Up the game

[poias]

It is interesting that 5D3's comparison base is 5D2. D800 is being compared to Leica S2 and PhaseOne IQ180.

"5D3 is far better than 5D2, especially in handling, JPGs, and AF."

versus

"D800 comes close to MF like S2 and IQ180 in other aspects, but clearly fails in midtones."

 

[Ricku]

It is not very surprising i.m.o. The 5D3's sensor technology seems to be basically the same as with the first 5D. It improved very marginally every generation after that.

While Nikon brings out innovative and impressive features together with their (Sony's) awesome Exmor sensor, Canon looks like they are very much focused on video over stills.

 

[altenae]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

 

[Ricku]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

 

[poias]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

That is the point of my threat. Clearly people do not care about the sensor, hence 5D3 being such a success so far.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

Yeah, we got it. Canon sucks, Nikon is god.

</thread>

 

[altenae]

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

Yes it's important, but really blown out of porportion.
I am 100% sure you don't own the 5D Mark III.

After reading all of your posts I already know enough

 

[Rob Wiebe]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

Hmmm. Guess you should try one. Coming from the 7D and 5D2, my 5D3 I wouldn't trade for either. Sensor or not, the focusing system wins it for me and I guess the DiG!C 5+ Image Processor is what makes it worthwhile, among a few other items such as feel, ergonomics, programmability ... yes, it works well for me. Now if the damn 1D-X would just arrive! ;-)

 

[RunAndGun]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I wouldn't lump the entire "5D2 crowd" together. I disagree that it's underwhelming and disappointing. I have two MKII's and as a camera the MKIII is a huge upgrade. This isn't film, a DSLR is a system and should be looked at in that way. A camera(now) is more than JUST it's sensor. I'm not saying a bad sensor won't ruin an otherwise good camera, because it can, BUT the MKIII does not have a bad sensor. Like a lot of people, I never had a problem with the sensor in the MKII, I just wanted it in a better "camera".

 

[pdirestajr]

I think the 5D3 is a HUGE upgrade from the 5D2 in every area. To me that is the definition of Canon "upping their game".

I recently picked up a 5D2 because I needed a second camera, and the price was right- It captures beautiful images. But besides that, my 7D destroys it in terms of AF, ergonomics and useful features. I took my new 5D2 to the park today to see if it could keep up with my 2yr old daughter... Not a chance.

I've read all about the 5D2's limitations for years but bought it regardless because I plan to use it with my manual focus lenses and studio work. I got it for the sensor basically.

My point is the 5D3 has turned the 5D line into a real professional camera that can handle a lot more types of photography. The 5D2 wasn't/ isn't even close. That is progress.

Since so many people need to compare it to the D800, besides their sensor, what improvements were made?

 

[briansquibb]

It is interesting that 5D3's comparison base is 5D2. D800 is being compared to Leica S2 and PhaseOne IQ180.

"5D3 is far better than 5D2, especially in handling, JPGs, and AF."

versus

"D800 comes close to MF like S2 and IQ180 in other aspects, but clearly fails in midtones."

I did wonder why it isn't compared with the 1DS3 as it is now being stated as a 'pro' camera

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

Please don't speak for the rest of us. I happen to think its an excellent upgrade from my 5d2. It doesn't depend what camera you're coming from, but your needs.

 

[1982chris911]

Having a 5d MK II and MK III all I can say is that it is a hugh upgrade in every aspect ...

 

[briansquibb]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

Please don't speak for the rest of us. I happen to think its an excellent upgrade from my 5d2. It doesn't depend what camera you're coming from, but your needs.

I feel the same way - the 5D2 was such a good camera for a large number of people that chose it for its strengths. Those strengths, mp, low light and video, have not been massively improved.

I can see this is something you feel strongly about so there's no point continuing the discussion.

 

[jrista]

Still talking about the sensor......

There is much improved in the 5D Mark III to give us the shot we want...
And that's what counts.

