Nikon D800 vs Canon 5d Mark III
- Thread starter jdeg
- Start date
Photowyzard
Senior Member
8 for me. Couldn't make out more.
With non-digital SLRs, I never trusted anything coming from Japan 
and now it seems like Nikon and Canon invented photography - there are a lot of other companies that make really interesting cameras, too.
And that new organic sensor developed by Fuji and Panasonic might revolutionize everything (29.2 stop dynamic range).
That said I had a lot of cameras from different brands over the time, and I always purchased them based on whether they were said to produce good image quality. I also never purchased a lot of glass, so I never got really tied to one brand.
I'm not a pro photographer, I don't shoot astro, fps and 8 minute exposure times are irrelevant for me. I had a Canon DSLR before getting the Nikons but was unhappy with some aspects, namely dynamic range and colours in difficult light conditions.
I searched for a solution and a knowledgeable friend pointed me to Nikons new sensors, on the D600 and the D800. I bought the D600 first, had the sensor dirt problem, and bought a D800 consequently (I know, others might have reverted to Canon, or another brand, I didn't).
I'm happy with the D800 because it seems to be the right camera for me. The dynamic range is excellent (as of today, in a few years it may be obsolete). I can shoot exactly the type of pictures I want to shoot, without worrying all the time about whether that bright stretch of sand should be in there or not because if it's in the sensor's dynamic range would be exceeded. Rather, I compose the image I want, and shoot, and the result is technically good (whether the image is good is another question, but that is the responsibility of the photographer, not of the camera).
Furthermore, all the controls I use for my type of shooting are readily available. There's a button or a switch for everything I really need to have readily available, so operation-wise the camera does what I want. Plus, personally I find the use of the camera both in controls and menus intuitive - with the Canon I struggled a bit, with the Nikons I find everything immediately, don't know why.
Then again I have a friend who shoots astro - Canon seems to be much better in that market, and if I look at his pictures, they're just as good as mine. OTOH, none of his images requires a lot of DR - it's just the kind of images he wants to shoot.
I don't really think that 4 or 6 fps make a big difference, but for those who need the additional 2 fps, they probably make a difference. For them, the 5D-III is the better choice.
I like how Nikon tries to capture natural colours. They never seem to try to exaggerate, even though their colours sometimes look a bit plain. Canon colours are sometimes more vivid out of the camera, IMHO. I personally prefer to add that in Lightroom, if I want to add it. But I applaud Nikon for resisting the temptation to make their pictures look more flashy, and give me the option to chose, instead.
As for the glass, actually I also perceive the Canon glass as being a tad better, or at least more interesting options being available. But all I need is an excellent standard zoom, and two or three primes like 35-50-85 for those occasions when utmost quality is desired.
For those who need special lenses, they have to decide for themselves where they find the better options.
So basically, as I see it, it's not Nikon versus Canon, as there are a lot of other interesting options if you want to take great pictures (not to forget the excellent m43 market with the OMD and other great cameras which may fulfill the needs of many good photographers better than bulky DSLRs do). And, which brand or camera is 'better' is based on your needs. You cannot say that one brand is better than the other, you can only say it is better than another for a specific purpose.
I would easily move away from Nikon if they would fall behind in image quality. But right now, I really like those current Nikons, and feel that they are the best choice for me. BTW, the D800 does have an HDR feature (I saw this question at the start of this thread).
and now it seems like Nikon and Canon invented photography - there are a lot of other companies that make really interesting cameras, too.And that new organic sensor developed by Fuji and Panasonic might revolutionize everything (29.2 stop dynamic range).
That said
I had a lot of cameras from different brands over the time, and I always purchased them based on whether they were said to produce good image quality. I also never purchased a lot of glass, so I never got really tied to one brand.I'm not a pro photographer, I don't shoot astro, fps and 8 minute exposure times are irrelevant for me. I had a Canon DSLR before getting the Nikons but was unhappy with some aspects, namely dynamic range and colours in difficult light conditions.
I searched for a solution and a knowledgeable friend pointed me to Nikons new sensors, on the D600 and the D800. I bought the D600 first, had the sensor dirt problem, and bought a D800 consequently (I know, others might have reverted to Canon, or another brand, I didn't).
