- Status
solarpos said:
The measure is when you join and post something useful and meaningful, not just a snarky comment. Its not the best start. Even a question asked 500 times before is more useful.
Upvote
0
D
D.Sim
Guest
If you asked me its coz none of their general populace bothered to get one. The pros who DID want it, won't be whining about it, because its that specialised a camera. The 5D3, however, is easily available to the general populace, where most of the whinging will occur.smirkypants said:
Upvote
0
kubelik said:
If there's truth to those figures, it's really not surprising. While the 5DIII represents a logical evolution of the 5DIII, the D800 is a complete departure in philosophy from the D700. The 5DIII is essentially a 5DII that's just better all around: nicer AF, faster FPS, superior build quality, dual slots, etc. I can understand why current 5DII owners might not think the added feature set is worth upgrading to the 5DIII, but if you like the 5DII, chances are you'd enjoy shooting with the 5DIII.
As for the D800, it's a high-res, slow speed body that's replacing a low-res, high-speed body. I'm sure many D700 users were hoping the D800 would be a baby D4, but instead they got a body with triple the resolution and half the burst rate. It doesn't change the fact that Nikon has built a very impressive machine, but the way I see things, Nikon shooters have more of a reason to be disappointed with the D800 than Canon shooters do with the 5DIII. The obvious appeal of the D700 was its balance of just enough resolution and a lot of speed, and now it's been replaced with a body that has a sh!t ton of resolution, and a big reduction in speed.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Otter said:We need to open a "Canon Whiners" section on CR so peopel will stop spamming the forum with the same boring threads. Up until the 5d Mark III came along, you never really saw people complain too much other then the random forum banter, but since the release or close to the release, all I have seen is "It costs too much", "There aren't enough megapixels", "It's broken because of a light leak" and on and on...
It's ridiculous. Enough already. I understand it's a forum and people have the right to express their displeasure or beef with a product. But writing another "this isn't an acceptle solution to the light leak" or some of the other issues. IT is an electronic device. It will have issues, in some cases. Other then the odd case, I have not seen anyone show any evidence of a photograph ruined by a light leak. If it is runing your photos, then return it, just like you would any piece of electronics.
It even relfects negatively on the community. "Canon users are a bunch of whining babies" is what a friend of mine had to say when looking through the CR forum the other day. Yes, he was a Nikon userBUT, I really had no defence, as he was correct about a lot of people on this forum. Posting the same complaints again and again. I really get the feeling that a lot of people were holding out for the MKIII because it would make them a better photographer just by pressing the button. People are focusing more on the shortcomings or what it can't do, then going out and taking great photos. If you owned a MKII, it is a better camera. If you could take great pics with your 50D, it will take better pictures although there may be a learning curve.
I understand this is sort of hypocritical complaining about the complainers but I am hoping that maybe some people will realise how foolish and useless this is. If you really have a beef with it, or you think it's terrible, do what one user was smart enough to do and write to Canon. As posting it in a forum, will get you nowhere... I'm sure a lot of you think this is a ridiculous post. I'm also pretty sure, you are the ones continulously posting or commenying on the same posts bashing Canon. Get out there and use your camera and post some great pics...
You are spot on. People tend to forget their is more to photos than equipment. Heres an example of my totally disgusting canon D30 still producing the photographic goods despite it being ancient. Infact, I like shooting with it because it forces me to think harder on my compositions.
Attachments
Upvote
0
solarpos said:
Not intending to refer to you, just the subject of a 1st time poster posting comments that are of little value to readers.
Upvote
0
ceterum censeo: the 5D III is overpriced. Nikon D800 is both a much better camera and a much better value.
ah yes, this is just whining, only pictures are important. So look here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/
once you are through the article, you'll start whining too.
ah yes, this is just whining, only pictures are important. So look here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/
once you are through the article, you'll start whining too.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
smirkypants said:
Light is king, agreed but equipment will always have limitations. It wasn't too long ago that sports and wars were covered by manual focus only cameras and fast primes. Those photographers worked around those limitations to produce the goods. (agreed with a less keeper rate but got those amazing shots anyway!)
There will always be the person who searches the limitations of a camera and stop there when they find them. Instead of working a round them to force your vision into a tiny litte camera box no matter how good or Terrible that little box is.
