# [DxO] DxOMark verdict: D800 v. 5DMIII



## DorkSterr (Apr 19, 2012)

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings

DxOMark verdict: Nikon D800 &#8211; 95, Canon 5D Mark III &#8211; 81 | Nikon Rumors


----------



## mjhoward (Apr 19, 2012)

OUch... again.


----------



## jaomul (Apr 19, 2012)

That's some achievement in technology terms


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Apr 19, 2012)

jaomul said:


> That's some achievement in technology terms



Not really.
From DxOMark - "If we wanted to get a little nit-picky, however, we might be tempted to point out that there has been no significant progress with respect to pixel quality since the D7000 and the K5 first appeared back in 2010&#8230;."​


----------



## Derrel (Apr 19, 2012)

Yes, 2010 was a banner year for the pixel crop from the Sony vineyards...as I understand it, people are paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars per bottle for pixels bottled under the Nikon and Pentax labels...


----------



## LungFish (Apr 19, 2012)

Doesn't seem to fit with the hands on comparisons, as per usual.


----------



## mjhoward (Apr 19, 2012)

LungFish said:


> Doesn't seem to fit with the hands on comparisons, as per usual.



Hands on, the 5D MKIII won't meter properly...  They're basically charging $3500 for the performance of a D700  sensor and AF inside a broken 50D body.


----------



## STM (Apr 19, 2012)

And the D800 does not have light leak problems.


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 19, 2012)

Does this mean that I can't get good pictures without a Nikon? 

I've been so blinded using my 8 year old 1D Mk II.

I now wonder how I ever survived with such inferior equipment


----------



## jaomul (Apr 19, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Does this mean that I can't get good pictures without a Nikon?
> 
> I've been so blinded using my 8 year old 1D Mk II.
> 
> I now wonder how I ever survived with such inferior equipment


I would be sceptical enough about the numbers, and that camera of yours remains great but it is impressive that the resolution is so high yet the quality remains. I do believe though that people can only see 12 dynamic range (this may be ill informed)so maybe thats why older cameras seem as good


----------



## Derrel (Apr 19, 2012)

Here's a link to a test of the Nikon D1, Nikon D3, Nikon D7000, Fuji X-Pro 1, Nikon D800, Canon 5D-Mk II, and Canon 5D-Mk III. All images were shot at f/5.6. SInce the D800 shoots the largest image, all the other cameras had their images up-sampled using Photoshop CS5 (using the bicubic interpolation method) so that all comparison images would be of the same size. Nikon D4, D3 (D700), D800, D7000 and Canon 5D, 5D Mark II, 5D Mark III and Fuji X-Pro 1 and X100 High ISO Sample Image Comparison

As he points out, "To show each camera fairly, I used actual images directly from each camera. If I had shot raw data instead, I would have needed to process each file with software to turn that data into a visible image, which also would have shown differences in each piece of software's interpretation as well as differences between cameras. Unknown to most casual users is that even if I used the same software, say Adobe Camera Raw, it processes files from different cameras differently. By using real JPGs, we can see exactly what each camera is doing. Feel free to run your own experiments with raw data if you prefer. Sharper renditions will enhance detail, but exaggerate noise, and vice versa. Ditto for differences in letting Adobe or whoever do the noise reduction instead of the cameras themselves in JPG. If you want these results in raw data, shoot it yourself and please share with us the results as I do."

Looking at these images, it's quite obvious...the 36MP Sony-made sensor in the D800 performs very well across a wide range of ISO levels. Where the Canon cameras are getting their butts kicked is in the dynamic range results, especially at lower ISO values...that is where the Sony-made sensor technology paired with the electronics Nikon has developed since 2007 is allowing Nikon's cameras to offer Dynamic Range figures that are significantly higher than what Canon is able to do with its sensor and electronic technology. The DxO Mark rating formula gives a pretty good amount of weight to base-level ISO dynamic range capability in their "Landscape" segment, according to the articles that have analyzed the DxO mark methodology. Now that Canon has lost its lead in sensor quality, it's amazing how many Canon shooters now discount the DxO Mark figures and claim that they cannot see any differences in images made with "any"camera,etc.,etc.. Still--the 5D Mark III is a very good camera. It's just that since Nikon fired around 50% of its long-time executives and replaced them with younger men, Nikon has been producing best-in-class image quality by using on-chip noise suppression sensor technology that SONY has patented, and which Canon has no access to. Leapfrogging...

Still, even if the 5D III is not top-top-top rated, it is QUITE a good performing camera...it's a LOT better than the old 1Ds 11 MP or 16.7 MP 1Ds Mk II,and so on...the 5D-III has in fact the BEST-performing camera sensor Canon has ever released. And that's saying something.They now have a decent focusing system and even better video. Once they get the light leak issue figured out, and drop the price $500-$700 it'll start selling well.


----------



## DorkSterr (Apr 19, 2012)

What in the world is wrong with the D4 Screenshot? They all look very soft...


----------



## Derrel (Apr 19, 2012)

DorkSterr said:


> What in the world is wrong with the D4 Screenshot? They all look very soft...



I'm gonna guess that that's due to the rather low default degree of sharpening the D4 applies to the in-camera JPEG files it creates. Low in-camera sharpening means the JPEGs will have minimal sharpening artifacts. Consumer-oriented cameras quite often apply more in-camera sharpening at their default output settings. Also...the 16 MP D4 images are being up-rezzed so that they are the same size as 36 MP D800 files.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Apr 19, 2012)

Looks like the D800 is the new King. At $500 less too, and better ISO performance. Who would've thunk it.


----------



## sovietdoc (Apr 19, 2012)

I am a bit skeptical about DxO results because DxO score  shows that D800 is significantly superior in low light.  I've shot with 5D3 and D800 at 12800 and higher and D800 isn't even close.  Resampling images to the same size doesn't help either.  

