Canon 5D MKIII or Nikon D800

Rojin said:
That would be a nice easy answer, but you are ignoring why others don't rely only on numbers. You might like that to be the truth so you can pigeon hole everyone, but I am delighted to disappoint you :)
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of anyone here that 'only' relies on numbers. The reason these numbers are in such hot debate is simply because they are not favourable to Canon so they must be denounced.
These numbers were simply included as part of the equation, not the be and end all. Others it seems want to make it 'all about the numbers', so they can make the numbers a dirty word. Like DXO currently is, as evidenced by DP's reluctance to even use their data for fear of a flame war.
 
An Exception said:
I'm not aware of anyone here that 'only' relies on numbers. The reason these numbers are in such hot debate is simply because they are not favourable to Canon so they must be denounced.
These numbers were simply included as part of the equation, not the be and end all. Others it seems want to make it 'all about the numbers', so they can make the numbers a dirty word. Like DXO currently is, as evidenced by DP's reluctance to even use their data for fear of a flame war.
Click to expand...

Not for me, I've said it's useful as a starting point. However once I get into actual reviews and then into user reports and feedback, I couldn't even tell you what the figures were on DXO. DXO will never influence any purchase I make, it will always be made based on actual use outside of a lab environment.

I have mentioned in the past that I don't quite know how DXO come to their conclusions. This was when I looked at the 70-200 mkII results compared against the mkI. They had the mkII down as an inferior lens. Which after owning both I know is far from the truth.
 
I couldn't tell you unless the mkii sample happened to be a dud.

Edit:

Rojin, I just looked at the DXO and the mkii is indeed rated much higher than the mk1!
Perhaps you were comparing scores with different camera bodies?

For example mkii on 1dsiii
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF70-200mm-f28L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-1Ds-Mark-III-versus-EF70-200mm-f-2.8L-USM-on-Canon-EOS-1Ds-Mark-III___408_436_254_436

And mkii on 7D
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF70-200mm-f28L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-7D-versus-EF70-200mm-f-2.8L-USM-on-Canon-EOS-1Ds-Mark-III___408_619_254_436

You get vastly different results depending on the body you mount the lens on.
 
Last edited:
An Exception said:
I'm not aware of anyone here that 'only' relies on numbers. The reason these numbers are in such hot debate is simply because they are not favourable to Canon so they must be denounced.
These numbers were simply included as part of the equation, not the be and end all.
Click to expand...

But every argument in the past you have of why the D800E is a better choice comes down to numbers. That seems to be your angle on it every time. The other factors never seem to be come into your equation.

An Exception said:
Others it seems want to make it 'all about the numbers', so they can make the numbers a dirty word. Like DXO currently is, as evidenced by DP's reluctance to even use their data for fear of a flame war.
Click to expand...

Other people don't want to make it all about the numbers, it's just a part of it, but not all of it.

Today I got the urge to get a Fuji XM-1, instead of the pro-1, after watching some online videos, what struck me the most is the EM-1 has a dial at the top right that can be turned easily when pressing the shutter, that dial has no lock and too large so unless you shoot with the index finger bent in a weird way, you will rub against it and risk changing the setting every time you shoot. The Pro-1 don't have that design flaw. That is the thing that is stuck in my head the most.

It is those little details also that isn't stated on paper. It is those little details that are interesting. Charts and DXO are all good but they don't tell you the whole picture.

I like to hear about these things. These are the interesting things. I like to hear how you think why the D800E is better. How the menus are better navigated, how the dials are better placed, how the grip is more grippy, how the viewfinder is brighter. If they are.

I can read about the data of the camera everywhere, I don't need you to repeat the data results. That's not interesting.

If however you can show me some example of the same shot in the same real world situation how a photo can't be taken on a 5D3 but can on a D800E. That's where it gets really interesting.

Don't get me wrong, I know you know your stuff, I respect that. I just like to hear more on how you apply what you know, rather than posting on lab results others have done.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
But every argument in the past you have of why the D800E is a better choice comes down to numbers. That seems to be your angle on it every time. The other factors never seem to be come into your equation.



