Big doubt - Canon x Nikon

rawfa

rawfa

Veteran
Guys, I've been a Sony user for many years as a photographer and videographer. I love their lcds and evfs (I own an A99 and A77II), but they lose light with the translucent mirror, the A99 has a slow AF compared to the competition, both are worth iso performers than the competition and Sony doesn't have a 50mm or an 85mm f1.2 (plus Sigma and other brands always neglect Sony in favor of veterans like Nikon and Canon).

My doubt today is between the 5D III or the D750.
- Both brands have similar performing glass.
- D750 has faster af for photography.
- D750 is a better low light performer in noise and af.
- D750 has an lcd which is one of the things I would miss the most from Sony.
- D750 is less expenssive than the 5D.
- D750 live view AF is supposed to be bad, but so is the 5Ds (I've never ran comparisons)
- I don't need 4k, but even with it's regular codec the 5D is better than the D750's codec (then again the A99's codec is pretty week and I've been living with it)
- I don't see many people shooting wedding with Nikon when it comes to video...then again, when it comes to photography it's right there with Canon and the D750 has thr 5D beat in AF and low noise.

I'd really like to go with the D750 but I'm afraid to encounter the problems I have with Sony when it comes to getting video gigs.

Any thoughts?
 
The Nikon light-leak was really just an internal reflection and Nikon has not only fixed the problem but has recalled all the units sold before the correction and fixed them all for free for every user including gray market cameras.

These 2 cameras are very similar in performance, and yes there are a few areas where the Nikon is a little more impressive.
But you need to determine which one you like the look of because they do look very different.

The Nikon lacks 2 things - a high enough bit rate, and focus peaking.
the lack of focus peaking may not bother you if you are used to working without it, but Nikon really needs to get on that if they are going to be competitive in the DSLR video world.

The stock bit rate is too low to avoid compression artifacting, but the D610 and the D800 have already been hacked to triple the bit rate. This makes a very serious difference in detail quality. Hopefully the hack will be done for the D750 and the D810 soon. If it is then that issue will be SOLVED.

Then there is the issue of Magic Lantern for the 5D mkIII. That adds some SERIOUS extra stuff. Not just RAW recording but other features as well. And the 5D mkIII RAW video is in a whole different league. WAY better...if you want to shoot in RAW.

The 5d has been so incredibly successful because it puts out an image that most people just like. But the Nikon is a more modern design. It's really a toss up unless you want that RAW option - then the Canon wins hands down. Also the 5d mkIII recently came down in price by a few hundred dollars, making it nearly the exact same price as the D750.

They both do VERY well in low light. They both come with very good kit zoom lenses. They both shoot spectacular stills.
do yourself a favor and try to rent or borrow both. Shoot something you know well and then compare the results. They will look quite different. Pick the one you prefer the look of.
 
Point for Canon - you can stick a lot of different lenses on it (if you don't need AF).

AF on either camera - can't imagine it's useable for video other than initial focus point.

Canon gets a big bump if you want ML functions.

Interfaces are wildly different, but one can probably adjust to either, I don't know I'd buy based on that.

Nikon's D7200 release was a little jaw-dropping... in a bad way. They don't seem very concerned about video which could affect you in the future.

And if that's of primary concern, I'd take a hard look at Samsung - first DSLR out of the gate, and they impressed - 1st firmware update (in a matter of weeks) and they nailed it - they are listening. First SDK (for camera control) released by a major, EVER. ML says they're in a dialogue with Samsung as well. Pro zooms reasonably priced compared to Canon/Nikon.

I think Samsung is really playing for keeps here. Compared to N and C, they manufacture their own sensors, giving them more control. It's gonna be interesting to see if they implement anything like raw or 10-bit color. And what comes up in the next 12-24 months. They are a little Steve-Jobs-ish with their H265-only. But y'know, Jobs tended to be correct when he dismissed older tech (floppies, flash, etc) - just ahead of the curve.

FWIW, I still shoot Nikon and I'm pretty happy with the look. I could see me being all Samsung (except for some glass) if they keep rolling like this.
 
Unless you re willing to shoot RAW with the 5DIII, I dont think there is any serious reason to choose it over the D750. Out of the box the Nikon does everything better in both photography and video (personal opinion). However that does not mean its the perfect camera...its just better than the 5DIII which by the way its at the end of its cycle, so not the best time to buy it now, at least not new. If you re more in photography...Id say Nikon...if you re more in video Id say neither! From one hand you have Nikon that for some reason as Michael Carter said they dont seem to care much and from the other you have Canon that has to protect their C line. In any case if for some reason those two are your only choices...DPStewart gave you the best advise: Try both before the decision...
(Personally Im a Canon user and while I see that Nikons have a better image, no matter how much I tried I couldnt get to use to shoot smoothly with the D750...espesially that opposite direction focus thing just burns my head...:-)...if only they had a super AF (70D like) things could have been better...
 
It's not like the old days when you'd buy a self contained camcorder and then replace it entirely when a new one came along. If you're looking at either of these companies for video, then you're looking at buying in to their eco system of lenses and accessories too.
Personally, I've been a Canon guy for over two decades now since I also do a lot of stills shooting. Lenses I got back when I was starting out still work on my C100. Oh, I just realized that's a good point...Canon has an upgrade path beyond the DSLR with the C series. Maybe you don't need it, but I'm not sure that Nikon has anything in the works past the DSLR.
I haven't used a Nikon since sometime in the early 90's, and I don't have anything against them as they make a really nice camera and lens, just that I'm invested in Canon glass so I've been sticking with them and for the most part have been pretty happy with the innovations they come out with in the camera bodies. Of course, you could be one of those guys that sells everything off and starts fresh with the other company every time one comes out with a new feature before the other.
 
If one has Sony glass, then I'd wait a month and see what they reveal at the NAB.

5D MK III is a three year old body anyway. That's another reason to wait.

As has been pointed out above, if you switch your whole ecosystem, then you switch the whole ecosystem.

FWIW, if one needs good auto focus, a fast lens selection and decent video while staying on a budget, Olympus ought to be considered as well. Then, if you load up on the MFT glass, you have a nice slate of option and MFT cams will take most of the existing glass and various adapters.
 
For the last couple of years I've been apalled at Canon, but Nikon has not been a whole lot better lately... I have an a7S right now, and I'm pretty interested in the Samsung NX1, it's the only camera that could make me switch away from Sony mirrorless right now.

So... since you need stills with good AF... maybe try the NX1, a7S and/or a7II??
 
I am still astonish how people, I mean shooters who have a certain experience are still fixed on only numbers. I mean how can people still compare the 1080p of latest Nikon cameras to Canons ones. Yes it is written 1080p on both camera but they are very very different. Just look at side by side between 5d3 14bit raw and Nikon D750 stock here http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic...ch-5d-mark-iii-14bit-uncompressed-raw/?page=1 . If you look closely the 5d3 14 bit raw is a little nicer, with a little better detail in the highlight and a little bit more detail. This is stock 24 mbit Nikon D750, put a Ninja with it and you would get even better colour and resolution... for about the same price. From my test with Ninja and D7100, you get a little bit more rez with more visible but finer tighter noise when using higher bitrate. But for me the image feel more solid and I would qualify it as denser. Another thing to note about the Andrew Reed example is that the Nikon cameras are about 2/3 stop brighter than the Canons, if you take the same setting with both the Nikon will overexpose by 2/3 stop. But in the end you can see how close the D750 is to the 14 bit 5d3 raw which is itself known to be much much better than the stock 5d3 image quality.
 
Well, I think it's a matter of preference. For me, the 5D3+H264 is too soft by today's standards, and any other Canon feels ancient. I would clearly go with the D750 or D810 over the 5D3, unless I planned to shoot 5D3+RAW. But I don't have Canon lenses, I care more about IQ than about UI, and I don't use AF. All cameras are so good these days that it's very difficult to go wrong with any choice. Your craft is much more of a factor for your final product than which camera you used, so, if some people are more comfortable shooting with a 5D3, well, good for them. I'm still terribly happy with my a7S.
 

I just saw this video, do you think you need more detail (stock 24 mbit) to shoot human beings and this is at 1600 ISO!!!!! I think that the grade might be a little bit high, but it gives us and idea how much this base codec can be graded. If you do some research you will see countless example of people saying how good it is even at this low bitrate. But again you can still invest in a Ninja that will get you better bitrate but also focusing and exposure tool like peaking and false colour.

If you follow Nikon you will see that they have been constantly innovating in video. It is more an evolution than a revolution. But when some camera manufacturers are putting X feature but then their camera have big flaws like Sony A7s colour and rolling shutter, Nx1 DR, low light and even worst rolling shutter. Nikon is producing very nice and balance camera. I am not saying the D750 does not have any flaw, but for me the only one is internal peaking, but at least you can buy a $ 200 monitor that will fix it. I have always said that the next iteration of the D800/D4 will see other big advancement like 4k. They sometime implement some of the advancement in lower level camera (Nikon d5200 pixel binning tech, that got rid of moire/aliasing and much better low light), it seems that the first 4k nikon camera will come in their mirrorless http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/17/nikon-1-j5-mirrorless-camera-rumored-to-have-4k-video.aspx/ .
 
Andrius Simutis said:
It's not like the old days when you'd buy a self contained camcorder and then replace it entirely when a new one came along. If you're looking at either of these companies for video, then you're looking at buying in to their eco system of lenses and accessories too.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. If you're starting from scratch, find which system as a whole works best for you and go from there. The 5d3 still produces a great image and people (clients) love the finished product because they're not pixel peepers. Canon's colors work better for me and I prefer its ergonomics since I can make all my shooting adjustments (ISO, WB, exposure compensation) with my right hand while looking through the VF and keep my left hand on the lens - but that's a personal thing and you may be able to do it with the D750, but I couldn't in the limited time I tried it. I've dabbled in other systems, but Canon has always been the backbone of my kit. I have the option of moving to the cinema line as well. If you're looking at the 5d3 and D750, both are capable of producing great images on the stills and video side. 5d3's are selling for under $2k new on ebay with the recent price drop. Bodies come and go, lenses are forever. Magic Lantern adds a lot of useful functionality for free outside of raw, but it also gives you the option of somethnig like this:

https://vimeo.com/77580463

That being said, I've recently used the A7s and now have the NX1 - both are amazing and frustrating at the same time. IQ-wise they're fantastic, but handling (A7s terrible ergonomics) , AF (both in low light) and flash options means I just can't get Canon out of my system. Rumors have Samsung releasing its third major firmware update in the last few months to improve performance and address issues. For now this is the mirrorless camera for me.

I would also wait for NAB at this point before doing anything.
 
Another vote for the NX1. Samsung said the are commited to these large FW updates and improvements, and functionally it is a better camera than the 12MP A7s (vs. 28mp).
For $1500 you get the best 4K in an ILC, which is very beneficial even if you goal is 1080p.
The NX1 has virtually no rolling shutter in 1080p mode too, which I believe is an important consideration.
My favorite feature is the NX1 is very good at focusing and tracking while shooting 1080/120p for .25x slow motion.
 
Yes, you have to think of the whole system, and consider whether the manufacturer is commited to meeting your needs. Or, even better, you can commit to buying only stuff that will work with any camera. My lenses are vintage Leitz glass for the Leica-R mount: absolutely gorgeous, and I can use them in every camera except the ones I can't afford (it's manual glass that can be adapted to nearly every lens mount, the big exception being PL). When I sold my Canon T2i to buy a Sony NEX-5N, the only things I had to write down were the kit lens and the timelapse intervalometer.

(this won't work for the OP because he needs AF for photography)
 
I agree, the D810 (D800 has moire problems) is far superior to the 5d3 even with a lower bitrate. Also, it's not much talked about, but the 60p 42mbps mode is stellar. No resolution loss from the 24/30 modes. Magic lantern raw is another story, but what a workflow...
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
I agree, the D810 (D800 has moire problems) is far superior to the 5d3 even with a lower bitrate. Also, it's not much talked about, but the 60p 42mbps mode is stellar. No resolution loss from the 24/30 modes. Magic lantern raw is another story, but what a workflow...
Click to expand...

MLVFS has changed the raw workflow completely, its really easy now and no conversion necessary - this is a demo using a i5 2.5ghz macbook with 10gb ram. My mac pro rips through raw using this method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xr2pT5mrn8Q
 
Nikon compresses video more efficiently using B frames, Canon has improved their compression, but it's still inefficient. A high bit-rate won't make the video look better, it just gives you more room to push it in your grade. Magiclanter is a big plus for Canon, but Nikonhackers is slowly releasing hacks for Nikon, so the hack playing field might level someday. I appreciate that Nikon kept the same mount allowing me to use lenses from the 70s, and I personally prefer Nikon's color. Also, current Nikon's will have a little better DR than Canon in photos and H.264 video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top