August 26
It appears the Kamerabild.se article may have been from 2008. This is why you should clearly date stuff.
D3X vs 1Ds Mark III
A review site I just bumped into put the 2 $$$ beasts up against each other.
http://www.h2hreviews.com/article/Head-2-Head-Review-Nikon-D3x-vs-Canon-EOS-1Ds-Mark-III.html
A Direct Quote
“With all that out of the way, here's our comparison: the Canon 1Ds Mark III beat the Nikon D3X in most measures of image quality – detail, color accuracy, noise and dynamic range. Usually not by much, but with convincing consistency. The Nikon, however, has much better autofocus and mechanics. The D3x’s ability to focus via the Live View data stream is a significant distinction, depending on how problematic heat buildup is. The comparison of Nikon and Canon user interfaces is subjective in the end. We like Nikon's variations in controls.”
The review is from June and I just read it today.
cr
66 Comments
I think ergonomics is mostly a non-issue and always has been. Obviously, if you’re used to a camera working a certain way, a different brand of camera will feel like a foreign object. So, long-time Nikon users will generally prefer Nikon ergonomics, and long-time Canon users will generally prefer Canon ergonomics. However, from what I’ve read, people who have no history with either Canon or Nikon (D)SLRs generally prefer Canon ergonomics.
That “review” is pretty hilarious. They state that the 1DsIII is sharper and has more detail than the D3x, despite the findings of virtually every other testing body in the world. That their findings run counter to the far better documented conclusion of DP Review is one thing, but the findings seem to run counter even to the image H2H itself provides as an example of detail. Go look. To my eye, the D3x is sharper in their own comparison.
However, the jig is really up when they do the high ISO comparison, but they only go up to ISO 1600. Yeah guys, that’s where it stops on the D3X.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m a Nikon shooter, but not a slavish fan. I’m seriously considering getting the 5DII just to mount the new tilt shift lenses, which have no real equal on the Nikon side. And I would never pay money for the D3X, a camera that will be crammed into a D300 body at half the price sometime in the next year.
But to compare the D3X to the 1DsMark3 (a camera that is years old) and then bend over backwards to declare the canon the winner, again counter to their own posted examples, is just bizzare.
I have no doubt that the next Canon hi-res body will yield image quality superior to the D3x. Just as I have no doubt that the last one is inferior. But don’t take my word for it. Go look at the H2H images. Better yet, look at DP review.
Oh, and as a parting shot (slow work day).
Direct print buttons rulez.
APS-H is worthless.
And if the G11 is instant on and no shutter lag, then it will be well worth the 5mp downgrade, and I will buy it.
I guess button placements are good in Nikon system
Well, I doubt it. With the way things work in canon’s side, they would want to have clear market segmentation. They may bring some updates to XL line but still they will make video an option in DSLRs rather than a movie-making machine. Canon, sony, panasonic and jvc very nicely play the market such that products are in the same category with some minor differences. They are very careful not to give too much to the market.
If RED can successfully produce a movie making camera for 17k, all the biggies could’ve definitely done it, with R&D and budget available to them. but they chose not to, coz they knew the movie market can afford to pay 250k for a movie camera.