Now only if Nikon released a 26mp D800s with 8 fps continuous shooting, using the same sensor they have in D800 with moire tweaks and better low-light performance, and sold it for 2 grand, Canon would have nowhere to run.


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 19, 2012)

jaomul said:
			
		

> I would be sceptical enough about the numbers, and that camera of yours remains great but it is impressive that the resolution is so high yet the quality remains. I do believe though that people can only see 12 dynamic range (this may be ill informed)so maybe thats why older cameras seem as good



I know lol, I was just being facetious.

I don't really enjoy when people try and compare cameras online without any purpose other than to metaphorically say 'my d*ck is bigger than your d*ck' like it actually amounts to a hill of beans.


----------



## analog.universe (Apr 19, 2012)

sovietdoc said:


> I am a bit skeptical about DxO results because DxO score  shows that D800 is significantly superior in low light.  I've shot with 5D3 and D800 at 12800 and higher and D800 isn't even close.  Resampling images to the same size doesn't help either.



I really can't take DxO seriously.  A great many of their tests seem to contradict what the community actually experiences, so I don't even bother anymore.  

I actually just wish that some of the great lens sites would start doing in depth sensor tests.  You can compare DxO's lens results to everyone else on the internet, and then its obvious how far off they are.  There aren't a lot of resources for sensors though, so we don't even know if DxO is making as many mistakes with sensors as they are with lenses.


----------



## sovietdoc (Apr 19, 2012)

Well, if you look at the "our customers" page on DxO's site, you'll see they're listing biggest names in the imaging industry.  Canon isn't there.  Obviously it isn't that big of a name.

Customers worldwide use DxO Analyzer


----------



## analog.universe (Apr 19, 2012)

I wonder if they have a grudge?

That page is a little misleading to begin with.  Even citing high end clients isn't a testament to accuracy.  The DxO Analyzer software may well be brilliant, and extremely useful in the hands of Nikon engineers and whoever else they say uses it.  But that doesn't imply that the people running the testing website are competent, unbiased, accurate, or anything else.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Apr 19, 2012)

Blah blah blah, Canon fanboy crying, blah blah blah.D800 is king.  The only thing it's missing to make it the absolute best DSLR on the planet for EVERY professional photog is FPS, 2 stops of ISO performance and top shelf build quality.The 5D3 can't come close, not even mentioning the damn thing is about $700 overpriced.


----------



## DorkSterr (Apr 19, 2012)

Oh no he didn't.


----------



## analog.universe (Apr 19, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> Blah blah blah, Canon fanboy crying, blah blah blah.D800 is king.  The only thing it's missing to make it the absolute best DSLR on the planet for EVERY professional photog is FPS, 2 stops of ISO performance and top shelf build quality.The 5D3 can't come close, not even mentioning the damn thing is about $700 overpriced.



I was going to clarify the discussion, about how this isn't Canon specific etc...  but then I took a second look at your attitude and decided not to bother.


----------



## STM (Apr 19, 2012)

If I may interject a little bit of my philosophy here..........

Yes, Nikon now has a reasonably priced (if you call $4000 reasonable I guess, I am not known for usually carrying that much cash around in my wallet) 36MP DSLR. This is all well and good I guess. Will I ever get one? Perhaps when my "antique" D700 finally gives up the ghost. My question is, at which point does all of this become nothing more than just _*tekkie insanity*_? How many people here will e_ver _make prints large enough to take advantage of the amount of resolving power that this kind of technology provides? I am guessing you can count them on one hand. How many of you even make (or have someone else make) prints any larger than 16" x 20"? I have a printer at home which will make 16" x 20" prints and a stack of 16" x 20" trays in my darkroom and they almost never get used (except as a "wash" tray) when I print 11 x 14's. And at a normal viewing distance for a print that large, I doubt anyone here would notice the difference between them anyway. And for people who post a lot of stuff on the web, you do realize that most stuff posted on the web winds up around 72dpi, right? 

Coming from a film background, I find it very easy to just sit back and and enjoy watching people go _*ABSOLUTELY FREAKIN' BATSH*T*_ over the technical stuff. It actually gets quite amusing sometimes, almost like being the only _sober_ person in a _room full of drunks_. Which if you have never done it, I highly recommend it, because that kind of comedy you simply cannot buy. Of course photography has a very technical side to it, anyone who like me is still a big fan of black and white film and Ansel Adams' Zone System will attest to that. And of course with digital there is a greater complexity to it than when all you had was slide vs negative film, color vs black and white, ASA 64 vs 400 (or whatever). But lets not all forget that ultimately photography is an form of ART. A means of expression that transcends all the technical mumbo jumbo. One of the funniest conversations I ever overheard was two reasonably new to photography "photographers" arguing the merits of the Nikon D3 and the Canon D5 Mk II and talking megapixels this, and ISO that and all I could think to myself is " You know, I'll bet I could take a 50+ year old Leica M3 with a 50mm f/1.4 Leitz lens and some Plus-X and produce a print that would blow anything these two tekkies could ever make right out of the water. 

So where am I going with all of this you are wondering? Technology is all well and good folks.  But let's never forget that the camera is but a tool, it is but a recording device. Photographs are *taken* with a camera, but photographs are *MADE* by the photographer. 

Ok, I will step down from my soapbox now I think I just gave myself an aneurysm. We now return you to our regularly scheduled program, already in progress.........


----------



## mjhoward (Apr 19, 2012)

STM said:


> Yes, Nikon now has a reasonably priced (if you call $4000 reasonable I guess, I am not known for usually carrying that much cash around in my wallet) 36MP DSLR.



The D800 is $2999... $500 cheaper than the other body that is apparently littered with problems and the topic of this discussion.


----------



## Vtec44 (Apr 19, 2012)

Cool test!  Now if Nikon can get the camera to me in time for my next gig.


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 19, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:
			
		

> Blah blah blah, Canon fanboy crying, blah blah blah.D800 is king.  The only thing it's missing to make it the absolute best DSLR on the planet for EVERY professional photog is FPS, 2 stops of ISO performance and top shelf build quality.The 5D3 can't come close, not even mentioning the damn thing is about $700 overpriced.



Sounds like a Nikon fanboy. And to the statement above I stand my ground at who the **** cares? 

I mean, I understand that you (or ANYONE for that matter) obviously cannot take good photos without this camera but do you really have to be so belligerent? I mean, I know you must get really aroused by having your brand  (it's like a cult thing right) being technologically superior.

The Nikon IS better. It IS probably the best DSLR in the price range.

But I honestly haven't seen any photos take by it that could not be taken by another camera. Please quit molesting my mind with your superiority complex.

People have been professionally taking photos with lesser equipment for years. Nobody really seems to mind until a camera comes out with 20 EVs of dynamic range. HOW DID WE HAVE SURVIVED WITHOUT IT???!!?!?!

Don't be a pissy little troll please

(PS: Make sure your photographic talent is worth the camera....well, unless you're trying to compensate for something else that is inadequate James...)

I mean, if you're going to using the Holy Grail of all photographic technology, we need to know that you have the skill and responsibility to handle such a treasure.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Apr 19, 2012)

No fair, the canon "absorbs" more light.....the cheaters!


----------



## Derrel (Apr 19, 2012)

Here is a really good article that analyzes and describes how the DxO Mark scores are computed. http://peter.vdhamer.com/2010/12/05/dxomarksensor/

I do not own either the 5D-III or the D800. I have picked up and handled and shot a few dozen sample shots in a camera store with each camera, plus the new Nikon D4. As far a "fit and feel" in the hand, the D4 is the best for me, and the 5D-III a close second, with the D800 not being very appealing to me as far as the grip..I have long fingers, about 8.5 inches from tip of middle finger to heel of the palm, so for me the D800's grip is just,well, really bad-feeling. it felt like it was going to fall out of my hand, and there's barely any room for my pinkie finger. It's not that I did not like the feel of the B800 in-hand...it was that I *immediately* DISLIKED it. Worst Nikon I think I have ever held in the hand...on the other hand, the Canon 5D felt just totally AWESOME in the hand...best Canon I have ever felt and held! When you pick up the 5D-III, you will want it. It's not at all like the 5D or 5D-II...

Anyway...the fact that the D3200 is at 24.2MP now means that...the D300s replacement camera will also likely be 24.2 MP...and there could be some kind of new, upcoming "bridge" model that spans the D90/D300/D7000 gap, meaning a reasonably priced camera one step below the "pro" and semi-pro bodies...

Maybe it will be a D400 with a 24MP APS-C sized sensor...Maybe it will be a D700x with a 24.2MP FX sensor...that would aim RIGHT SQUARELY at the Canon 5D-III, and might be able to undercut it price-wise by $500-$800...maybe it will be the D700 body with the D4 16.2 MP sensor...


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Apr 20, 2012)

There are lots of variables, DxOMark is a reputable site. Experts have visited them but never found any error in them, other than advising us to avoid looking at scores, but individual measurements. Please compare noise using the SNR chart (3DB = 1EV), not the Low-Light ISO score (it includes dynamic range, color sensitivity and SNR). Moreover, Canon might have pre-cooked their RAW ie. reduced noise before you even edited your photo. Next thing is, the correct way is to compare them at the same size. 

Also, a higher MP have other advantages, ie sharper image due to weaker AA filter, and could withstand more noise reduction, therefore have less noise.

Theoretically, human can see only 6 EV of dynamic range, but experts say due to the eye's ability to adapt to changing lighting conditions, our eyes could actually see 20+ EV of dynamic range.


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Apr 20, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> jamesbjenkins said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have to ask though respectfully, why am I seeing this argument over and over again here from Canon users using the 'it is not the camera, it is the photographer' statement when we all know if it was the other way round, Canon would be slamming it home how Canon were superior. And if you really don't give a '****' as you put it why come on to a Nikon thread to voice these opinions. 

Admittedly, your right in some your statements. But your post seemed to be an attempt to start a flame war by making personal insulting comments about peoples 'D***' size and insinuating that the OP and anyone who simply comments on this thread has an inferiority complex because he made the post in the first place. 

Often in life, the people who sit round making nasty, personal and cheap comments to get a reaction are usually the ones suffering from the inferiority complex. 

If you are so sure of yourself and so confident in yourself pal, why do you feel the need to come on and throw personal insults at other forum members? When as you say, you don't give a 'F***'?? Why is it any thread made about Nikon cameras, you come on and make the same comment every time 'How did people make good photos without a Nikon camera'? If as you say, you don't give a F***. Your the troll it would seem!

And.. before you start brandishing me as a Nikon fanboy, I am a Nikon fanboy who has a Canon Powershot S90 compact camera and a Canon photo printer and if someone handed me a Canon 5D3 for free I would take it and use it happily.


----------



## STM (Apr 20, 2012)

mjhoward said:


> STM said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, Nikon now has a reasonably priced (if you call $4000 reasonable I guess, I am not known for usually carrying that much cash around in my wallet) 36MP DSLR.
> ...



Did you even read anything else I wrote in my post? Did any of it even sink in?


----------



## mjhoward (Apr 20, 2012)

STM said:


> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> > STM said:
> ...



Yes, you provided false information and then proceeded to rant.  I ignored your rant and provided anyone else reading with correct info.  I don't plan on buying either body either but can appreciate how far things have come.  You come to a thread that is only about the technological advancement (or lack of) in current camera bodies and then ***** about consumers comparing the technical capabilities?  Do you see how ridiculous that is?  Why don't you let that sink in, @sshole. :mrgreen:


----------



## Mrgiggls (Apr 20, 2012)

I think we should all switch to Sony.. then we can all be freinds.


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 20, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:
			
		

> I have to ask though respectfully, why am I seeing this argument over and over again here from Canon users using the 'it is not the camera, it is the photographer' statement when we all know if it was the other way round, Canon would be slamming it home how Canon were superior. And if you really don't give a '****' as you put it why come on to a Nikon thread to voice these opinions.
> 
> Admittedly, your right in some your statements. But your post seemed to be an attempt to start a flame war by making personal insulting comments about peoples 'D***' size and insinuating that the OP and anyone who simply comments on this thread has an inferiority complex because he made the post in the first place.
> 
> ...



Because to a certain point it's not the camera. Name something that the D800 does that the 5D doesn't. What's that? The 5D only has minimal noise up to ISO 2000?  That's so sad considering that one of my cameras only goes up to ISO 1600 max in its normal range. I just find the whole pissing contest stupid.

I was trying to start a flame war....did you james' post...

I'm just trying to prove a point that all these threads are retarded. All of them

Nikon vs X
Pentax vs X
Canon vs X
Sony vs X

I comment because that seems to be the consensus: you aren't doing something right of you don't have THIS camera. I just don't understand why it matters. Honestly, I do wish that Canon would step up to the plate and do some great things, I have considered just switching to Nikon. But arguing over which camera is better isn't going to make you seem any smarter or any better at photography. It makes you look like a dick.

And anyways, what does anyone gain from making threads like this I any forum? If you can logically explain that to me I will be gratefull

You have people like James who makes asinine comments on another very civil post. I'm not being a troll. I'm using sarcasm, on of the most easily comprehendible forms of comedy to prove a point, and apparently it's not working.

I guess this is the end of my rant. I'm sure you will retort with a seemingly clever comment about how I am no better. But it's just whatever (rhyme lol).


----------



## Alex_B (Apr 20, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Nikon vs X
> Pentax vs X
> Canon vs X
> Sony vs X



I think Linhof might be the best ...


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Apr 20, 2012)

analog.universe said:


> jamesbjenkins said:
> 
> 
> > Blah blah blah, Canon fanboy crying, blah blah blah.D800 is king.  The only thing it's missing to make it the absolute best DSLR on the planet for EVERY professional photog is FPS, 2 stops of ISO performance and top shelf build quality.The 5D3 can't come close, not even mentioning the damn thing is about $700 overpriced.
> ...


Good sir, that entire post was written with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek.  I never pass on a chance to get a good zing on the brain-damaged Canonites who disregard all evidence in declaring their brand is superior.  And Rex, seeing as how I've only posted one of my sessions on here (and I doubt you've even bothered to research before flaming) your post is completely worthless ESPECIALLY since you agree with me that the D800 is superior.  I'm no Nikon Fanboy, I just appreciate having the very best...whatever that happens to be. Seeing as how Canon is already pulling 5D3 off the shelves for their failures (light leak, anyone?) they're obviously not the best. And, FTR, I built quite a nice little business on the back of a D90 and a few DX primes.  I don't NEED anything other than my eyes and my right index finger to deliver the "wow" for my clients... ;-)


----------



## o hey tyler (Apr 20, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> I never pass on a chance to get a good zing on the brain-damaged Canonites who disregard all evidence in declaring their brand is superior.


 This...  





> I'm no Nikon Fanboy


 ...contradicts this. 





> I just appreciate having the very best...whatever that happens to be.


 Yet you weren't shooting a PhaseOne Digital MF back until the release of the D800, were you? 

Denial isn't just a river that runs through Egypt. If you want to talk about someone being "brain damaged" look no further than yourself. If your first post was "tongue firmly planted in cheek" you wouldn't have continued with the post that I quoted. Grow up, Jimmy. 

How do I manage to get great images out of my Canon bodies? If they're bodies are so inferior, why do the images not look inferior?


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Apr 20, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> Good sir, that entire post was written with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek. I never pass on a chance to get a good zing on the brain-damaged Canonites who disregard all evidence in declaring their brand is superior. And Rex, seeing as how I've only posted one of my sessions on here (and I doubt you've even bothered to research before flaming) your post is completely worthless ESPECIALLY since you agree with me that the D800 is superior. *I'm no Nikon Fanboy,* I just appreciate having the very best...whatever that happens to be. Seeing as how Canon is already pulling 5D3 off the shelves for their failures (light leak, anyone?) they're obviously not the best. And, FTR, I built quite a nice little business on the back of a D90 and a few DX primes. I don't NEED anything other than my eyes and my right index finger to deliver the "wow" for my clients... ;-)



You're right, you're not just any ol' fanboy. You're a belligerent, ignorant fanboy. The only person I see with "brain damage" in this thread is you. 

It's always the same crap with these same old arguments-- Mac or PC, Nikon or Canon, Chevy or Ford? But what a difference it makes when these arguments do come up (which inevitably they will) if you can conduct yourself in an intelligent manner and provide thorough and developed arguments for whatever side of the fence you fall on. But when you start calling an entire group of people "brain-damaged" because they aren't on the side of the fence you are, well, that just makes you look like an ignoramus.


----------



## Crollo (Apr 20, 2012)

jaomul said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > Does this mean that I can't get good pictures without a Nikon?
> ...



Just because new cameras have better technology doesn't make existing cameras have worse technology. A 1D will still take pictures as well as it did before the next camera was released, unless there's noncosmetic damage to the camera.


----------



## STM (Apr 20, 2012)

mjhoward said:


> STM said:
> 
> 
> > mjhoward said:
> ...



I would say the very last line in your post tells me everything I need to know about the kind of person you are. Perhaps you should take a look in the mirror before _getting rude, profane and personal with others_. My first inclination was return the favor with an insult but I will not lower myself to stoop to your level, I am better than that.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Apr 20, 2012)

Rotanimod said:
			
		

> You're right, you're not just any ol' fanboy. You're a belligerent, ignorant fanboy. The only person I see with "brain damage" in this thread is you.
> 
> It's always the same crap with these same old arguments-- Mac or PC, Nikon or Canon, Chevy or Ford? But what a difference it makes when these arguments do come up (which inevitably they will) if you can conduct yourself in an intelligent manner and provide thorough and developed arguments for whatever side of the fence you fall on. But when you start calling an entire group of people "brain-damaged" because they aren't on the side of the fence you are, well, that just makes you look like an ignoramus.



I'm brain damaged eh?  Care to prove that? Oh wait, you can't because this is an anonymous forum on an anonymous Internet... ;-)

Belligerent? Yes, intentionally so. 

 Ignorant?  Far from it.  

You are correct on one point.  These arguments are stupid...unless they're backed up with scientifically measured, objective testing.  Sucks to be on the wrong side of the data this go around, doesn't it?

And, Tyler...I love you too, sweetie.


----------



## analog.universe (Apr 20, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> I'm brain damaged eh?  Care to prove that?





jamesbjenkins said:


> Belligerent? Yes, intentionally so.



That's about enough proof for me...


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Apr 20, 2012)

jamesbjenkins -- Maybe people would like you more if you talked less


----------



## Austin Greene (Apr 20, 2012)

Ah yes, nothing brings out the best of TPF like a good old Canon vs Nikon rage topic.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Apr 20, 2012)

o hey tyler said:
			
		

> This...   ...contradicts this.  Yet you weren't shooting a PhaseOne Digital MF back until the release of the D800, were you?
> 
> Denial isn't just a river that runs through Egypt. If you want to talk about someone being "brain damaged" look no further than yourself. If your first post was "tongue firmly planted in cheek" you wouldn't have continued with the post that I quoted. Grow up, Jimmy.
> 
> How do I manage to get great images out of my Canon bodies? If they're bodies are so inferior, why do the images not look inferior?



Never said your images were inferior.  You know from other threads I'm a big fan of your work!  This thread is about the technical merits of specifically the D800 and the 5D3.  Not the Phase One or even the complete product lines of either Nikon or Canon.

Once again, the limitations of text based communication don't lend themselves to proper understanding of anything but the most basic of messages.  I take great pleasure in poking the ignorant spec-slobbering fauxtographers around here. Besides, Canon had more than a decade of being clearly superior to Nikon in DSLR performance across the board, hopefully you can keep things in perspective now that they've changed for this cycle.

And the only one allowed to call me Jimmy is my grandpa. He died in 2002.  Nice try though. ;-)

Can we get back to flaming n00bs plz?


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Apr 20, 2012)

analog.universe said:
			
		

> That's about enough proof for me...



Tsk tsk, does anyone around here have the slightest sense of humor?? Good Lord.

You'd think there'd be some appreciation left for a nice thoughtful flame.  This forum used to be so entertaining...


----------



## Crollo (Apr 20, 2012)

NOW NOW, GUYS! BOTH GIRLS ARE PRETTY!


----------



## Vtec44 (Apr 20, 2012)

Dang, this thread is getting way too serious! lol

I more upset that I don't have my D800 yet even though I placed an order 3hrs after it was released.  WTH??


----------



## o hey tyler (Apr 20, 2012)

Vtec44 said:


> Dang, this thread is getting way too serious! lol
> 
> I more upset that I don't have my D800 yet even though I placed an order 3hrs after it was released.  WTH??



That's a bit odd... Did you preorder? Or did you just place an order 3 hours after it hit the street?


----------



## kundalini (Apr 20, 2012)

An interesting article in the latest issue (April 2012) of Rangefinder magazine about the D800.

*Rangefinder - Rob Van Petten: Lighting the Way



*EDIT:  Sorry, the on-line article isn't showing the images that the paper copy shows.


----------



## Vtec44 (Apr 20, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> That's a bit odd... Did you preorder? Or did you just place an order 3 hours after it hit the street?



It was announced on Feb 6 9pm PST (if I remember it correctly).  I placed an order through Amazon at 11pm on the same day.  Amazon rescheduled the ETA twice already, and still a no show


----------



## jake337 (Apr 20, 2012)

I'm just waiting to see evolution of the newest and upcoming medium and large format digital backs and camera bodies.  I'm sure they'll be great, just like all the new tech being released.


----------



## Aloicious (Apr 20, 2012)

Vtec44 said:


> Dang, this thread is getting way too serious! lol
> 
> I more upset that I don't have my D800 yet even though I placed an order 3hrs after it was released.  WTH??



I called my local brick and mortar store within 15 mins of them opening the day after the announcement and was able to get mine on their first shipment, but when I picked it up they were saying that if I would have called just a few mins later I would have had to wait as well. I'm sure amazon was even more overloaded with pre-orders, and who knows how many units they recieved...I just got lucky I guess. but with your order that early, I would guess you're probably fairly close to the top of the waiting list.


----------



## Vtec44 (Apr 20, 2012)

Aloicious said:


> I called my local brick and mortar store within 15 mins of them opening the day after the announcement and was able to get mine on their first shipment



Don't take this personally, but I hate you! lol


----------



## Aloicious (Apr 20, 2012)

Vtec44 said:


> Aloicious said:
> 
> 
> > I called my local brick and mortar store within 15 mins of them opening the day after the announcement and was able to get mine on their first shipment
> ...



 heh...don't worry, you'll hopefully get yours pretty soon too...


----------



## mjhoward (Apr 20, 2012)

STM said:


> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> > STM said:
> ...



I think you may be bit delusional if you don't think your original response to me wasn't being rude or uncalled for.  No level stooping needed, you were already there.  Implying that I may be thick-headed because I chose to ignore your childish rant is what prompted the @sshole comment.  I never insulted you, you were being an @sshole so I called you out on it.  Have a good night.


----------



## STM (Apr 20, 2012)

_"I never insulted you, you were being an @sshole so I called you out on it........"  _ 

Now who is being delusional? ,  to paraphrase _"I never insulted you...........I just called you an a******."   _What do you call people when you are TRYING to insult them? I take it manners have never been one of your forte's.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 20, 2012)

Side by side comparisons

Part II - Controlled tests


Take a look at how the two cameras, 5D-III and D800, handle shadow recovery of the same,exact, high-contrast scene. The Nikon blows the Canon away.


As Fred Miranda himself wrote, "*Obviously, the Nikon D800 is in a totally different league. Absent of color noise or any pattern, this image reveals Nikon's exceptional performance."* 

And also wrote,*"**T*here is no question that the D800 does not disappoint in signal to noise ratio (SNR) at low ISO and has higher dynamic range. I'm still shocked by the differences."


----------



## Vtec44 (Apr 22, 2012)

The D800 sensor is insane, and suits my style really well.  I tend to under expose a bit to preserve highlights.


----------



## gsgary (Apr 29, 2012)

Have you heard about the D800 problems ? autofocus problems with wide angle lenses below 50mm, batteries being recalled


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Apr 29, 2012)

Derrel said:


> Side by side comparisons
> 
> Part II - Controlled tests
> 
> ...



TBH thats really sad. Why cant canon fix this by now?


----------



## cgipson1 (Apr 29, 2012)

jaomul said:


> I do believe though that people can only see 12 dynamic range (this may be ill informed)so maybe thats why older cameras seem as good



Most digital camera sensors only "see" about 10 stops of DR.

People can generally see up to about 24 stops with our "variable aperture pupil". At a single "fixed" aperture.. our eyes still see up to 14 stops or so.

Cameras vs. The Human Eye

Understanding Dynamic Range in Digital Photography


----------



## Netskimmer (Apr 29, 2012)

gsgary said:


> Have you heard about the D800 problems ? autofocus problems with wide angle lenses below 50mm, batteries being recalled



The EN-EL15 is used for several different bodies , including my D7000, and has been in production long before the D800 was announced. I don't see how one single bad batch reflects poorly on the D800?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Apr 29, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > I do believe though that people can only see 12 dynamic range (this may be ill informed)so maybe thats why older cameras seem as good
> ...



I'm not sure if I'm right but I actually read that our eyes could only see up to 6 stops. Actually not all that stops comes the aperture, our eyes also have some kind of ISO. That's why in the dark, things looks grainy. Also our brains do a lot of tone mapping too. Wait... there is still one thing that causes us to see more stops... we squint our eyes!


----------



## cgipson1 (Apr 29, 2012)

EchoingWhisper said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...



I actually did a bit of research on this last year.. just happened to have those links handy! Did you read them? If you feel they are incorrect, please post substantiating data!


----------



## Derrel (Apr 29, 2012)

About 35 years ago, I read the instruction manual for my even-the-outdated Weston Master II selenium light meter. I recall very clearly that that light meter manual stated that the human eye could see things well across a 100,000 to 1 lighting ratio, *or greater*, such as a white ski jacket on top of a snow-covered mountain top, as well as a dark-toned object placed in deep shadow. So....I JUST did a Google search on the question "How many f/stops is a 100,000:1 ratio?"

First hit ,top of the list was this article under the umbrella of the Canon,USA company's learning resources web pages.

Canon DLC: Article Print: Capture More Light: How to Capture High Dynamic Range (HDR) Images with your DSLR

A brief excerpt:


*Black & White Negative Film*​10-11 f-stops,  or a DR ratio of about 1,000:1  2,000:1​*Slide Film*​6-7 f-stops, or a ratio of about 100:1​*DSLRs (in 2008)*​8-10 f-stops, or a ratio of about 250:1  to 1000:1​*Daylight Scene (with full sun)*​12-15 f-stops, or a ratio of 5,000:1 to 50,000:1 (depending on preferred amount of shadow detail)​*Room Interior, with outside view from window into full daylight*​At least 17 f-stops, or a ratio greater than 100,000:1​


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Apr 29, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> EchoingWhisper said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



Found it. Way Beyond Monochrome: Advanced Techniques for Traditional Black & White ... - Ralph Lambrecht, Ralph W. Lambrecht, Chris Woodhouse - Google Books


----------



## Aloicious (Apr 30, 2012)

Netskimmer said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Have you heard about the D800 problems ? autofocus problems with wide angle lenses below 50mm, batteries being recalled
> ...



+1, and I haven't had any autofocus problems below 50mm with my 14-24 or 24-70 either....


----------



## Vtec44 (Apr 30, 2012)

gsgary said:


> Have you heard about the D800 problems ? autofocus problems with wide angle lenses below 50mm, batteries being recalled



I have 3 ENEL15 batteries for my D7000, which is the same battery for the D800.  I believe the recall is for a tiny batch but this is not related to the D800.  The battery is being used for several Nikon cameras including the D7000, J1, D800 and it was in production way before the D800 was introduced.  I'll definitely test lenses below 50mm but I doubt it's any serious issue.  Nikon are really good at product testing.


----------



## gsgary (Apr 30, 2012)

Found this for you


----------



## gsgary (Apr 30, 2012)

And another Flickr: Discussing AF problem ? in Nikon D800 Users Group


----------



## Derrel (Apr 30, 2012)

Yes, the CLS flash triggering seems to be a sticky wicket for the users of off-camera flashes triggered by CLS. Here's Thom Hogan's March 29,2012 entry regarding D800 teething problems.2012 Nikon News and Comments by Thom Hogan

"_*Grumbling*__March 29__ (__commentary__)__--_It happens with every new camera introduction: people get their hands on the new camera and they start grumbling about "issues."
The interesting thing is that all of Nikon's warnings about lenses and camera handling on the D800 seem to have done their job: I've seen very few "it isn't sharp" grumbles so far. Fewer than on almost any previous Nikon DSLR resolution bump. Perhaps Nikon will learn from this that much of their problem has been lack of expectation setting in their marketing messages.
That leaves the "other" grumbles:

_Build quality complaints. _Not a lot of these yet. A battery door that fell off because a pin was missing (this, by the way, is why cutting off parts to only authorized repair centers was a mistake--it'll take longer and cost more to fix). A miscentered viewfinder or two. Complaints about the plastic quality of the shooting method selector. But the big winner in this category is the LCD: I've seen a lot of miscalibration complaints, with color tints and brightness issues being the common ones. The camera has some ability to change brightness (and hue in Live View), but the Auto setting appears to be the culprit most of the time.
_Functional complaints. _I haven't been able to test this one yet, but there's a prominent complaint about wireless flash reliability using camera's flash as master. There are definitely issues with tethered shooting, and I've already pointed out the missing functions in Camera Control Pro. Noisy long exposures once you jump above the analog gain limit (ISO 1600 or higher). The return of amp noise (visible at bottom of frame at high ISO, visible as horizontal bands at long exposures). "No crop" movie is actually a 1.1x crop horizontally (91% of the horizontal width of the sensor).
_Design issues. _Why no WT-5 support? Why no RCA video out? Why do the PC-E lenses hit the flash housing in some orientations? Why no camera-wide "setting" ability (still only shooting and custom settings banks)? Why do we still have the 1EV bracket limit outside of the built-in HDR?
_Documentation issues. _Uncompressed HDMI video out seems impossible if all you do is read the manual, yet it works if you know the secret spell and wave your wand correctly (Relashio! Engorgio!).
Personally, nothing so far seems like anything other than the usual product launch noise level. A few things will need to be addressed by firmware fixes. Quality control will get better with each new wave of shipments. The design issues are typical Nikon, where they seem to have blinders on to things that are obvious to serious users.
All in all, a quiet post-launch, as far as post launches go."

end quoted passage.

The above is a good example of why I NEVER like to buy Version 1.0 of ANYTHING...


----------



## Mrgiggls (Apr 30, 2012)

Yep...same here. I like to let the manufacturer get all the little things worked out and if I'm lucky there'll be a price drop or I'll catch a special when I'm ready to pull the trigger.

That's exactly what I did with my D90 although I can't remember it really having any new-model issues....I was just too cheap to pay $899 the first year or so LOL.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Apr 30, 2012)

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photographic-discussions/278741-camera-like-hammer-just-tool.html


----------



## bhop (Apr 30, 2012)

Leica rules!


----------



## Aloicious (Apr 30, 2012)

I fired multiple off camera flashes yesterday with the D800 and never had a problem with it, however I was using a master SB700 in the hotshoe...

and I was shooting with the 14-24mm yesterday and still have no issues...I can take some autofocus test shots and post them up if people would be interested...

I have no problems buying v1.0 cameras nowadays. I personally have not seen any of the issues that people are complaining about, but if they are widespread and not just a few isolated incidents then I'm sure nikon can issue a firmware update which is simple to perform. DSLR technology is fairly well developed, buying a new model of camera is not like buying a totally new type of technology....like when plasma TV's first came out, they were riddled with issues that took time to work out...or when DSLRs first came out, I would have waited to buy one (and I did, I didn't switch from film until like 2010ish, but thats not necissarily only because of waiting on technology advancements), but the base technology behind DSLRs is pretty well rooted....maybe its the engineer in me, because I understand how product development and such work, but none of these complaints really bother me...

I'm still glad I got mine, and given the chance, I'd do it again....really the only thing I could complain about are some of the changes in ergonomics, but that is really minor, and only a matter of opinion and personal preference, so it really wouldn't necissarily affect other people.


----------



## gsgary (May 1, 2012)

Vtec44 said:
			
		

> I have 3 ENEL15 batteries for my D7000, which is the same battery for the D800.  I believe the recall is for a tiny batch but this is not related to the D800.  The battery is being used for several Nikon cameras including the D7000, J1, D800 and it was in production way before the D800 was introduced.  I'll definitely test lenses below 50mm but I doubt it's any serious issue.  Nikon are really good at product testing.



http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538719/nikon-uk-issues-d800-battery-voluntary-recall


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

Vtec44 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Have you heard about the D800 problems ? autofocus problems with wide angle lenses below 50mm, batteries being recalled
> ...



yeah, the recalled batch actually does include the ones that came with the D800, ask me how I know...heh 

but you're right, a battery recall has nothing to do with the body they're used on...


----------



## gsgary (May 1, 2012)

If you search the net there are other problems with video and a few have gone bang not sure what it is though


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

if you search the internet for problems with ANY body you'll get people complaining about almost anything, but its on the net so it must be true, right? if that were the case and everything on the 'net was accurate then every camera ever made would be riddled with problems and issues...

shall we search the 5DM3's light leak issues, and Canon's own product advisory for the 5DmIII body, pink casting issues, HDR mode issues, incorrect EXIF issue....or the 5dM2's video problems, shutter problems, sensor 'burning'... but I'm guessing you probably didn't have those problems with your 5DM2 'eh? otherwise you probably wouldn't have it....

my problem with all these posts your going around and making is that unless you have personal experience with all these problems, its little more than just spreading useless hearsay and rumors...if you were truly wanting to know what issues the D800 might have, you would probably ask those of us who use one if what you were reading was correct rather than posting up BS based off 'net searches and claiming it as fact....because I DO have first hand experience with the D800, and have not seen any of the problems you keep parrotting from internet searches...

if there were issues with my D800, I'd have no problems reporting them to nikon and telling it like it is...hell I'd get rid of the D800 if all the rumors were true...but they just plain aren't correct in real-world-land. People all to often claim a piece of equipment is at fault when it is much more likely due to user error. 

the only 2 claims I've seen that MIGHT have any merit from your posts are the flash triggering, and autofocusing....I'll test out the OCF triggering of remote units today since I haven't tried using the OCF to trigger the remotes, but I haven't had problems with a hotshoe SB700 triggering other SB700's, and I'll try to get some autofocus test shots below 50mm posted too.. and guess what, if I have problems, I'll tell it like it is, and provide some first hand proof of the problems, but from what I've seen so far with my experiences, you'll probably get evidence that the claimed 'net' problems, are not accurate, or at least not widespread enough to be in my copy of the D800...


----------



## Nikon_Josh (May 1, 2012)

gsgary said:


> If you search the net there are other problems with video and a few have gone bang not sure what it is though



Gary, I have to say! I'm not sure where you are going with this. It seems someone is slightly irritated about Nikon releasing the D800? Or am I wrong??


----------



## gsgary (May 1, 2012)

Nikon_Josh said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > If you search the net there are other problems with video and a few have gone bang not sure what it is though
> ...



Couldn't care less, but most Nikon owners on here try to make out they are perfect


----------



## gsgary (May 1, 2012)

Aloicious said:


> if you search the internet for problems with ANY body you'll get people complaining about almost anything, but its on the net so it must be true, right? if that were the case and everything on the 'net was accurate then every camera ever made would be riddled with problems and issues...
> 
> shall we search the 5DM3's light leak issues, and Canon's own product advisory for the 5DmIII body, pink casting issues, HDR mode issues, incorrect EXIF issue....or the 5dM2's video problems, shutter problems, sensor 'burning'... but I'm guessing you probably didn't have those problems with your 5DM2 'eh? otherwise you probably wouldn't have it....
> 
> ...




I don't have a 5Dmk2


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

good job champ...then could look at the 1Dmk2's dark band problems, or color handling problems...the point remains the same...


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

Issues firing off camera flashes with the D800? nope, no issues other than my flash batteries need to be replaced...


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

gsgary said:


> Couldn't care less, but most Nikon owners on here try to make out they are perfect



no more than canon owners try to make out that canon is perfect...no one said the d800 is perfect anyways, not at all, there are some little things I could complain about, but overall any of those things are simply opinion....going around like an upset canon fanboy quoting internet rumors and fabricating innacuracies doesn't do anything for anyone.


----------



## Vtec44 (May 1, 2012)

gsgary said:


> Nikon UK issues D800 battery voluntary recall | Photography news - Camera news, photo news and photography events | Amateur Photographer



Thanks for the link.  Yeah I verified mine a few days back and none are on the list... so far


----------



## gsgary (May 1, 2012)

Aloicious said:


> good job champ...then could look at the 1Dmk2's dark band problems, or color handling problems...the point remains the same...



Never seen that with either of mine


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

gsgary said:


> Aloicious said:
> 
> 
> > good job champ...then could look at the 1Dmk2's dark band problems, or color handling problems...the point remains the same...
> ...



yeah, thats exactly my point, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, I'm only saying that just because it's on the internet doesn't mean it's true...I just searched '1DmkII problems' and thats a few that I saw off the top...I'm sure your 1DMk2 is a great camera, just like I'm sure the 5Dmk3 is a great camera, and just like I know that the D800 is a great camera....none of them are perfect, and discussing their issues and limitations is a good thing, but we've got to keep it reasonable and keep the hearsay, crazy internet stories and baseless claims out of it, they won't help anyone who is searching to find real and accurate information...

I've got some autofocus test shots, I just need to get them coverted to jpg and resized with crops


----------



## gsgary (May 1, 2012)

Aloicious said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Aloicious said:
> ...




I also like pulling peoples legs


----------



## Aloicious (May 1, 2012)

heh...I can tell...but I'm glad you brought up the off camera flash video, I had never heard of that so it was a good thing to investigate...


----------



## Vtec44 (May 3, 2012)

I'm happy to report that my D800 doesn't have the recalled battery, focus issues, speed light problems, or light leak.


----------



## Aloicious (May 3, 2012)

nice!...I don't think the D800 ever had any light leak issues, that was mainly the 5dmk3....I'm still waiting on my new battery from nikon though...

post up some pics from it if you get a chance


----------



## gsgary (May 3, 2012)

Vtec44 said:
			
		

> I'm happy to report that my D800 doesn't have the recalled battery, focus issues, speed light problems, or light leak.



Have you tried the 24f1.4


----------



## gsgary (May 3, 2012)

And 24-70f2.8  the 14-24 was ok


----------



## Aloicious (May 3, 2012)

I don't have a 24 1.4, but both the 14-24 and 24-70 are great on mine...


----------



## Vtec44 (May 3, 2012)

Tried it on my old 35-70mm and 24-70mm.  Both are razor sharp.  I don't have 24 f1.4 but I should just borrow one to test.  So far, I like the build of this camera.  Shutter sound is loud! lol


----------



## Mach0 (May 3, 2012)

Vtec44 said:
			
		

> Tried it on my old 35-70mm and 24-70mm.  Both are razor sharp.  I don't have 24 f1.4 but I should just borrow one to test.  So far, I like the build of this camera.  Shutter sound is loud! lol



Congrats  enjoy


----------



## Vtec44 (May 3, 2012)

ISO 3200 at 21mp

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/69534716/_NIK0070.jpg


----------

