Considering switching to the dark side

[wez130]

The impression I've been given is that the 1D series cameras still have the edge. After all, they've been king of the hill for quite a while and have had plenty of time to keep refining their AF.

It's quite common knowledge that the D3 has simply superceded the 1D series now, many reviews have given the D3 the clear edge over the 1Ds MkIII, i suppose you could say Canon have gotten complacent at the top of the tree and have now paid a big price letting nikon get the edge.

@alexisonfire, Nikon pro glass does seem to be more expensive than the canon equivelent, at the same time, in many cases it is better too, the 70-200 F/2.8 eg on the nikon is better than the canon equivelent, and if you look at my sig, you'll see i'm not biased towards nikon, however, you cannot go comparing the price of a brand new SB900 to a used 580EX II, the 580EXII was £400 up until recently (street price),still is in some places, but i also believe the nikon flash system is superb compared to canons.

 

[JBuk]

snip.

what makes that 70-200 2.8 lens better than the canon equivalent?

 

[olv]

af is better on the D3 isn't it? 51 point - same as D300 and D700. Each one selectable.

Regardless of how many points it has the 1 series AF system is still more accurate in many situations.

I've seen a decent test of a broken 1D III (i.e. before mirror box fix) in a head to head with the D3 and the keeper rate for the 1D was still higher.

I think everyone has gone a bit mental on the D300 and D3. I haven't had a go with the D3 but have had a play with the D300 and I was impressed. Mostly by the screen on the back though... lol.

Many have reported a severe drop in low ISO performance though which for me would be a major down side. Some of the files i've seen at ISO2000 and above though are superb.

However, I won't be jacking off over a Nikon body yet and have hope that Canon will respond with the 7D and 3D shortly.

 

[wez130]

However, I won't be jacking off over a Nikon body yet and have hope that Canon will respond with the 7D and 3D shortly.

Which is why i'm holding on, my local independant shop suggested i hold on for its release in the next few weeks, he seems to think it'll be something special.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Which is why i'm holding on, my local independant shop suggested i hold on for its release in the next few weeks, he seems to think it'll be something special.

And after all the fuss, I'm sure that we can all agree that whether or not we end up buying D3s, that the recent surge of extremely good cameras from Nikon is brilliant for us as consumers, as the additional competition will most certainly result in some seriously good kit from all of the major manufacturers.

 

[Johnny|lucidcomposure]

And after all the fuss, I'm sure that we can all agree that whether or not we end up buying D3s, that the recent surge of extremely good cameras from Nikon is brilliant for us as consumers, as the additional competition will most certainly result in some seriously good kit from all of the major manufacturers.

exactly.
By being a Canon user at present you are in the best seat as they will respond with something better.. and vice versa.

are you really not getting the photos you want from a 1D?
Funny coz the rest of the world are...

chasing technology is the worst thing you can do. evolve with what you have.

 

[EnglishMack]

exactly.
By being a Canon user at present you are in the best seat as they will respond with something better.. and vice versa.

are you really not getting the photos you want from a 1D?
Funny coz the rest of the world are...

chasing technology is the worst thing you can do. evolve with what you have.

I guess that's a matter of opinion then, it's nigh on impossible to evolve with what you have and avoid chasing new (and better) technologies. If that theory was to believed, we'd still be shooting on film, in fact I'd probably go as far as saying that's one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.

 

[alexisonfire]

@alexisonfire, Nikon pro glass does seem to be more expensive than the canon equivelent, at the same time, in many cases it is better too, the 70-200 F/2.8 eg on the nikon is better than the canon equivelent, and if you look at my sig, you'll see i'm not biased towards nikon, however, you cannot go comparing the price of a brand new SB900 to a used 580EX II, the 580EXII was £400 up until recently (street price),still is in some places, but i also believe the nikon flash system is superb compared to canons.

I'm a nikon user myself, i wasn't knocking the brand, simply stating that the body won't be the only large expense for the OP. Oh, and I can go comparing the price of a new SB900 to a second hand 580EXII, because thats precisely what the OP will most probably do. Sell a second 580EXII and then purchase a new SB900...

 

[Johnny|lucidcomposure]

I guess that's a matter of opinion then, it's nigh on impossible to evolve with what you have and avoid chasing new (and better) technologies. If that theory was to believed, we'd still be shooting on film, in fact I'd probably go as far as saying that's one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.