Ah yes, the sensor.. Kind of important, don't you think?

While the 5D3 might be a great upgrade for people coming from the 7D, XXD, or the rebel line, it is a very underwhelming and disappointing upgrade for the 5D2 crowd.

Not everyone wants to pay 3500 bucks for fixed AF, ratebutton and more FPS.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I wouldn't lump the entire "5D2 crowd" together. I disagree that it's underwhelming and disappointing. I have two MKII's and as a camera the MKIII is a huge upgrade. This isn't film, a DSLR is a system and should be looked at in that way. A camera(now) is more than JUST it's sensor. I'm not saying a bad sensor won't ruin an otherwise good camera, because it can, BUT the MKIII does not have a bad sensor. Like a lot of people, I never had a problem with the sensor in the MKII, I just wanted it in a better "camera".

I totally agree here. I think the 5D III is actually a pretty stupendous upgrade overall for the "5D II crowd" at large. There are so many things that have improved.

I think the 5D III comes off as a disappointment to those who were really hoping that Canon would finally improve their DR and offer another boost to MP. I'm not saying 22.3mp is bad, most certainly not, but there are some large groups of photographers who do/did use the 5D II for landscapes and studio work, and something along the lines of 28-32mp with better DR would have serviced their needs much better. As it stands, at the moment at least, Canon users in those groups have just been left in the lurch..so to say. I guess it should also be noted that such a camera could still be released by Canon...there is still plenty of 2012 left, and the rumors about a 40mp+ megapixel monster from Canon are still flying.

I am not sure I'm particularly confident Canon can really produce the same kind of technological excellence as the SoNikon alliance is currently producing, though. Canon has demonstrated a lack of interest in really competing on the technological front for quite a number of years, and I am not really sure they have any interest in producing things like sensors with better DR or AF systems that support f/8 AF points. Those facts are very sad and somewhat disturbing for Canon users who need those features. Switching brands is not an easy, fun, or in most cases worthwhile thing to do, but Canon will start leaving many groups of their users with little other choice to get what they need in the long run if they don't really start making some improvements, and stop producing technologically disappointing "toddler steps" forward with their IC design. Their cameras are certainly capable...every DSLR on the market today is unbelievably capable...but stagnation is never a position you want to be in, and skilled photographers can always make use of improved technology.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have a D800 on order, but after following the Nikon forums and editing some of the raw images on my I7 equiped PC with plenty of memory and fast SSD, I'm beginning to wonder.

Besides cameras that don't focus, cameras that lockup (workaround reportedly doesn't work), batteries that overheat or explode, editing is extremely slow on the 50+ mp raw images I downloaded, no way could I edit 1500 or 3000 images in a reasonable time, I have to wait 30 sec or more for a simple edit like NR to update and let me proceed. I did workout a method that works, downsize the images to the same size as my 5D MK III, but then, they are not much better, and even with downsizing, high ISO 12800 images are noticibly noisier than my 5D MK III.

As long as buyers are paying a premium for them, I'll probably just resell mine when it arrives and get a 1D X.

 

[UrbanVoyeur]

The 5DMkIII is disappointing precisely because it is a very good body, with an excellent feature set, joined to a less than impressive sensor that is well behind the competition.

It was easier with film - you picked a body on one set of criteria and the film on another, selecting the best tool in each category. Taking advantage of film improvements was painless.

Now we have to trust that our system manufacturer will always give us the best digital "film" (sensor) in each body revision. When they don't, we are faced with the unpalatable choice of taking a loss on thousands of dollars in glass, or hoping they get their sensor act together in next revision, before they (and we) fall too far behind.

 

[V8Beast]

The 5DMkIII is disappointing precisely because it is a very good body, with an excellent feature set, joined to a less than impressive sensor that is well behind the competition.

It depends what you need. The 5DII was a great sensor encased in a POS body. The 5DIII is a great sensor encased in a great body. Sure it lags behind the D800 in DR, but it's still a very capable piece of hardware.