Other people don't want to make it all about the numbers, it's just a part of it, but not all of it.

Today I got the urge to get a Fuji EM-1, instead of the pro-1, after watching some online videos, what struck me the most is the EM-1 has a dial at the top right that can be turned easily when pressing the shutter, that dial has no lock and too large so unless you shoot with the index finger bent in a weird way, you will rub against it and risk changing the setting every time you shoot. The Pro-1 don't have that design flaw. That is the thing that is stuck in my head the most.

It is those little details also that isn't stated on paper. It is those little details that are interesting. Charts and DXO are all good but they don't tell you the whole picture.

I like to hear about these things. These are the interesting things. I like to hear how you think why the D800E is better. How the menus are better navigated, how the dials are better placed, how the grip is more grippy, how the viewfinder is brighter. If they are.

I can read about the data of the camera everywhere, I don't need you to repeat the data results. That's not interesting.

If however you can show me some example of the same shot in the same real world situation how a photo can't be taken on a 5D3 but can on a D800E. That's where it gets really interesting.

Don't get me wrong, I know you know your stuff, I respect that. I just like to hear more on how you apply what you know, rather than posting on lab results others have done.
Click to expand...

I appreciate you taking the time explain this RL. However below is what I posted in response to the Op. Many such user related things are covered. Not just the numbers.

An Exception said:
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.

[Samples shown]
Click to expand...

Jase said:
OK I better update this thread on what I decided, and in the end I got the... Nikon D800E

Firstly can I thank everyone for their feedback and a big thanks An Exception who took time to email me sample photo's of stuff I was looking for.. although in the forum he may come across as favoring Nikon but in the conversations we had he was very fair to both.
Click to expand...

An Exception said:
No worries bud.
As I said, it will take allot of getting used to. Your muscle memory will keep trying to put the lens on and off the wrong way. The dial will seem confusing and will do exactly opposite of what you want.

You can customise the camera allot though. If someone handed me a default D800 once and I really struggled to even use it due to how much I had configured mine. I have my dials setup, so it's almost like shooting a Canon, the back dial controls the aperture, the front controls the shutter. I also set the directions of the dials to mirror Canons. This made the switch to Nikon allot easier for me personally.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
dannyjo22 said:
He's no different to you or most of the posters on here. After all before you got a 70-200 2.8 mk2 and proceeded to tell a "dedicated photography forum" the Mk1 2.8 was "a waste" despite it being a must have lens in the bag in many professional photographers for years.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/canon-70-200-mk2.327569/

You then proceeded to give you informed run down of each 70-200 despite never having used any.

Why did you get the 24-70 mk2 over the mk1? Was that about the art of photography or just buying what reviews and not hands on experience told you was the better lens?

Let's not pick at one man for being into his gear. Loads of people here will happy strive for the best gear available to them even if they could achieve results with cheaper options. Even if I don't agree with his views sometimes I admire the research he puts into his posts. Is it wrong that he wants to have the best tools available to him when just about everyone else is doing that anyway.
Click to expand...

You must be seriously bored in new years eve to troll a post/thread made over 2 years ago.

I got the 24-70 mk2 because of the following reasons:

1. mk1 was discountinued, nowhere to buy a brand new mk1
2. the mk2 has improved IQ, weighs less and slightly smaller in physical size
3,mk1 second hand was nearly the same price as a mk2.

For the above reasons, not just me but a lot of others would buy the mk2.

mrk said:
Oh, I don't mean bad for me or anything, I mean bad as in the above heated debates is what usually arises. You'd expect that from DPF/TP etc really not here, not these days anyway.

Gear talk is fine if we understand both boats and discuss respectfully :)
Click to expand...

Check out TP'S gear forum. less bickering and fanboys compared to here
 
Last edited:
James J said:
Completely off topic (well, most other posts are it seems!) but are you still shooting with a D90 DP? If so, are you planning on getting a D800 or are you waiting for a potential D300s replacement for wildlife?
Click to expand...


I am still shooting with a D90. I had saved up for a D800 and a 500mm f/4.0 to with it. Then I found out my with was expecting and I purchased a house instead :D

If I see a good deal on a D800 I might grab one before the baby arrives but likely I will wait it out.

And yes, I am still kind of hoping the D300s replacement will come, although the D7100 is pretty much ideal for me since I am really getting into wildlife work. The D800 is exceptional but if I use it in DX crop mode a lot of the time I might as well go for the D7100.
 
jonneymendoza said:
You must be seriously bored in new years eve to troll a post/thread made over 2 years ago.

I got the 24-70 mk2 because of the following reasons:

1. mk1 was discountinued, nowhere to buy a brand new mk1
2. the mk2 has improved IQ, weighs less and slightly smaller in physical size
3,mk1 second hand was nearly the same price as a mk2.

For the above reasons, not just me but a lot of others would buy the mk2.
Click to expand...

The point was you said he was a gear fanboy, when you yourself have shown you will want or dismiss something without having used it because it perceived to be the best. Plenty of us do it, but I'm not the one having a pop at exception for his Gear knowledge/judgement. I think what really grinds your gears is the notion the other body might be better ;):p

Uk prices the MK1 24-70 second hand is nothing like the same as the new MK2. I think we all want to know where you can get a MK2 24-70 way under 1k.
 
Rojin said:
Not for me, I've said it's useful as a starting point. However once I get into actual reviews and then into user reports and feedback, I couldn't even tell you what the figures were on DXO. DXO will never influence any purchase I make, it will always be made based on actual use outside of a lab environment.

I have mentioned in the past that I don't quite know how DXO come to their conclusions. This was when I looked at the 70-200 mkII results compared against the mkI. They had the mkII down as an inferior lens. Which after owning both I know is far from the truth.
Click to expand...

The DXO lens tests are very different to their sensor test. Their summary numbers are even more meaningless than the sensor DXOmark. Like the sensor data through the actual detailed results are more illuminating.

The DXO sensor data is well supported by numerous other independent testers, like the link I showed you. The DXO lens data is similar to other sites but is harder to understand and view. SLRgear, photozone.de and lentips give good data to understand the objective measures like sharpness. Then you can view files on Flickr for subtle rendering qualities and Bokeh.

This is something else that is dependent on what you shoot. If you shoot landscape you care about the sharpness stopped down, don't give 2 hoots about Bokeh. If you shoot wildlife you care about sharpness wide open and AF, Bokeh needs to be smooth but it doesn't need to be magic. If You shoot portraits then sharpness matters way less and subjective rendering qualities are more important. I can view some lens data and see how it will help me get sharper landscape images, the raw numbers are useful. FOr others the data is less useful.
 
An Exception said:
Well stay over there, then there will be less here.
Click to expand...

ironically its you who turned this thread into a canon vs nikon affair. I have not debated on any whilst you been! Its you who needs to go elsewhere as this is not the first thread you have polluted and turned a thread into product a vs product b
 
dannyjo22 said:
The point was you said he was a gear fanboy, when you yourself have shown you will want or dismiss something without having used it because it perceived to be the best. Plenty of us do it, but I'm not the one having a pop at exception for his Gear knowledge/judgement. I think what really grinds your gears is the notion the other body might be better ;):p

Uk prices the MK1 24-70 second hand is nothing like the same as the new MK2. I think we all want to know where you can get a MK2 24-70 way under 1k.
Click to expand...

I would like to know too where you can get a mk1 under a grand lol. Maybe a heavily used one but that doesn't answer most of my points about why i got the mk2 :p

I dont dismiss or get into silly arguments over gear because its ****ing childish and pathetic.

I may have done so in the past but not anymore.

I have met many real live photographers including some here . Go and ask them if i chat and argue about freaking gear lol.

i would not like to meet Exception if that is how his like in real life ie gloating on how superior his or hers gear is as quite frankly i dont care lol
 
How can you get opinions on two products side by side what to get without going product A v Product B and chewing over the data. Besides it's up to the OP to decide if the information Exception was giving had any relevance and he seems happy enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom