Planing to move on to full frame. D610 vs 5D mk III?

[Cartogrophotographer]

So here is the deal. I have been learning and experimenting with my 600D/EOS Rebel T3i and am starting to feel ready to go full frame.
After doing some research I am leaning towards Nikon D610 because of its good image qualities and bang-for-buck affordability.

I have not invested significantly in canon-glass, but what kind of bugs me is two things that speaks in favor of the 5d mk III: low-light (I do plan of taking some documentary style indoor and street portraits among other things) and magic lantern.

Yeah, AF would be another issue, but quite frankly it has not been overly important to me, but perhaps that is because of me experimenting with manual liveview focus peaking in ML. But as I know the D610 lacks this feature it adds to me feeling less sure.

In any case, I plan to get the sigma 35mm 1.4 in conjunction with buying the full frame body. (I know that nikon glass can be mounted on canon bodies with an adapter for manual focus- which is also a pragmatic reason why investing in glass with nikon mount is the way to go, I actually plan to eventually get the Zeiss Otus after some brutal savings).

Any advice and tips or general thoughts?

 

[runnah]

There is a vast chasm separating the D610 and the MKIII. A more apt comparison would be the D800 and the MKIII. Or the D610 and the 6D.

Either way if you can afford it go with the MKIII and you won't need a new camera for many many years.

 

[Derrel]

Depends on what you want the camera to be optimal for. The 5D III is a new camera with a really awesome focusing system and good handling for a Canon body...it's been re-engineered to act a lot like the Nikon D2-series, with the Func Button added, and the DOF preview button moved to the traditional Nikon location, and the viewfinder has been upgraded quite a bit from other earlier cameras. The 5D-III is a MAJOR revision from the 5D and 5D-II that came before, which were cheap EOS ELAN-type bodies with good sensors in them.

The D610 is a cheap-body camera, with the "square viewfinder" system Nikon uses on mid-line consumer cameras, not the round eyepiece that signifies the high-end bodies with the best viewfinder system and better pentaprism and better viewfinder image overall. (Especially if you wear eyeglasses while you shoot.)

The camera to compare against the 5D Mark III is the used Nikon D3x, at around the same, or less money as the new 5D-III. The D800 is a few hundred dollars less than the 5D-III and has a better sensor than anything Canon has made, but if you want an "economy" FX camera, the D610 is low-priced.

Live view focusing and focus peaking...ehhh...yeah, okay. It sounds like you're not really sure of what it is you really want or need the most. It sounds like you want a video camera, a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, and a full-frame d-slr, all in one body. Do you want to hold it out in front of you with two hands, like a P&S, or look through the viewfinder and shoot like an SLR?

By the way, the D610's video is considered consumer-level, where the 5D-III has better video imaging. Like runnah says, D800 vs 5D-III and D610 vs 6D make more sense...figure out the actual budget, then look at the choices. Handle them. See what YOU think. You might really LOVE one or the other!

 

[runnah]

Like Derreelll said the MKIII is awesome for video. As a videographer I love it thus far and the results rival most consumer grade video cameras.

 

[jaomul]

I own none of these but from friends that have the 5d and nikon d600

The 5d3 has an amazing autofocus system. If you want to shoot fast moving subjects it is likely a better choice. Canon do excellent tilt/shift lenses and do a very fancy super macro lens with up to 5x macro.

The nikon is cheaper, has a simpler but still good a/f system and excels as a low iso shooter due a massive dynamic range sensor, while still being good at high iso (as is the 5d3)

If you are not specifically doing sports or a big macro shooter they are similar

 

[KmH]

Nikon's D610 is an entry-level grade camera. Canon's 5D MK III is a prosumer grade camera.

Canon's 6D would closer to the Nikon D610 for comparison purposes.

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

Like Derreelll said the MKIII is awesome for video. As a videographer I love it thus far and the results rival most consumer grade video cameras.

Yeah, if I was a videographer, the choice would have been easy, especially given the magic lantern hack.

 

[DarkShadow]

A more fair comparison would be the Nikon D610 VS Canon 6D or Nikon D800 VS Canon 5D III.

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

Depends on what you want the camera to be optimal for. The 5D III is a new camera with a really awesome focusing system and good handling for a Canon body...it's been re-engineered to act a lot like the Nikon D2-series, with the Func Button added, and the DOF preview button moved to the traditional Nikon location, and the viewfinder has been upgraded quite a bit from other earlier cameras. The 5D-III is a MAJOR revision from the 5D and 5D-II that came before, which were cheap EOS ELAN-type bodies with good sensors in them.