I'm happy with the D800 because it seems to be the right camera for me. The dynamic range is excellent (as of today, in a few years it may be obsolete). I can shoot exactly the type of pictures I want to shoot, without worrying all the time about whether that bright stretch of sand should be in there or not because if it's in the sensor's dynamic range would be exceeded. Rather, I compose the image I want, and shoot, and the result is technically good (whether the image is good is another question, but that is the responsibility of the photographer, not of the camera).
Furthermore, all the controls I use for my type of shooting are readily available. There's a button or a switch for everything I really need to have readily available, so operation-wise the camera does what I want. Plus, personally I find the use of the camera both in controls and menus intuitive - with the Canon I struggled a bit, with the Nikons I find everything immediately, don't know why.
Then again I have a friend who shoots astro - Canon seems to be much better in that market, and if I look at his pictures, they're just as good as mine. OTOH, none of his images requires a lot of DR - it's just the kind of images he wants to shoot.
I don't really think that 4 or 6 fps make a big difference, but for those who need the additional 2 fps, they probably make a difference. For them, the 5D-III is the better choice.
I like how Nikon tries to capture natural colours. They never seem to try to exaggerate, even though their colours sometimes look a bit plain. Canon colours are sometimes more vivid out of the camera, IMHO. I personally prefer to add that in Lightroom, if I want to add it. But I applaud Nikon for resisting the temptation to make their pictures look more flashy, and give me the option to chose, instead.
As for the glass, actually I also perceive the Canon glass as being a tad better, or at least more interesting options being available. But all I need is an excellent standard zoom, and two or three primes like 35-50-85 for those occasions when utmost quality is desired.
For those who need special lenses, they have to decide for themselves where they find the better options.
So basically, as I see it, it's not Nikon versus Canon, as there are a lot of other interesting options if you want to take great pictures (not to forget the excellent m43 market with the OMD and other great cameras which may fulfill the needs of many good photographers better than bulky DSLRs do). And, which brand or camera is 'better' is based on your needs. You cannot say that one brand is better than the other, you can only say it is better than another for a specific purpose.
I would easily move away from Nikon if they would fall behind in image quality. But right now, I really like those current Nikons, and feel that they are the best choice for me. BTW, the D800 does have an HDR feature (I saw this question at the start of this thread).
Tomfifield
Senior Member
I am looking at the D800, I also want to do video with it. I do green screen work so the uncompressed video out makes the D800 the winner for me.
If you are not looking for faster fps, the D800 is the camera of choice. I have been extremely pleased with its performance coming from the D700.
Canon 5d Mark III, because it is a more versatile camera than the D800 and overall it has a better IQ. I know, I know the fantastic DR of the D800. Well yes at basic ISO, because after that, say around 1600, Canon is better even in DR. whoever interested have a look DXOmark measurements.
But then is the AF system, and practice has shown that the Canon is better. And then it is able to shoot 6 fps and that is acceptable for action photo, not the best but acceptable.
And then video is far better, Nikon still need to evolve in this direction.
We all expected that Nikon will launch on the market a camera like that (5D3) and that would have been undoubtedly the successor of the D700, but obviously Nikon did not care about this as well as it did not care about the successor of the D400. Instead we have got the king of dust and oil, and the king of resolution and focusing issues.
Well done Nikon !
But then is the AF system, and practice has shown that the Canon is better. And then it is able to shoot 6 fps and that is acceptable for action photo, not the best but acceptable.
And then video is far better, Nikon still need to evolve in this direction.
We all expected that Nikon will launch on the market a camera like that (5D3) and that would have been undoubtedly the successor of the D700, but obviously Nikon did not care about this as well as it did not care about the successor of the D400. Instead we have got the king of dust and oil, and the king of resolution and focusing issues.
Well done Nikon !
There is no doubt that the Canon 5D Mk III is a very capable camera. Your comments are all subjective of course but that is your opinion.
However, you have not pointed out the flaws of the Canon system when it comes to shadow recovery, in which the Canon system including their latest models will give you banding even at base ISO.
See link below that was posted by Fred Miranda, who is a Canon shooter and also owns his own photo forum. His test were at base ISO so don't even go to ISO 1600.
Part II - Controlled tests
Check out this user that I frequently talk to over the other Canon forums (POTN), user name jdizzle who owns high end Canons, now owns D800E/D800, D4 and now the Phase 4 medium format as his credentials. He also owns most of the top lenses that these manufacturers owns so I know that he has first hand experience unlike most bashers.