Your taking what I said and making a total meal of it.
I am not saying dont upgrade your camera but what I am hearing is
"oh the 1Ds III is rubbish compared to the D3"
Now if you truly believe a D3 will give you better results than a 1D then thats one of the most pathetic things I have ever read.

to ditch an entire system for one camera body when in your current system the next upgrade could be round the corner is just ridiculous

 

[TheBigCheese]

I guess that's a matter of opinion then, it's nigh on impossible to evolve with what you have and avoid chasing new (and better) technologies. If that theory was to believed, we'd still be shooting on film, in fact I'd probably go as far as saying that's one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.

I understand where Fstop11 is coming from, I remember reading an article, probably in Amateur Photographer a few years ago about a Magnum photographer who shot the majority of his work on an Olympus 4MP compact, and he was producing stunning work.

It is very much the case (most of the time) that it isn't the tools that get the best picture but what you do with them.

However in this case if ISO and noise is a critical issue to you and higher shutter speeds + lower noise = greater return on your investment then it would be worth investing in a new machine (whether Canon or Nikon).

However if it's itchy wallet syndrome because it's a new and shiny gadget (and I know that affliction particually well!) then it would be best to wait and see what comes out in September.

 

[D.P.]

what makes that 70-200 2.8 lens better than the canon equivalent?

It is a lot sharper, edge to edge on a DX sensor. Massively sharper in fact. Sharper than the infamously sharp Canon 70-200 F4 lenses.

However, it was highly optimized for DX sensors and some problems occur on full frame sensors. But it is more or less guaranteed that Nikon will release an update with wider coverage (and the excellent nano coating, and VR2). WIll probably weigh a bit more. Then again, its about time Canon updated their 70-200.


Nikon really have some tremendous lenses: 14-24 - best ini its class, 24-70 - best in its class, 70-200 on DX, best in its class, 200-400, best in its class. 200 f.20, best in its class. A lot of the tele primes are also there best around.

Canon has other offerings though with more faster primes updated with AF-s etc. Nikon has some updating to do of odler lenses, but Nikon is showing that it can make Zooms sharper and better than even Zeiss primes.


But you do pay for for this in increased cost (and sometimes size and weight).

 

[D.P.]

And after all the fuss, I'm sure that we can all agree that whether or not we end up buying D3s, that the recent surge of extremely good cameras from Nikon is brilliant for us as consumers, as the additional competition will most certainly result in some seriously good kit from all of the major manufacturers.

And thats the bottom line.

 

[V-Spec]

Its like the Ferrari owners club again camera X's files have 0.075732% contrast and 0.843% less shadow noise at ISO 3200, Camera Y is inferior blah blah blah...

All i'll say is i've used all 3 cameras, (1DIII, 1DSIII, D3) quite a bit recently. When I used a D3 on the Farne islands, I simply could not get close to getting the puffins in flight in this thread. I tried for ages but the AF is simply not up to scratch compared to the MkIII, as it doesn't aquire focus even slightly quick enough..

To say the D3 is "way ahead" of the 1D series is silly, D3 files at low ISO are certainly not any better then the 1D. At ISO100 many reviewers including Rob Galbraith believe the MkIII produces the best file of any DSLR available.

If you shoot high ISO all the time in low light, you shouldn't even argue that the D3 is better because it blatantly is at high ISO.. But thats the only place it excels compared to the 1D cameras.

 

[TheBigCheese]

It is a lot sharper, edge to edge on a DX sensor. Massively sharper in fact. Sharper than the infamously sharp Canon 70-200 F4 lenses.

However, it was highly optimized for DX sensors and some problems occur on full frame sensors..

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't that then mean the lens wasn't that good...but only the middle portion of the lens was good, and if it was that sharp on an APS sized sensor then it wasn't a 70-200 but a 112-320mm.

All i'll say is i've used all 3 cameras, (1DIII, 1DSIII, D3) quite a bit recently. When I used a D3 on the Farne islands, I simply could not get close to getting the puffins in flight in this thread. I tried for ages but the AF is simply not up to scratch compared to the MkIII, as it doesn't aquire focus even slightly quick enough..

Just to clarify V-Spec did you find both MKIIIs to be highly reactive with their focus? I've heard of lots of problems with the 1DsMKIII and AI Servo focus issues but I am interested to hear from someone who has tried them all together.