That's the heart of photography, working around the limitations of your gear but don't let it restrict your imagination.
Upvote
0
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517
So much to the myth, that Nikon users are happier with their gear.
And the grass is always greener on the other side.
Fact is, that Nikon has the better Camera, on paper that is at least. 36MP for less money, and a much higher rating at DXO Mark.
The actuall question is, will you take better pictures with the D800 than you do with the 5DIII. Probably not; and also not the other way round. There are differences between the two cameras, some of them are easely measurable, others not.
To me this is like boys comparing cars. The BMW M3 has so much HP and this 0-60 time, but the Audi RS4 is stronger and even faster, and it has 4-wheel drive. All true, but put them on a race track, and there you will see the real difference in the performance of the cars.
And the biggest difference will be, when you switch the driver, because both of them are amazing cars, who offer more than you actually need in most situations. The same goes for the D800 and the 5DIII.
What influences the quality of your pictures the most, are your skills, and I think there are not so many people who are so skilled, that they can blame their camera for bad shots. We can reproduce known issues, and we can see noise at high ISO, but what we have to learn are the limitations of our tools, which defines the way we are using it.
To go back to the car comparison, we will never be able to go over a certain speed in a certain curve, it's simple physics, you will only be able to reach the maximum speed given the car and the circumstances. If you are too fast and fly of, than it was your mistake, and not the one of the car.
So how big is the difference between the D800 and the 5DIII, and how bad is the 5DIII? I would say both cameras represent the crown of digital FF photography at the moment; what you think is better mainly depends on what is more important to you, or what like better. It is like with the M3 and the RS4, none of them is realy better than the other, they are just a little different.
So much to the myth, that Nikon users are happier with their gear.
And the grass is always greener on the other side.
Fact is, that Nikon has the better Camera, on paper that is at least. 36MP for less money, and a much higher rating at DXO Mark.
The actuall question is, will you take better pictures with the D800 than you do with the 5DIII. Probably not; and also not the other way round. There are differences between the two cameras, some of them are easely measurable, others not.
To me this is like boys comparing cars. The BMW M3 has so much HP and this 0-60 time, but the Audi RS4 is stronger and even faster, and it has 4-wheel drive. All true, but put them on a race track, and there you will see the real difference in the performance of the cars.
And the biggest difference will be, when you switch the driver, because both of them are amazing cars, who offer more than you actually need in most situations. The same goes for the D800 and the 5DIII.
What influences the quality of your pictures the most, are your skills, and I think there are not so many people who are so skilled, that they can blame their camera for bad shots. We can reproduce known issues, and we can see noise at high ISO, but what we have to learn are the limitations of our tools, which defines the way we are using it.
To go back to the car comparison, we will never be able to go over a certain speed in a certain curve, it's simple physics, you will only be able to reach the maximum speed given the car and the circumstances. If you are too fast and fly of, than it was your mistake, and not the one of the car.
So how big is the difference between the D800 and the 5DIII, and how bad is the 5DIII? I would say both cameras represent the crown of digital FF photography at the moment; what you think is better mainly depends on what is more important to you, or what like better. It is like with the M3 and the RS4, none of them is realy better than the other, they are just a little different.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:once you are through the article, you'll start whining too.
All I see is a bunch of beautiful photos from both cameras and a couple of ugly ones from both.
Upvote
0
DavidRiesenberg said:AvTvM said:once you are through the article, you'll start whining too.
All I see is a bunch of beautiful photos from both cameras and a couple of ugly ones from both.
well, you may want to look again at the pictures in section 2 where Fred Miranda examines and compares dynamic range for the 2 cams ... and see how ***fully justified*** all the "whining" is!
Nikon has the better camera and it is is significantly less expensive. If Canon wants me to stop complain, they got 2 possibilities:
* bring a camera as good or better than D800 for not the same money or less
* charge significantly less for the 5D III than what a D800 costs ... as far as I am concerned: lets just say € 2.000 and I am game.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
You mean the part where he pushes the shadows 4-5 stops? Indeed you are right. The performance of the D800 would really have helped in the recent trend of lens cap photographing.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
