Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 5D3 vs. D800 - great real world head-to-head tests  (Read 32922 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7991



WWW
« Reply #60 on: April 22, 2012, 11:15:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Not sure what he saw, but the D800's live view enables easy focusing in my book. However one has tobe aware that normal magnification seems to be mapping one screen pixel to one sensor pixel (meaning about 10 times magnification), while the high magnification is a 23x zoom, which I find very helpful, but which can come acctoss as unsharp.

Wow, I have now read the article and the whole argument against the D800 - including the fact that Mr. Miranda hardly shot any image with it - is based on "the fact" that high magnification images are pixelated... How could they not be pixelated knowing that the camera has to map 3 screen pixels to one sensor pixel?

I find this a bit surprising from a top reviewer like Mr. Miranda.

The one comment that makes sense is the fact that there is no easy way to focus in live view using the lens wide open. This is a real pain and I sure hope Nikon can fix this quickly with a firmware update. The easy by-pass is of course to focus wide open and then to stop down the lens to the desired aperture, which takes no more than 2 seconds (more like 0.5 seconds for lenses like the Zeiss that have an aperture ring) and is negligible compared to the rest of the operations needed to take one image on tripod, but I agree that this should be improved.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
shadowblade
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 689


« Reply #61 on: April 23, 2012, 12:32:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Wow, I have now read the article and the whole argument against the D800 - including the fact that Mr. Miranda hardly shot any image with it - is based on "the fact" that high magnification images are pixelated... How could they not be pixelated knowing that the camera has to map 3 screen pixels to one sensor pixel?

I find this a bit surprising from a top reviewer like Mr. Miranda.

The one comment that makes sense is the fact that there is no easy way to focus in live view using the lens wide open. This is a real pain and I sure hope Nikon can fix this quickly with a firmware update. The easy by-pass is of course to focus wide open and then to stop down the lens to the desired aperture, which takes no more than 2 seconds (more like 0.5 seconds for lenses like the Zeiss that have an aperture ring) and is negligible compared to the rest of the operations needed to take one image on tripod, but I agree that this should be improved.

Cheers,
Bernard


That's actually not a very well-known fact - essentially, the D800's lower magnification is equal to Canon's top magnification (1 screen pixel for 1 sensor pixel), and the higher magnification is just useless.

Live view focusing wide-open should be easily fixable with a firmware update - there's no hardware-specific reason it can't be done.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7991



WWW
« Reply #62 on: April 23, 2012, 12:59:04 AM »
ReplyReply

That's actually not a very well-known fact - essentially, the D800's lower magnification is equal to Canon's top magnification (1 screen pixel for 1 sensor pixel), and the higher magnification is just useless.

Well, I agree with the fact that it may not be very well known, but you would expect a top reviewer like Mr. Miranda to check his facts before writing a whole review around a supposed critical weakness that ends up not being real.

As far as high magnification being useless, I respectfully disagree. I thought so at first, but I find it to be actually useful to fine tune focusing.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
asf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 506


WWW
« Reply #63 on: April 23, 2012, 01:58:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I agree with the fact that it may not be very well known, but you would expect a top reviewer like Mr. Miranda to check his facts before writing a whole review around a supposed critical weakness that ends up not being real.

As far as high magnification being useless, I respectfully disagree. I thought so at first, but I find it to be actually useful to fine tune focusing.

Cheers,
Bernard


Is his point about the CA in shifted images from the 24 shift lens valid? Or the corner sharpness in the same images?
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #64 on: April 23, 2012, 02:58:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Is his point about the CA in shifted images from the 24 shift lens valid? Or the corner sharpness in the same images?
Given FM's record on Live View, one has to wonder whether he was assessing CA and corner sharpness:
- at maximum magnification in Live View (and so magnifying the D800 images far more, and making imperfections more visible but possibly due to greater magnification rather than greater imperfections)
  or
- at 100% on computer screen (so magnifying the D800 images moderately more).

I would be pleasantly surprised if he had gone so far as to compare images on a computer screen or print at equal size, as would be needed for fair comparisons, especially with lens comparisons.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 06:27:52 PM by BJL » Logged
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #65 on: April 23, 2012, 05:15:23 PM »
ReplyReply

While peepers are debating the virtues or perceived issues between the Canon 5D MkIII and the Nikon 800, I've been out shooting with my new 5D MkIII. It's an awesome upgrade to the 5D MkII, which I've owned for 3 years along with my 1Ds MkIII.

I shot an indoor karate tournament this weekend at ISO 16,000, no flash, using my 24-105 f4 L lens. The lighting was a horrible mix of daylight, tungsten and halogen gym lights. After tweaking the noise in LR4, the images are amazing, given the environment. You can see some of them here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/budjames1/sets/72157629872791817/

Let's get out and take pictures.

Cheers.
Bud
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7991



WWW
« Reply #66 on: April 23, 2012, 07:27:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Amazingly mr Miranda has still not amended his review...

I have re-read the exact wording he is using... and he does in fact clearly mention that the issue with live view is due to the usage of high magnification.

But what I find very shocking is that he doesn't go on to write "but there is zero issue when using live view in normal magnification, forget about it guys, I messed up". So he does leave behind a very clear impression that live view on the D800 is unusable.

Pretty low work ethics I feel.

And yes... it is possible to worry about these topics and take images at the same time... live view focused images for that matter:



Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 07:52:47 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
mr purdy
Guest
« Reply #67 on: April 23, 2012, 07:59:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Amazingly mr Miranda has still not amended his review...
But what I find very shocking ...

Pretty low work ethics I feel.
Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard, do you have the D800?

In any case, you should send Mr. Miranda an email describing how best to use the live view, instead of being "shocked" at his work ethic. Wouldn't that make more sense?
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7991



WWW
« Reply #68 on: April 23, 2012, 08:11:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Bernard, do you have the D800?

In any case, you should send Mr. Miranda an email describing how best to use the live view, instead of being "shocked" at his work ethic. Wouldn't that make more sense?

Yes, I do own a D800.

Could you please PM me his email? A quick look on his site a few days back didn't show any link. Clicking on his name goes to a broken URL.

I also tried to create a user on his forum but my email is apparently already registered, pwd long forgotten... and I could not find a way to get the password sent again...

The basic harm was already done though... and the basic work ethics issue will still be there.

I don't know whether you ever have had the opportunity to review a product in a media with large diffusion, but I have personally felt a strong sense of responsibility. When you review a product and find issues with it, common sense dictates that you check first before reporting on an issue that can be anticipated to generate lots of visibility and noise. There is no way Mr Miranda can not have anticipated this.

Do you disagree with this view?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 08:29:13 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
mr purdy
Guest
« Reply #69 on: April 23, 2012, 08:16:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Bernard - click the "lost password" button and you can PM him.

re:
"I don't know whether you ever have had the opportunity to review a product in a media with large diffusion, but I have personally felt a strong sense of responsibility. When you review a product and find issues with it, common sense dictates that you check first before reporting on an issue that can be anticipated to generate lots of visibility and noise."

Not doing so reveals poor work ethics. Does it makes sense to you?"

About your question quoted above, I think you are being overly sensitive and defensive. It's just a camera, and he is just a photographer, like us. His first impression was that it is not a great implementation, and he is not the only one who thinks so. It did not help him focus the camera, and that is the issue . I am not going to discuss this particular "work ethic" issue with you anymore. But like I said, if you find an issue with someone's review, send him the info which he needs. He will probably appreciate it, and he might even update his review. And then you can rest easy ;-)
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 08:40:33 PM by mr purdy » Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7991



WWW
« Reply #70 on: April 23, 2012, 08:18:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Bernard - click the "lost password" button and you can PM him.

OK, thanks.

Mail sent to Fred Miranda.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 08:27:48 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7991



WWW
« Reply #71 on: April 23, 2012, 08:31:43 PM »
ReplyReply

About your question quoted above, I think you are being overly sensitive and defensive. It's just a camera, and he is just a photographer, like us.

I have nothing to defend.

But Fred Miranda is not just a photographer, his hat when he writes such articles is that of a reknown camera reviewer.

Enough said.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 08:33:48 PM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
rmyers
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80


« Reply #72 on: April 23, 2012, 11:15:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm having to agree with Bernard here.  A reviewer with an audience as large as his that is respected in the field has an obligation to exercise due diligence.  The FM report on the live view was a serious negative to me.  You can google "D800 live view focusing" on you tube and you will see a you tube video basically showing the same thing.  To get around it, the you tube guy turns the contrast up on the display to get better edge definition.  This guy is not a known reviewer of cameras with a commercially viable website.  He therefore is not held to the same standard, in my mind.

This issue was the biggest negative I had about the camera, and there are none in the stores to go check out for ourselves.  This leaves us searching online review sources for information.  In this case, it appears to be bad information.  Not saying it was intentional, but he impacts a large number of people with his gear reviews, positive or negative.  This is how people lose their credibility and are accused of being a shill for certain products.  Again, not saying this was intentional.  It was at best sloppy reporting.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 11:18:23 PM by rmyers » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #73 on: April 24, 2012, 10:49:43 AM »
ReplyReply

This is how people lose their credibility and are accused of being a shill for certain products.  Again, not saying this was intentional.  It was at best sloppy reporting.
Perhaps we should put it down to unintentional "confirmation bias", read his review as a useful report on the improvements in the 5D Mk III over its predecessor (on which he is better qualified to speak), and move on. Surely we have all read enough "I tried some other brand of computer/phone/potato peeler that people are raving about and I have to say it is all hype because I get better performance from the gear I am used to" commentaries.
Logged
mr purdy
Guest
« Reply #74 on: April 24, 2012, 01:34:35 PM »
ReplyReply

" When reviewing these images on the LCD, I noticed they had a green cast…

The point is, if you don't use a manual lens or rely on live view for critical focusing, this shortcoming is not really an issue. It's more of an adjustment for those of us accustomed to using this feature. After testing Nikon's live view manual focusing in the field, I quickly came to the conclusion that Canon's implementation worked better for the applications I need. Perhaps because Nikon's depth of field preview is always "live" and there's a lag time from when you make your adjustment to when you actually see the results. For this reason, Nikon's live view at higher magnification appeared pixelated and nailing focus was not easy. However, with the Canon you get to preview depth of field by simply pressing a button. Therefore, the changes appear faster and the nuances necessary for focusing are much easier to see."

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

Nothing about the above quote from the review leads me to believe he does not understand how it works. He just seems not to like the lag, etc. There are other reviews which state the same issues and dislike of the D800's live view, from people who shoot Nikon on a regular basis.

Anyway, it seems we all need to make our own decisions about these things, no?

Thanks for your input everyone.
Logged
kuau
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


WWW
« Reply #75 on: May 08, 2012, 07:09:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I have  D800/E on order from amazon, of course have heard no word on a delivery date yet, I am looking for a smaller system that I can take on longer hikes.
Right now I shoot with a Sinar arTec and a 33mp leaf back, love the combination and my biggest prints I make is 20x30.
The one thing that bothers me about the D800 is the fact that Nikons PC-E Lens are not up to the call of the 36mp D800, maybe the 90 PC-E would work well.
I am so use to using shift on my arTec that I almost don't want to give that up. Thats where Canon has the edge I believe, there TC-E lens are superior to Nikons offering.
Even when I was shooting the D3x, the 24mm PC-E and 45mm PC-E I though performed poorly especially after adding some shift which I did all the time.
Nikons PC-E lenses all performed very well on the D3/D700 12mp cameras and I believe correct me if I am wrong were all introduced at the same time as the original D3...
I know there are Schneider PC-E lens now, but I have not heard anything good about there 50mm, and they don't offer anything wider.

Bottom line, I know the D800 is superior in every way especially when using top notch glass, i.e. Zeiss, again to go all the way with the D800 or any other high mp camera, everything has to be perfect or your wasting your money.

I know Nikon is really marketing the D800/E as a great landscape camera, yet I have yet to see any really good results from Nikon glass in terms of corner performance only the Zeiss lenses seem to be there at least on the wide angle side.
Logged

__________________________________________________________________________
Sinar arTec, Leaf Aptus II 7 AFI, 35, 70, 135mm Sinaron lenses,  HP Z3200 PS Printer
Phil Indeblanc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1106


« Reply #76 on: May 08, 2012, 09:52:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Why? PJ has been done with cameras that don't have the specs of the D800. There really is not such thing as a landscape camera or a PJ camera. That is just marketers speaking and I have long ago learnt to ignore those folks. The D800 will make a fine camera for photojournalism and documentary work.

Well, when you're in the field and you depend on something that you adapt to over time and the other camera doesn't have it...its a strong card in that line of work. Egonomics alone make a difference for PJ...Think of it as a weapon. Over time you can adapt, yet one might feel better in the hand over the other out the door.

I ignore most marketing hype as well, but users tend to know it and those types tend to lean to one over the other for the type of work they do, for the way they do it.  Funny I had switched to Canon some time back as my Nikon (late 90's)  had horrible focus and red color cast. Now with the 5D2, I curse the AF everytime when I need it to perform. It's also that we have a certain level of expectation from these tools...sometimes more than the design allows.

Anyway, if you have a MF and a Canon, no need to ruffle feathers, but if you have a Canon and no MF, maybe :-)...D800E ? :-)


The colors on the second model, Gina for the studio shoot The Nikon did better, as the orange/yellow was too strong on the 5D3...Odly, the night shot with Gina, the Nikon showed more magenta in the darks, lips while 5D3 was more nutral
All this off a YouTube video :-)  It was my observation on a Samsung XL30
Logged

If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #77 on: May 08, 2012, 10:11:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Bottom line, I know the D800 is superior in every way especially when using top notch glass, i.e. Zeiss, again to go all the way with the D800 or any other high mp camera, everything has to be perfect or your wasting your money.

That's largely true, but I don't think the D800 is in a special category in this regard. All the recent cropped-formats from Canon and Nikon, the 50D, 7D, D7000 etc. have at least equal or greater pixel density than the D800 and would therefore require the same, or even higher shooting standards than the D800, for optimal results.

Loss of lens performance at the edges and corners has always been a disadvantage of the FF format compared with the cropped format used with FF lenses. However, the fact remains that a D7000 when used, say, with a 100mm lens, requires an equally stringent technique as a D800 used with the same lens, the difference being that the D800 provides a wider FoV.

For owners of the Canon 7D, which has the pixel density of a 46mp full-frame, techniques have to be even more demanding to achieve optimal results with a FF lens, whether it be a state-of-the-art Zeiss lens or not.

The lens-review site, Photozone, has a number of examples of the same model of lens tested with different cameras of the same brand but with different pixel counts, such as cropped-format and full-frame. Even with an average zoom lens, the camera with the higher pixel count always delivers more LW/PH.

I just placed my order today for a D800E. I've been a bit undecided about the choice of the D800 or D800E, but I've always felt that any need for less sharpening has a benefit regarding noise levels. This advantage has nothing to do with moire considerations. One would expect D800E high-ISO shots to be either noticeably sharper or noticeably cleaner compared with the D800 shots.

Another advantage of the D800E is that I'm probably going to receive the camera sooner. For that I should thank Bart and Guillermo and Bernard and BJL, and all those who have been so vocal about the horrors of moire and aliasing artifacts, for helping to shift the major demand towards the D800, resulting in a shorter waiting list for the D800E. Grin
Logged
billy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 274


« Reply #78 on: May 23, 2012, 01:29:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Want to add dynamic range to your 5d to keep up with the D800? This guy tried to achieve it by shooting thru a screen door to ' knock the highlights down '.

http://tinyurl.com/cqg5kdq

Interesting technique although it is tough to say if it worked without seeing a with and without. Still, it conjures up ideas of some sort of filters to screw on your lens that would either open up shadows or diminish highlights. Is such a thing possible? Does it exist?
Logged
Fine_Art
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1087


« Reply #79 on: May 24, 2012, 03:58:03 PM »
ReplyReply

That's largely true, but I don't think the D800 is in a special category in this regard. All the recent cropped-formats from Canon and Nikon, the 50D, 7D, D7000 etc. have at least equal or greater pixel density than the D800 and would therefore require the same, or even higher shooting standards than the D800, for optimal results.

Loss of lens performance at the edges and corners has always been a disadvantage of the FF format compared with the cropped format used with FF lenses. However, the fact remains that a D7000 when used, say, with a 100mm lens, requires an equally stringent technique as a D800 used with the same lens, the difference being that the D800 provides a wider FoV.

Agree. My Sony A55, which is the exact same sensor as the Nikon D7000, works fine at the pixel level with all my primes. I routinely look at pictures at 200% when running through Adaptive Richardson Lucy sharpening. I run it until the pixels start to degrade then hit cancel to stop the next cycle. These pixels are smaller then the D800 so claims you need top shelf glass are over-stated.

The real thing that separates a good shot from blurry tripe is a tripod. Nothing new here.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad