Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Dear Distinguished Photographers about glasses vs camera bodies?  (Read 1129 times)
ZoeEnPhos
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« on: August 30, 2012, 04:12:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Dear Sirs,

As a newbie and first time writer in here - may I please ask you all exquisite Digital Photographers in here - if you might consider and think that it would be an asset to involve the impact of using the best quality of lenses also - when comparing for example Nikon D800C and Canon EOS 1Dx with Canon 5D MkII or MkIII?

In the end of the day - when examine the result of my photographing I often are amazed by the fact that the IQ is also in all of all depending of the whole photographic equipement and its total standard of quality level.

Today I am still using Canon 5DMKII with almost only so called "L"-lenses -both primes and tele-zoom.

So for me is the question - how about all the talk about the new sensor-monster-Nikon D800 used with Nikon Nikkor best lenses vs Canon full frame camera with the best of the "L"-lenses in comparison?

I am still not convinced that I should upgrade to either 5MkIII or 1Dx in order to get better allround photographs mostly in the field of nature/landscape/skyscape/-photographs.

So this is my present humble opinion coming from my direct examine of my photographs with my Canon photographic equipement.
One additional aspect of highest IQ is of course having a precise exposure and using RAW-full-files with good post-processing programs.

So would you please consider the lens-quality-aspect as valid when comparing camera/sensor/DR/End-Quality?

We all know that the overall limitation to obvious quality and IQ is the weakest link in the photographic-image-chain, donīt we?

Looking forward to your own personal observation and valued thoughts about this Lens-Quality+Camera-body comparison!

Wishing you much much inspiration and joy - when you keep shooting your beautiful and artistic photographs!

All the Best

Charl (from Sweden)





-
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1811



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2012, 08:06:54 AM »
ReplyReply

m still not convinced that I should upgrade to either 5MkIII or 1Dx
Do you rely on autofocus? If so the 5D Mark III and 1D X are major improvements over all other Canon bodies to date.
Do you ever use an ISO setting over 500 on your 5D Mark II? Is so the technical quality of the raw image coming directly from the the 5D Mark III and 1D X bodies will be a revelation at every ISO setting above that. Better image quality (less noise) also opens up aesthetic and photo making possibilities not available to you now.
Do you ever use Live view? The LCD  on the 5D Mark III and 1D X - are head and shoulders above my 1Ds Mark III.

Having worked extensively with all of these cameras I am firmly of the opinion that the 5D Mark III isn't really the successor to the 5D Mark II but to the 1Ds Mark III.

But the technical aspects of "image quality" are only that: just technical aspects. It what you do with a camera and how you see that have a far greater bearing on real image quality.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2012, 12:08:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I use/used all of these cameras.  I think the 5d2 is an amazing value, and frankley is better than most photographers uing them.  Ellis is correct, the 5d3 is the 1ds3 replacement, but without the larger finder.  The AF of the 5d3 is really VERY good, it is precise, fast, acurate.  Noise performance is better, but I never had a problem with the 5d2 noise performance up to 3200.  The D800e is really fantastic.  Great AF, not as good a sthe 5d3, great ISO.  The only problem I have with the D800 is that I'm not particularly fond of modern Nikon lenses.  They are too sharp, much like the Zeiss zf and ze lenses.  I shoot people, and find them too well corrected, while the cheaper Nikon lenses have too many ugly problems like vicious CA at wide apatures.  That being said, I like the old AI and AIS lenses on the D800.  Smooth, not overly sharp.

That being said, I don't really see much difference in a print between the 5D2, 5D3, D800e (or P30+ or Aptus 75s).  I can make the D800 prints better, and there is way more head room, less noise, etc with the D800, but in reality, I shoot in controlled light, tethered, just as I did the 1ds when it first came out.  So in a way, these cameras are interchangeable, with the difference being AF, lenses and viewfinders.  None of the viewfinder are great.  I like the Canon 50 1.2, 85 1.2, and the 135 2 so much, an dthe 5D3's AF is so good, that that has become my default camera for the studio.

Speaking of lenses, The Zeiss CF Hasselblad lenses are GREAT on all of these cameras.  Focusing through the Viewfinders can be a pain, but if you can use live view the results are worth it.  I stopped thinking in terms of 35mm, medium format, large format.  I use these cameras for everything up to what I formerly thought of as large format portraits.  Using live view, a release, and a tripod with CF lenses is exactly how I shot the Mamiya RZ and 4x5, but with no dark cloth.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2136


« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2012, 04:43:08 PM »
ReplyReply

I absolutely agree with the comments so far regarding the Canon bodies.
As good as the 5D II is (I still own and use it) the 5D III is significantly better in every respect that I can fathom.

No experience with the D800 bodies so I can't offer an opinion there.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad