Nikon user Swapping to Canon with a 5D3

[bdunbar79]

If you want to argue Nikon vs. Canon, there is no camera in the world that can even come close in matching the 1DX for sports. I didn't realize this until recently, but it's ridiculous.

 

[moreorless]

If you want to argue Nikon vs. Canon, there is no camera in the world that can even come close in matching the 1DX for sports. I didn't realize this until recently, but it's ridiculous.

I actually think this explains Canon's recent focus, FF DSLR's are right at the top of the food chain when it comes to "action" photography where as there operating below MF DSLR's when it comes to studio/landscape work.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

Too many people get tunnel vision with DR and shoot down the 5D3 without having used both.

Actually my guess is that the most vocal people are those that haven't used either.

 

[heptagon]

With a 21/22 megapixel camera you can make prints in the range DIN A2 and you can crop in. The pixels on the D800E sensor are very small. If you have small pixel, then you have normally more noise, less light sensivity and a poorer image quality. Same you get if you put 24 megapixels on an APS-C sensor.

But the pixels of the D800 are better than the Canon pixels. Especially at low ISO they have lower noise.

 

[bigmag13]

With a 21/22 megapixel camera you can make prints in the range DIN A2 and you can crop in. The pixels on the D800E sensor are very small. If you have small pixel, then you have normally more noise, less light sensivity and a poorer image quality. Same you get if you put 24 megapixels on an APS-C sensor.

But the pixels of the D800 are better than the Canon pixels. Especially at low ISO they have lower noise.

wow, it goes RIGHT to his argument of LESS light sensitivity... smaller pixel fit more onto any given grid, so for the sake of this silly 5D3 vs. D800 thing YES, more pixels = more res. but the NEW 22.1mp 5D3 sensor handles light BETTER, period!low iso is a stiffles me in a lot of situations today. I dont always have a tripod for 800-3200 iso shots. All given I'd take the 3 compared to the 800 for my style of shooting anyway.

landscapes, studio, street and weddings have been shot LONG BEFORE THIS SILLY CONTEST!

as far as which is better- what are your end results with the kit you have???

 

[bdunbar79]

Exaclty. With the combination of lenses and my 5D Mark III, I wouldn't even consider buying a D800. I don't care about all that technical crap, I'm getting much better results than I thought I would when I bought the camera.

 

[RichM]

Welcome to Canon. I've gone from FTb->F1->EOS 620->EOS 3->EOS 20D->EOS 40D->EOS 7d & 5DII. Hard to believe it's been more than 30 yrs.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Exaclty. With the combination of lenses and my 5D Mark III, I wouldn't even consider buying a D800. I don't care about all that technical crap, I'm getting much better results than I thought I would when I bought the camera.

Same here

 

[pmac]

Hi
Can I ask which nikon camera you were using before the switch..Im currently a nikon user with a d700 and pro glass,but i cant see
the d800 as a good upgrade for myself, so have been looking at switching to canon for the 5dmk3.
Maby im doing something wrong but find myself shooting at 6400+ alot and the d700 struggles from there on, and the d800 doesnt seem much
of an improvement iso wise.

Ive never used a canon before so im not sure how i will get along with the controls..was it easy enough to pick up.
I also hear the canon 24-70 is very hit and miss with regards to getting a sharp copy(the mk2 is stupidly expensive) is this true..my nikon
is very sharp even wide open.

 

[elbeasto]

I also recently switched from Nikon to Canon, and I am very happy the change. In the past I've owned the Nikon D90, D700, and D800....in my opinion the D800 is best for a studio environment with a tripod. The 5D MarkIII is a better all around camera and more fun to shoot with...my only complaint is I wish it had better dynamic range.

Also, Canon appears to offer more frequent, and better, discounts/rebates than Nikon offers.

Thanks Gino, it sounds like you've been shooting for a lot longer than myself & your post confirms my feelings about the new Nikon body.
That said, there is the new D600 but again, Canon will have a similar offering before too long in the 6D.
On top of all that, my decision is based more on lens choice and pricing but still...

It wasn't an easy decision, I love my D700 and 50 1.8G but as I'm only invested in one, inexpensive prime, I feels as though I'm still free to pick a system.

If truth be told, I'd prefer the M9 over Nikon or Canon but their system is very expensive & I have a feeling the M9 will be replaced soon(ish).

Ta again for all the feedback.

 

[ishdakuteb]

I'm a Canon owner, fan , and prospective buyer of a 5DIIi, but this review, from a reputable source I have been following for years, gives me pause. Right now the images form the Nikon are just better. Tell me where I am wrong? http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html

i thought to be fair in comparison, 163% crop has to be applied on nikon d800 while cropping 100% on 5d mark III image. please let me know as if i am wrong... however, i do not think that i need to be carefully frame my subject while shooting with nikon d800, just snap and then crop right

 

[Northstar]

Hi
Can I ask which nikon camera you were using before the switch..Im currently a nikon user with a d700 and pro glass,but i cant see
the d800 as a good upgrade for myself, so have been looking at switching to canon for the 5dmk3.
Maby im doing something wrong but find myself shooting at 6400+ alot and the d700 struggles from there on, and the d800 doesnt seem much
of an improvement iso wise.

Ive never used a canon before so im not sure how i will get along with the controls..was it easy enough to pick up.
I also hear the canon 24-70 is very hit and miss with regards to getting a sharp copy(the mk2 is stupidly expensive) is this true..my nikon
is very sharp even wide open.

the nikon 24-70 is a better lens than canon's 24-70.....I imagine that canon's new 24-70 is probably better than the nikon but your right, it's expensive.

 

[EvilTed]

I made the same move, but from a D7000 DX rather than a D700 FX.

I bought a 5D MK3 and currently have a bunch of L glass and a couple of cheaper lenses:
16-35 F/2.8 II L, 70-200 F/2.8 II L, 50mm F/1.2 L, 40mm F/2.8 pancake, 50mm F/1.8 and I have just returned a 24mm F/1.4L II and a 35mm F/1.4L because I'll pickup a new 24-70 II in Japan next week.

I bought a Fuji X-Pro 1 for my wife in May and I've been using it every since

1) The Fuji is more Leica-esque. It's light, small unobtrusive and can give IQ to rival an M9.
2) There's nothing "better" about the Canon IQ, even though the system is FF and significantly more expensive.

This site has lots of reviews of the Fuji system from real world users:

http://www.scoop.it/t/fuji-x-pro1

I would wait until the new Fuji firmware 2.0 is released on September 18th and read the reviews.
They have apparently fixed the sluggish auto focus problems.

You can start with a X-Pro 1 or the new XE-1 add the M mount adapter for $200 and start building up a system with Leica glass so that one day you can make the jump if that's where you want to end up.

I'm going to run both the Canon and the Fuji because they are different tools for different jobs.
I do a lot of street photography with the 18mm (27mm equivalent) and for this purpose, the Fuji is a better tool than the Canon.
The 40mm pancake lens is a particular favorite of mine on the 5D MK3...

HTH

ET

 

[nightbreath]

1) The Fuji is more Leica-esque. It's light, small unobtrusive and can give IQ to rival an M9.
2) There's nothing "better" about the Canon IQ, even though the system is FF and significantly more expensive.

Can we see your photos? For me the difference between camera bodies is so huge, that I can easily throw away photos from one camera when using different bodies during a shoot ???