Here is a sample that he posted.
Canon Digital Photography Forums - View Single Post - Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question! (II)
I know everyone has their own preferences so if you think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence, go for it. Best of luck to ya.
You assumed my comments are subjective ...
I had the D800 back-ordered and got it in their first batch of delivery. Mine had major focus issues, got rid of it very soon after the delivery. Friends of mine have them both. The 5D is way better in every sense.
Issues you've mentioned can be avoided with a good exposure technique.
Now about DR I was definitely wrong....The D800 outperforms the 5D up to ISO 800 not 1600. After ISO 800 the 5D3 is better in DR and tonal range. Have a look at the attached graphs, as a result of DxOMark measurements, a very serious company with very precise measurement tools, with a very wide recognition. So it is not a random person from as forum but a company that performs sensor measurement as you very well know.
DR comparison by Skytalker777, on Flickr
tonal range by Skytalker777, on Flickr
Please find below a link that contains the same measurements and explanations done by Tech Radar another prestigious company, which says pretty much the same thing about the 2 machines.
Now you or others can agree with this or not. But no matter what your position is, the truth remains the same, you cannot make the D800 better than it is.
I invested too much in Nikon to make the swap and have no intention to so. I have my two D3's since new when they appeared, never had problems with them. I have not upgraded because I did not like what Nikon put on the market. Maybe in the end I will go for the D4 but not sure. But for the moment I am not happy with the general strategy of Nikon. This time Canon caught up and provided better products.
I had the D800 back-ordered and got it in their first batch of delivery. Mine had major focus issues, got rid of it very soon after the delivery. Friends of mine have them both. The 5D is way better in every sense.
Issues you've mentioned can be avoided with a good exposure technique.
Now about DR I was definitely wrong....The D800 outperforms the 5D up to ISO 800 not 1600. After ISO 800 the 5D3 is better in DR and tonal range. Have a look at the attached graphs, as a result of DxOMark measurements, a very serious company with very precise measurement tools, with a very wide recognition. So it is not a random person from as forum but a company that performs sensor measurement as you very well know.
DR comparison by Skytalker777, on Flickr
tonal range by Skytalker777, on Flickr
Please find below a link that contains the same measurements and explanations done by Tech Radar another prestigious company, which says pretty much the same thing about the 2 machines.
Now you or others can agree with this or not. But no matter what your position is, the truth remains the same, you cannot make the D800 better than it is.
I invested too much in Nikon to make the swap and have no intention to so. I have my two D3's since new when they appeared, never had problems with them. I have not upgraded because I did not like what Nikon put on the market. Maybe in the end I will go for the D4 but not sure. But for the moment I am not happy with the general strategy of Nikon. This time Canon caught up and provided better products.
I just recently jumped the Canon ship (more like a Carnival Cruise) and climbed on board to Nikon. I evaluated Nikon's lineup of cameras and lenses, rented them and performed countless experiments.
But what REALLY sold me were the brilliant minds I encountered here at Nikonites!
But what REALLY sold me were the brilliant minds I encountered here at Nikonites!
HotGates
Senior Member
I know that this is a D800 vs 5D III thread but I had the 5D III and also bought the D610 here are just a couple test shots, the D610 pulls out more detail than the 5D III and the colors look better also,
5D III EF 24-105f4
D610 24-120f4
both shot in live view
1, 5D III 100% crop
2, D610 100% crop
and shadow recovery
5D III
D610
Even at high ISO the D610 is better, I used to always laugh at DxO mark scores but they are right.
5D III EF 24-105f4
D610 24-120f4
both shot in live view
1, 5D III 100% crop
2, D610 100% crop
and shadow recovery
5D III
D610
Even at high ISO the D610 is better, I used to always laugh at DxO mark scores but they are right.
Very simple.If you want to shoot mostly from 100 to 400 (1600) ISO then the Nikon is better choice. However, if you photographed mostly above 800 ISO then the Canon is much better choice.
I love my Nikon D800E but I want the second body for love light situations. Nikon Df???????
I love my Nikon D800E but I want the second body for love light situations. Nikon Df???????
Canon makes their own Sensors, whereby Nikon uses Sony CMOS Sensors.
Some camera models only and not all. Your statement is also similar to Canon users who have been asking for an answer for the D800 in the high resolution department.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk