Nikon D800 or EOS 5D Mark III

hunter richards said:
They are both great cameras but I like the image from the d800 better, looks crazy good. 5d wins on the high iso, but the images I'm seeing off the d800 are really wowing me in DR and tones. Once mosaic ships that Olpf filter for the d800, it's really going to be a great little foolproof camera. I'm just nit picking though, I don't think you would go wrong with either.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am in the same boat. I am hopping getting my d800 (bought for my photography) soon and waiting impatiently to see test result with the mosaic filter. The moire and aliasing are the only problem that I see with this camera. If it is cured, it will be a damn fine camera for video. I see one or two thing that I don't think will happen with the successor to my beloved hacked gh2. The first one is the DR of the d800 which looks to be the highest from all dslr. The second one is low light. Yes low light, these test are not done in low light, they are done in no light. Who shoots with one candle!!! So I think it will be more than enough to get some clean 1600 ISO (2500/3200 Canon 5d3) perhaps 3200 with a little noise reduction if need be. The resolution is good, perhaps not hacked gh2 level, but still good and the jello also seems much better.


for me these 3 videos show the potential of this camera. The DR is so good, near logish sometime. The mosaic filter could be the last building block for it to become an awesome camera.



 
I think that in the long term it won't really matter. Both are excellent cameras in there own right. If people are stigmatized by numerous half baked video tests and reviews, then they need to rethink what they are buying; a DSLR. What it also has is the option to shoot video, and some dam good video given that these cameras in essence are still cameras. Whether you buy the Canon 5D or the Nikon D800 you will end up with a first class tool that is multifunction. Just pick your brand on what lens's you already have.
 
Danielvilliers said:
I think we can agree to disagree on the skintones, what many feel that the colours are dull is that they don't understand dynamic range, which is superior in the case of the Nikon. This can be remedied very rapidly with just a little curve adjustment. But try to do the contrary in a contrasty lighting situation, that is get back shadow or highlight detail when one is either blown or crushed. This will happen much more in the case of 5d3. So I prefer the dull look to the crushed shadow one.
Click to expand...

And if you happen to use a more neutral profile on the 5d3 then that is negated. The difference was way smaller on Philip Blooms video so what gives there?

I think what many don't understand is that the Canon is using a lot of noise reduction in Camera.
Click to expand...

Is it now? The D800 doesn't even reach 5d2 levels and that is pretty noisy. Other low light tests show horrible colors coming to the surface on the D800 when it reaches ISO 3200. 5d Mark III isn't skipping as much pixels as before and so the noise is considerably lower.

Neatvideo doesn't completely clean up the D800 like it never completely cleaned my 7d. Look at the background, it starts developing big moving splotches. It does work miracles but skintones turn slightly plastic too. The reality is that 5dmkIII is considerably better in low light. Check out Blooms video for a better assessment. Ah screw this, I'm gonna make my own 7d vs D800 video now (have 2 d800 loaner bodies here, though no 5dmarkIII to compare to)
 
Errr, why not the GH2... :P
I mean, you get a camera that shoots already at...or better then what both the Canon and Nikon bring to the table at 5 times the cost. Not to mention moire and aliasing...or lack of, with the GH2.
With the money you save, you could grab a few extra tools/rigs and lenses. Have a smaller, more portable package, record longer then 30mins, and an articulating screen to boot.
Just saying...

If I could ONLY choose between the 2, im seeing more potential from the Nikon camp with the D800 with the camera thats out now.
Soon as Magic Lantern opens up the 5D... then maybe it'll change the playing field again.
 
I have a D800.
I shoot thousands of MotoCross photos in a day and have never run out of buffer.
I shoot Sunday Morning Service Videos. Sometimes the Auto ISO reaches 12800.
The MOV files look pretty clean to me.

If you have a Canon, I understand why you defend the product that you have just bought.
It is going to cost you a lot to replace it with a Nikon like I did with my 5D2.
I hope Canon has done a lot better because Nikon needs the competition.
I have had the best that Canon can offer 3 times now and I for one never plan on going back.
 
congrats, you sound really happy with your D800
I would have switched too, but I'm afraid of the aliasing/moire thing; any comments on that from such a happy D800 user?
 
Samuel H said:
congrats, you sound really happy with your D800
I would have switched too, but I'm afraid of the aliasing/moire thing; any comments on that from such a happy D800 user? QUOTE]

At 12800 ISO a lot depends on your settings, lighting, lens, and subject matter.
I have seen moire but not aliasing.
I shoot Landscapes, Video and Events.
The only real problem was shooting stills at an indoor Equestrian Event.
The barn has really weird overhead lights and bright open windows all around.
I have not found any camera that can handle this situation yet.
Hopefully I will find better settings and will try a different White Balance than Auto..
Click to expand...
 
maarek said:
And if you happen to use a more neutral profile on the 5d3 then that is negated. The difference was way smaller on Philip Blooms video so what gives there?

Is it now? The D800 doesn't even reach 5d2 levels and that is pretty noisy. Other low light tests show horrible colors coming to the surface on the D800 when it reaches ISO 3200. 5d Mark III isn't skipping as much pixels as before and so the noise is considerably lower.

Neatvideo doesn't completely clean up the D800 like it never completely cleaned my 7d. Look at the background, it starts developing big moving splotches. It does work miracles but skintones turn slightly plastic too. The reality is that 5dmkIII is considerably better in low light. Check out Blooms video for a better assessment. Ah screw this, I'm gonna make my own 7d vs D800 video now (have 2 d800 loaner bodies here, though no 5dmarkIII to compare to)
Click to expand...

Listening to some Canon Fan you just need to put some profile and the 5d will beat the Alexa, where is the 20 stop DR picture profile. Sorry it is a given that the d800 is exceptional at 14.5 stop in DXOlab numbers, more than 2.5 stop better than the Canon 5d3. In fact it is the highest in still camera. Now it seem from Samuel H designer of the Flaat profile than some of this DR (not the 14.5) advantage has been passed out to the video side. So to just think that some profile is going to do some miracle in terms of DR is very simplistic. If DXOmark scientific measurement is not your cup of tea just look at this threat http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1032&thread=41282602&page=2 to get a more visual representation at how much the DR of the D800 is better than the Canon. In the philip bloom test the difference might be lower because he just did not use a flat profile setting or the light just changed at that moment. That is what you get with not thorough testing.

The test from nofilmschool is much better than the one from philip bloom. The guy went back to further his test. If he just used the last example with same exposure ( I say same exposure and not ISO because in all objectivity there is a 2/3 to 1 stop difference between both camera) and equalise the detail level (Same as dxo compare at same output level) with NR from camera or Neatimage and did not tell anyone. Most would say that the cameras are close. I am not saying the D800 to be better, but the difference at same exposure and resolution is closer than what many so called test have shown. The d800 still have problems with moire/aliasing that is not very good.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if anyone has seen this test yet https://vimeo.com/41491834 for the mosaic filter on the Canon 7d. Seems to be quite encouraging and I think the company has made advancement compared to the 5d version for wide angle lens. From this report and the D800 one, they claim no sharpness lost in wide angle lens. If this is as good as it seems and cures the aliasing moire and adding a Ninja would make a great combo. The problem for me is that the ninja + mosaic filter will be already halfway the cost of the blackmagic camera. It makes for some tough decision.
 
my problem with the mosaic filter is that it doesn't work when you need it most: with wide angle lenses
I'm sorry for them because it was a very good idea, but it arrived to the party a bit too late


also, dynamic range: in video mode, the D800 will give you around a stop higher DR, a bit more if you're going to use noise reduction
* if you want to avoid heavily posterized noise in the shadows, the canons can give you 11 stops of DR, the D800 will give you 12
* if you're going to use noise reduction to get rid of that heavily posterized noise, Canon is 11.5 stops, D800 is 12.7

and mind you, that posterized noise is very ugly, it's a pity but the in-camera image processing doesn't allow me to get all that DR from the stills mode
on the D800, this is Flaat_12 https://vimeo.com/39941831 and see how much uglier Flaat_13 is https://vimeo.com/39899742
 
Last edited:
From the 7d review and the Nikon d800 report it seems that they have improve it. This is what the tester said in response to a comment about the wide angle problem. If I rember well the guy who did the D800 also said that it work very well to wide angle lens. At first I thought it was because the D800 crop in video mode would cut-off the corners of the frame but it seems that they have being on working to solve the problem. Now we need more test and a final version of the filter to be sure.

"Ivan... The filter looks very good at almost any aperture including wide open. I shot some cutaways with a 24mm F1.4 and the images looked very sharp. I think this version of the filter actually works better than the original VAF5D2. As soon as Dr. Cubanski has the production version of the new filter holder, I plan to shoot a short piece at a local amusement park at night. Thanks".
 
I don't shoot wider than 24mm very often, so that's great to hear: D800 plus mosaic filter will probably end up cheaper than 5D3 (plus I'd get the chance to test for myself and see if I actually need the filter, or if moire appears only rarely and I can live without the filter)
 
After seeing several comparative tests on the internet, I have also asked Philip Bloom if he did notice a difference in the calibration of ISOs between the two cameras. He said no, and told me the 5dIII was easily better than the D800 in low light.
Saturday night I had the chance to test the mark III against my partner's D800.
My conclusion confirmed what I had already seen on several tests:
ISOs are rated differently between the two cameras. The D800 is definitely 1 stop (or slightly more) brighter than the MarkIII for the same given ISO setting, aperture, and shutter speed.
As a result, ISO 100 on the D800 looks like ISO 200 on the markIII, and ISO 1600 on the D800 looks like ISO3200 on the MarkIII. The effect is more pronounced at lower ISO settings.
Of course, you get nothing for free, so brighter means also noisier, but this is just normal.
My conclusion is that saying that "the MarkIII being by far better than the D800 in low light" is just a marketing gimmick, as ISOs are rated differently. Of course the D800 at ISO 3200 has more noise than the Canon, but then again it is as bright as ISO6400 of the Canon... The D800 also appears to have a bit more dynamic range.

Just a heads up for potential buyers.
 
This ISO difference has been noticed from as far as the first 5DvsD200. I also noticed when comparing the 5dmkII vs d7000. Always a 1stop difference.
The 5DmkIII however, is cleaber than the d800, the nikon is not that good passed 1600 in my opinion.
And about the philip bloom test... Well I still don't understand how people can take those reviews seriously. Testing cameras while having beers in a bar???
 
Danielvilliers convinced me that the 5D3 is not actually better than the D800 for low light: the 5D3 looks a lot cleaner, but it is also a lot softer out of camera; you can apply tons of noise reduction to the D800 before you lose as much detail as the 5D3 has already thrown away by default; and after that it's not clear at all that the 5D3 is the winner - if only the D800 was aliasing/moire free... - also, I like Philip Bloom's reviews, but you have to take them for what they are: he's talking about how the camera feels to him, and how much he likes shoting with it, so it's an extremely subjective thing, and leaves many areas completely untouched
 
Last edited:
I am shooting at 12800 ISO with my D800 and have not noticed any noise yet.
Of course I just watch the Videos. I do not blow up the individual frames.
 
so I guess you're shooting high ISO but not in very low light, right? (i.e. not lit by a candle or something like that, just dark enough that you get proper exposure at 12800)
could you post some footage?
 
"I think what many don't understand is that the Canon is using a lot of noise reduction... "

The not so veiled attempt at calling me ignorant doesn't fly. The noise is on the image. This is a comparison. I'm not comparing fictional images that have to be magically converted somehow in the future. The Nikon is clearly MUCH more noisy than the Canon. How they get there is irrelevant.

"You can't compare the 5d3 with much lower detail resolution to the d800 directly, they have to be equalized at about the same level and this is what the noise reduction software does."

The test, I believe, tried to reduce the noise on the Nikon and FAILED. That's what I saw. Unusable. Don't call me ignorant and dress it up as some kind of theoretical pondering. If you want to use hideous noise in your films that's up to you. In the comparison I saw, the clear winner (pun intended) was the Canon.

PS

And I'll add that this is of very little concern to me at all. The only camera I'm considering is the Blackmagic because of its game-changing dynamic range. The others fail where it matters most to me, the bright sun highlights. That's what makes it look film-like, and the rest is a distant secondary concern.
 
Last edited:
Samuel H said:
so I guess you're shooting high ISO but not in very low light, right? (i.e. not lit by a candle or something like that, just dark enough that you get proper exposure at 12800)
could you post some footage? QUOTE]

Here is a frame reduced from 2.6MB to upload to this forum shot with my D800 in 720P movie mode.

RDM_4501.jpg
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top