If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.

For those who value DR above all else, Nikon offers some great options. Everyone's busy humping the D800's 14.4 stops of DR, but the D7000 gets you 13.9 stops for $1,200, and the D5100 gets you 13.6 stops for $700. It seems there are some affordable ways to get all that delicious Nikon DR, so I don't see why the DR lovers are so upset? As a Canon shooter, if DR was the most important element of performance for my shooting needs, I'd be thrilled that Nikon had such affordable options, and pick up some Nikon gear. That's the beauty of competition.

For the millions of landscape photographers that have come out of nowhere lately, you can pick up a D5100 and a 14-24 for less than the price of a D800, and have almost as much DR. That seems like a much more practical way to get your DR fix than complaining about how much Canon sensors suck.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It is not very surprising i.m.o. The 5D3's sensor technology seems to be basically the same as with the first 5D. It improved very marginally every generation after that.

While Nikon brings out innovative and impressive features together with their (Sony's) awesome Exmor sensor, Canon looks like they are very much focused on video over stills.

And on video they are mostly focused on what can we leave out (user chose for bitrates, clean hdmi, focus peaking, zebra strips, zoom modes, at least it seems ML can add that back other than the zoom modes) to protect C-line and the video division's pride now. They take internal protectionism way too far.

I mean the 5D3 does fix a ton of stuff that was weak on the 5D2 though.

 

[Aglet]

It depends what you need. The 5DII was a great sensor encased in a POS body. The 5DIII is a great sensor encased in a great body. Sure it lags behind the D800 in DR, but it's still a very capable piece of hardware.

If Canon put a high DR sensor packaged with a POS AF system, lethargic burst rate, and poor weather sealing in the 5DIII, I'd be shooting Nikon right now. It just so happens that Canon created an extremely well balanced machine in the 5DIII, so I cancelled my D800 order.

For those who value DR above all else, Nikon offers some great options. Everyone's busy humping the D800's 14.4 stops of DR, but the D7000 gets you 13.9 stops for $1,200, and the D5100 gets you 13.6 stops for $700. It seems there are some affordable ways to get all that delicious Nikon DR, so I don't see why the DR lovers are so upset? As a Canon shooter, if DR was the most important element of performance for my shooting needs, I'd be thrilled that Nikon had such affordable options, and pick up some Nikon gear. That's the beauty of competition.

For the millions of landscape photographers that have come out of nowhere lately, you can pick up a D5100 and a 14-24 for less than the price of a D800, and have almost as much DR. That seems like a much more practical way to get your DR fix than complaining about how much Canon sensors suck.

well stated and thanks for bringing that up.

I don't know why the Canon vs Nikon argument often goes to the "switch brands" end even for those who appreciate the merits of more DR.
If Canon shooters need a body with more DR and can afford a D800 and some glass to go with it, fabulous. Sometimes you need that extra performance in a FF body. But as you stated, there are low cost alternatives with 2 crop Nikons and the Pentax K5 too.

I've got a pile of Canon gear and it serves the majority of my purposes just fine, even tho I like to b!tch about the shadow noise and lack of DR when I need to push them. So I now have a little D5100 Nikon and picked up some cheap but capable 2nd-hand glass for it to do the high DR shots in most of the kinds of scenes where I'll need it. I'd sure love if the 7D had the 5100's IQ but until Canon can provide such a product I'll need a mix of brands in my bag. I'm still looking forward to getting a D800, might even switch my order to the D800e. Until then I use a 5D2, 7D and even a 40D to their limits. After all the testing I did I now know where to expect disappointment instead of it sometimes being an unpleasant surprise and work around it as much as possible of just accept the limitations.

This isn't a decision with the gravity of choosing which arm to cut off, merely knowing that if you need more DR you CAN get it with a complete kit that costs less than the cheapest Canon L lens. Hard not to justify if you can benefit from it. Not every shot needs to be done on a FF body.