:

Tiger: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/14.jpg
Woman in red: http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/08.jpg

The point is ... with sample images Canon is trying to "Sell" this camera to you. You should be allowed to pixel peep at 100% to make a judgment. If one only had the sample images to go by how many will buy the "new" camera?

They should let us have the raws.

I agree they look good, but at 1600px width they should.
Don't get me wrong, but even a not sharp picture can look sharp at 1600 px.

I felt that posting full res images here would be a rather pointless strain on the servers.

Also, how many people will be showing the pics from the 5D III in excess of 1600px?
You could print the Canon examples in a magazine too without any issue.

Wait for some real world results, yeah. And it is shocking that the examples aren't better.

 

[altenae]

Also, how many people will be showing the pics from the 5D III in excess of 1600px?
You could print the Canon examples in a magazine too without any issue.

Correct, but if that is all you do with the pictures you don't need a 5D Mark III right ?

 

[RuneL]

Also, how many people will be showing the pics from the 5D III in excess of 1600px?
You could print the Canon examples in a magazine too without any issue.

Correct, but if that is all you do with the pictures you don't need a 5D Mark III right ?

Lol, tell that to the people who are going to be buying it. http://www.flickr.com/cameras/canon/eos_5d_mark_ii/ It is the new Rebel.

 

[Daniel Flather]

I hate to admit but the Nikon sample images look wayyy better.
I am telling myself that Nikon used better photographer... :-[

Link(s)?

 

[RuneL]

I hate to admit but the Nikon sample images look wayyy better.
I am telling myself that Nikon used better photographer... :-[

Link(s)?

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/sample01.htm
Be aware of focal lengths though, before comparing sharpness on the people pics.

 

[ashe]

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2012/03/02/should-i-upgrade-to-the-5d-mk-iii-from-the-5d-mk-ii/#comment-456497550

ChrisGampat wrote,

It's fine.

I know that the D800 has the same pixel density as the D7000 in terms of physics, which makes me believe that it may have slightly better high iso capabilities. With that said, the 5D Mk III had better pull some magic because the D7000 sensor is said to be better than the Mk II.

Pound for pound though, these two cameras are very much the same with some single outlying features. Overall, Canon's lenses are ones that I'm happier with.

Lastly, I own cameras and lenses in both systems. But at the end of the day, my Canon investment has saved me more money.

-Chris Gampat
Editor in Chief
The Phoblographer

 

[jaduffy007]

I agree. Samples so far are very disappointing imo. Your suggestion about the use of a very strong AA filter for video aliasing & moire reduction is looking likely...and that would be very, very bad news.

Just seeing the sample images (and I'm not giving conclusion) I admit.

All the sample I've seen from the 5D3 looks way too soft. It can be 2 things : First is post prod NR. Second is 5D3 NR. If It's the 5D3 NR they use it wayyyy too much.
Ok nice, you see no noise at 1600 ISO or even 6400 but it ruin the quality.

Aside from the possible bad judgment and/or low talent of the people Canon chose to shoot their samples, I've come to almost the same conclusion as you have, but I'm just not quite as sure as you are, and I would like to see images from raw, shot by a good photographer and processed in DPP by a good craftsman before I could be. If, under those conditions, the results from raws look great, then I'd have to say that Canon has rolled up a big fat fail with its 5DIII in-camera Jpg processing.

But, there is another possiblity that is something I have deduced from the available specs and samples, plus statements by those associated by Canon with the 5DIII release. It's possible that Canon, in order to satisfy the potential video users of this camera who had previously complained about the bad aliasing and moire on 5DIII video, has used a much stronger AA filter on this camera to help cure it, and that the softness you see in the released Jpegs is mostly from this. There are two other points that can support this. One is that Canon is offering the unprecedented function of supposedly deconstructing the effect of the AA filter in the latest version of its raw software converter, DPP, to be released with the camera. Why do this now, unless it is especially relevant to the 5DIII? Although this might be their software answer to the Nikon D800 without AA filter, I doubt Canon could have developed this software function in the short time after which they likely learned of Nikon's plans. Also, in looking at many of the Canon 5DII samples, I noted an unusually low level of moire in many of the samples, several of which I know would certainly have displayed some level of moire if shot with my 1DsIII. I hope I am wrong about this, but I am afraid that I may well be correct in my deduction.

Second, as I look to the image, it look photoshoped! In some of them I can see clearly bad photoshop!
I think that we really have to wait unofficial pictures.

Most likely what you are seeing, and I too, at first, suspected as possibly some sort of horrible Photoshop work, is rather the awful effects of using the new in-camera HDR function, which, at different settings results in effects that range from bad to absolutely pathetic. This function needs either to be vastly improved or deleted from the firmware ASAP.

Regards,
David