 

[V-Spec]

Just to clarify V-Spec did you find both MKIIIs to be highly reactive with their focus? I've heard of lots of problems with the 1DsMKIII and AI Servo focus issues but I am interested to hear from someone who has tried them all together.

Both MkIIIs have identical focus, its the quickest of any camera to attain actual first focus, infact its totally instant from the moment you pump the shutter. The problems are with a constantly moving subject like an athlete running towards you, where both cameras will produce a few oof frames because they over estimate the forward movement, which leads to front focussing. The D3 has a delay before obtaining first focus, which makes things more difficult for fast action stuff, on the flipside it doesn't "hunt" when it fails to focus.
The Canon can sometimes get lost with big glass if it "misses" and focuses to the background with a small subject - the D3 doesn't do this but on the flipside it takes a lot longer to actually focus, which is why it sucked with the Puffins in flight and at Bempton when I used it both times, with a 300 and 800mm lens.

For me the files off the D3 are brilliant straight off the camera, but when you use either Canon below ISO200 it surpasses the D3. The colours are nice and smooth and there is more detail present. When you take things above ISO 800, the D3 pulls away.

The 1DS MkIII is worst for noise, as there are so many pixels, ISO 400 isn't that great, the MkIII is far better for noise - that said no camera resolves as much detail as the 1DS MKIII. If your good at processing and can deal with the noise, you end up with bigger better pictures. And with the 1DS MkIII you can still crop significantly and be within agency guidlines for image size.

They're all good cameras, but some do other things better, its retarded to say that "The D3 is a better camera overall" because it blatantly isn't. I can't shoot birds in flight, or ultra fast action stuff with the D3, however I can't shoot at ISO 6400 very well with the MkIII, they both do different things better than each other... Whichever camera you need depends on what you mainly photograph..

 

[olv]

All i'll say is i've used all 3 cameras, (1DIII, 1DSIII, D3) quite a bit recently. When I used a D3 on the Farne islands, I simply could not get close to getting the puffins in flight in this thread. I tried for ages but the AF is simply not up to scratch compared to the MkIII, as it doesn't aquire focus even slightly quick enough.

yeah but like ZOMG 51 POINTS AND STUFF

 

[iGiDK]

14-24 - best ini its class

Great lens indeed, but I'm not sure how many professional landscape photographers would agree with you on that statement given that there is no filter thread on this lens

 

[Johnny|lucidcomposure]

Great lens indeed, but I'm not sure how many professional landscape photographers would agree with you on that statement given that there is no filter thread on this lens

Your looking at medum format for anything pre 16mm really

 

[TheBigCheese]

Thanks for the reply V-Spec, really interesting read!
The forums like DPreview are terrible for getting an accurate representation of what the cameras are actually like because they are so biased and picky.

Sounds like the 1DSMKIII could still be the one to go for really for me at least, I've been thinking of getting into product and studio shots - anything where I can control the lighting so ISO won't be a problem, it'll be at the lowest constantly.

Thanks again for the info

[/Thread derail]

 

[robbiemc]

Sounds like the 1DSMKIII could still be the one to go for really for me at least, I've been thinking of getting into product and studio shots - anything where I can control the lighting so ISO won't be a problem, it'll be at the lowest constantly.
[/Thread derail]

If you're going to be getting into that professionally, then your best choice would be a medium format with digital back. Eye-wateringly expensive, but when you're taking product shots they're clearly superior.
Here's an excellent direct comparison between a D3 and Hasselblad H3D-22 (22Megapixels) to illustrate the difference.

V-spec, I've followed your threads carefully recently and have admired your photos, but I'm genuinely surprised to hear you were having less success with the D3 with BIF and fast moving subjects. As a recent 'switcher' to a D300 (and therefore have been following the progress of each very carefully) I've honestly not heard this criticism before.
For me there was a solid learning curve in getting to grips with the D300 AF system, and it seems there are a few setup tips that make the Nikon perform as you would expect. As (primarily) a Canon shooter maybe you didn't have time to explore these set-up options?

When I visited the Goodwood FOS I had some excellent slow-shutter panning shots that I wouldn't have been able to achieve had I not pre set-up the camera for this.

Also (unless I'm mistaken) your 1ds still has a 1.3 crop sensor? As the D3 is a full frame that would account for the ability of the Canon to get closer (although I'm sure you know this, and I certainly don't want to tell you anything you don't already know!).

But yes, as mentioned here, either brand of camera will out-perform the majority of users here, and any choice will no doubt come down to ergonomics/price.