Canon 5D MKIII or Nikon D800

[Jase]

Having been away from the Photography scene for a while, I have the bug again and looking to get some new gear etc.

At first I was going to get the Canon 5D MKIII but I'm considering changing to Nikon.. on paper the D800 (or D800E) looks really good and it's actually cheaper than the 5D MKIII so I'm wondering why ??

From what I can see the D800 has more Pixels, I like the idea of having a DX mode and I prefer the Nikon Black Lenses to the Canon White ones.. on the minus side it is only 4 fps compared to the 6 fps of the canon, it has less AF points and I've read about quality issues with the this model.

As for the Canon the only minus points are less pixels and I don't like the white lenses (yeah I know stupid).

At the end of the day I just want the best camera, so what's the current opinion on these 2 (3) ? which should I get

 

[Raymond Lin]

I'll save you the trouble of this thread turning it into Canon vs Nikon, which it would do and will sum it up for you.

Someone will come and say get the D800E because of the lack of AA filter is sharper.
Someone will come and say get the Nikon because more mega pixels is better and you get more resolution.
Someone will come and say Dynamic Range of the Nikon is superior.

You don't like white lenses (Nikon makes them too by the way). Also, I have like 6 L lenses or something and none of them are white. Are you planning to shoot telephoto only?

So just get the Nikon D800E.

/Thread.

On the other hand, I have a tog buddy who shoots D700 and he hates the D800 because of the "stupid" mega pixel, he actually wants a 5D3.

---------------------------------

That said, this is a really weird thread, what gear did you have before? you are going back to photography and just going to drop £3k on a body plus lenses? Which I presume you will be getting some nice lenses, as opposed to sticking with bottom of the range kit lenses?

What happened to getting a camera that feels right to your hand and your way of working. Why the "best camera ever?" You do know the biggest variable here is you, having great gear helps but cameras at this price point are all great and you would find award winning photographs taken from all these cameras and all these have 1 thing in common, great photographers.

 

[Vertigo]

What Ray said basically.

All I'd add is that, IMHO, Nikon & Canon are differentiated more by their lens lineups than by their bodies. Personally, if you're coming to it fresh, empty handed and open minded, I'd decide what lenses you want/need then look and whether Nikon or Canon are best for those lenses and choose a system accordingly.

 

[mattyg]

You could always rent both of them for a few days and see.

Its a big investment afterall.

 

[GTRacer]

Can't go wrong with either really. I've actually switched systems in the middle of a day of shooting before (switched between a D700 and a 5DII) and never felt limited by the fact I was using a Canon or a Nikon.

 

[Jase]

OK, I don't want this to turn into a Canon vs Nikon thread, if it does I'll close it..

Maybe I should have explained better.. Basically I had a load on Canon gear, 5D MKII, about 6 "L" lenses and was enjoying photography.. then for about 12 months I was working 80+ hours every week and had no chance to use any of it.. having it around annoyed/stressed me so I started selling stuff off but couldn't bring myself to get rid of it all in the end so I'm left with a 5D MKII, a 16-35 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS II and that's it. Luckily I still have my Lee Filter's, Tripod, Arca Swiss head etc which will of course work on everything.

Anyway, in the new year I'm going to be doing more realistic hours and need something to de-stress and this is it, I can go back to what I enjoyed.

So I could (and probably the sensible thing to do) just buy some lenses, flashes etc for the 5D MKII but I figured as I'm going to have to buy so much I may as well consider my options. I didn't sell any of the gear "for the money" so that's not an issue as I didn't spend any of it, and yeah I'll only be getting the good stuff ie replacing what I once had.

 

[JBuk]

I'm pretty sure you would be happy with any of them and I doubt you would notice much real world difference between the two

But seeing as you already have some canon gear then save yourself some hassle and get the mkiii

 

[James J]

All much of a muchness tbh. The extra DR the nikons have is rather pointless as processing that far just makes images look like a flat HDR anyway. If you are already invested in a system, might as well stick with it.

 

[Jase]

All much of a muchness tbh. The extra DR the nikons have is rather pointless as processing that far just makes images look like a flat HDR anyway. If you are already invested in a system, might as well stick with it.

That's the sort of feedback I was looking for the DX sounded good on paper but if the image quality is not as good then it is a non-starter for me.

 

[An Exception]

You should also let people know what you intend to use the camera for otherwise it's just guess work.

So to hazard a guess I'll tell you why I shoot with what I shoot.

I mainly shoot 3 things in order of importance.

1) People
2) Landscapes
3) Miscellaneous

For these things, the D800E is ideal. At least from the camera's currently available.

