awinphoto said:
If i'm not mistaken, didn't bloom say the d800 COULDN'T be sharpened without introducing bad artifacts but the 5d3 COULD be sharpened to correct it? It may have been another video but i got from blooms video was the 5d3 had to be sharpened in post and the D800 needed a 3rd party filter and assuming you corrected for both, they both are great cameras, noise issues aside for the d800.
I think you're remembering the CameraStore video (the 3rd in their series of 3). They did specifically say that the D800 can't be sharpened without really bringing out the artifacts. And their example shot certainly backed that up.
That said, they didn't have a pre-production Mosaic filter like Bloom did. They also weren't recording to an external, higher bitrate recorder - which was what was done in the example psolberg was referring to. They just tried sharpening the 24mb/s internally recorded D800 footage
I think it's funny how adamantly people are STILL arguing over who's dad can beat up the other guy's dad. As Bloom said, these are both GREAT cameras. Both require a fix - the D800 requires the filter if you don't want moire/aliasing - the MK3 requires sharpening in post to bring out the details. Noise in low light/high ISO on the D800 isn't fixable, but if you usually shoot in controlled conditions, and don't ever need to shoot above 3200, no worries, the D800 will be great.
The one thing Bloom didn't talk about, which I found very surprising in the CameraStore video, was the weird jumpy laggy picture when you magnify the D800 live view to check focus. In practical use, this would probably drive me more crazy than all the other gripes combined, because I use that constantly in a shoot. Then again... I'm sure you could get used to it.
I think Philip is right - they're both great cameras. If a close friend of mine buys a D800, and another buys a 5D3, I'll tell them both the exact same thing... "CONGRATS!!! Now shut up and go shoot something"