When shooting people. This may appear trivial to some and is more brand specific than camera specific, but small things can make a big difference.
No. 1 reason why I shoot Nikon, is that metering is linked to all AF points, not just centre. This is a big deal to me as I can meter off skin in spot metering (what the cameras are designed to meter from) at my chosen composition and catch moments without delay. There is no having to meter, and then lock exposure etc. and in this respect the camera just get's out of my way and allows me to work fast.

Why I got the D800E's? Well the D700's I was using at the time were good enough. The trouble is I don't have a 'good enough' personality. My investment got me a little better ISO, Dynamic Range, & resolution. For shooting people I thought resolution would be a hinderance. Nope. Can't go back to the likes of 12-16mp's now. The grip on the D700 was better though, and so was the joystick thingy that controls AF point selection.
For landscapes obviously resolution and dynamic range come in very handy.
Take a play with this landscape file. It's compressed DNG so not maximum quality but pretty close. Not so bad for only a 14mb 36 megapixel raw file imo. Most of my 36 megapixel files average 6-10mb in compressed DNG.

Here is an example of one of my landscapes, perhaps you will agree with James J.
SOOC

Processed

With all that said, I'm looking to go mirror-less and leave the world of DSLR's behind.
I'm not sure when that will be, if I wasn't shooting professionally now I would have switched to the X-E2. Professionally it is not quite there for me, maybe the X-E3, although I would miss the 35mm sensor.

If I only did landscapes I would consider an A7r, but it's not good enough for the other stuff I shoot. And native lenses are lacking in selection.

 

[mrk]

As for the Canon the only minus points are less pixels and I don't like the white lenses (yeah I know stupid)

Very.

Question, in what situation has 25 megapixels ever been a minus point? It's certainly not been a minus point for pros who create images to make a living in industry so certainly shouldn't be for anyone else either.

I own a 5D3 and every now and then use a D800 (probably about 70% of my close friends who shoot use D800s now) and as with every other thread where this is talked about, both have pros and cons and it all comes down to which one you've found most comfortable to use for extended periods of time.

Personally there's no equal to how the Canon feels in the hand over a 12 hours shoot. Every edge is curved whereas on the D800 it's more staright creased. The Nikon looks more professional and has more buttons on the body itself though.

I'm not going to mention image quality. They're both neck and neck in the vast majority of situations and where one excels in one area, the other does too in another.

Hire both from Calumet or something, use them each for a day or borrow one from someone you know and then decide.

 

[An Exception]

I'm not going to mention image quality. They're both neck and neck in the vast majority of situations and where one excels in one area, the other does too in another.

Agree with everything except this, and 5Diii doesn't have 25mp. It's simply non factual unless you are specifically referring to video image quality. For stills IQ, 5Diii is behind in every measurable metric compared to D800E, although ISO is about on par with standard D800.

The truth is IQ requirement is subjective. Some pro's get by with the original 5D. Others use a Phase One. For some it matters, for others it doesn't.
As has already been mentioned though, skill is the biggest factor here, but then the Op asking about camera's not technique.

 

[mrk]

I made no mention of D800E^

From our side by side testing in the early days we found little difference between D800 and 5D3. Where there was a difference it was small and could have been put down to the difference in lenses as they were not the same. They are now though (2 of us both have the Sigma 35mm).

E*
If we're talking video then the Canon wins no question.

 

[An Exception]

E*
If we're talking video then the Canon wins no question.

Of course.

 

[An Exception]

From our side by side testing in the early days we found little difference between D800 and 5D3. Where there was a difference it was small and could have been put down to the difference in lenses as they were not the same. They are now though (2 of us both have the Sigma 35mm).

Yes that is indeed true. Dynamic range is the only area where the difference can really be appreciable.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html

 

[Raymond Lin]

RP, I'd love to see you talk about the 2 camera for once without linking it to any tests whatsoever but based on purely of what you have experienced with both.

EDIT - by the way, in the first reply, when I said "someone", I was referring to you

I knew you would be here eventually Reading your posts is like a giant deja vu.

 

[mrk]

Speaking of Dynamic range, I've posted this before but for modern full frame sensors, they're both excellent.

A shot from a while back:

To:

 

[An Exception]

Common RL, I used to shoot Canons. I know the deal between them and how they both work in different conditions. I can talk and talk but it's better for the Op to see actual pictures, hence I referenced a credible source as well as posted my own camera samples.

The ironic thing is people here confuse me with being a Nikon fan. That's cool, I couldn't give a damn what others think. But put simply I just want the to use the best equipment for how I work. My camera now supports me, it's just logical. Eventually though, I won't be shooting Nikon/Canon at all. These two are dinosaurs and won't adapt fast enough to the changing conditions. Especially Nikon...

 

[An Exception]

EDIT - by the way, in the first reply, when I said "someone", I was referring to you

Yes I knew this.

 

[An Exception]

Image samples

That's cool, but I can tell you wouldn't want to view them much larger though, as I can see the signs of distress.