The D610 is a cheap-body camera, with the "square viewfinder" system Nikon uses on mid-line consumer cameras, not the round eyepiece that signifies the high-end bodies with the best viewfinder system and better pentaprism and better viewfinder image overall. (Especially if you wear eyeglasses while you shoot.)

The camera to compare against the 5D Mark III is the used Nikon D3x, at around the same, or less money as the new 5D-III. The D800 is a few hundred dollars less than the 5D-III and has a better sensor than anything Canon has made, but if you want an "economy" FX camera, the D610 is low-priced.

Live view focusing and focus peaking...ehhh...yeah, okay. It sounds like you're not really sure of what it is you really want or need the most. It sounds like you want a video camera, a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, and a full-frame d-slr, all in one body. Do you want to hold it out in front of you with two hands, like a P&S, or look through the viewfinder and shoot like an SLR?

By the way, the D610's video is considered consumer-level, where the 5D-III has better video imaging. Like runnah says, D800 vs 5D-III and D610 vs 6D make more sense...figure out the actual budget, then look at the choices. Handle them. See what YOU think. You might really LOVE one or the other!

Basically I just want a full frame camera with good image quality (color-accuracy/depth, good high iso-performance and dynamic range).
The reason I mentioned focus peaking was that I have been experimenting with developing my manual focus skill with my magic lantern 600d (which does not exactly have the best viewfinder).

It seems that the 5d mk III is the better all-round camera, but that its strength mainly lies in the AF, robustness and video capabilities. D600/D600 seems to have greater dynamic range, colour depth and of course, resolution (yeah yeah, I know...)

But I am a bit confused when it comes to the signal to noise and dynamic range ratios comparisons of the D600 and the D610. Measurements by Dxomark tells us quite another story than techradar for example.

Nikon D610 review: Noise and dynamic range | Digital slrs/hybrids Reviews | TechRadar
Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D600 - DxOMark
Tests and reviews for the camera Nikon D610 - DxOMark

From what I have heard and seen I know that dxomark results should be taken with a pinch of salt.

 

[ShootRaw]

D600 and D610 are the same..Except for 610 having a new shutter and slightly faster burst rate..

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

D600 and D610 are the same..Except for 610 having a new shutter and slightly faster burst rate..

According to the official story, yes. But the reports coming from tests and user tels us a different story (Apparently the d610 also focuses faster according to some). I wounder is it possible we are dealing with differences in manufacturing quality between individual cameras, and/or simply that people are doing their tests in under different conditions (lenses, type of lighting affecting how the signal is processed etc)?

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

I own none of these but from friends that have the 5d and nikon d600

The 5d3 has an amazing autofocus system. If you want to shoot fast moving subjects it is likely a better choice. Canon do excellent tilt/shift lenses and do a very fancy super macro lens with up to 5x macro.

The nikon is cheaper, has a simpler but still good a/f system and excels as a low iso shooter due a massive dynamic range sensor, while still being good at high iso (as is the 5d3)

If you are not specifically doing sports or a big macro shooter they are similar

According to some tests, it would seem the 5d mk III would have greater dynamic range than D600 past 800 ISO (and thus better than the 610). Does anyone know any good real world tests in order to bring clarity to this issue?

And as a general rule, is it better to underexpose a stop with a camera that has one stop better dynamic range given that ISO value compared with another camera? (shooting with ISO 800 vs shooting with 1600).

 

[Derrel]

I own none of these but from friends that have the 5d and nikon d600

The 5d3 has an amazing autofocus system. If you want to shoot fast moving subjects it is likely a better choice. Canon do excellent tilt/shift lenses and do a very fancy super macro lens with up to 5x macro.

The nikon is cheaper, has a simpler but still good a/f system and excels as a low iso shooter due a massive dynamic range sensor, while still being good at high iso (as is the 5d3)

If you are not specifically doing sports or a big macro shooter they are similar

According to some tests, it would seem the 5d mk III would have greater dynamic range than D600 past 800 ISO (and thus better than the 610). Does anyone know any good real world tests in order to bring clarity to this issue?

And as a general rule, is it better to underexpose a stop with a camera that has one stop better dynamic range given that ISO value compared with another camera? (shooting with ISO 800 vs shooting with 1600).

You seem to have trouble reading the charts and test results. The 5D mark III's sensor ekes out an 11.7 EV dynamic range at BASE ISO...it lags behind both the D600 and D610, which each manage well over 14 EV of DR at Base ISO...the 5D Mark III in RAW mode at ISO 800 is actually 640 ISO an 11.18EV in DR, the D610 is a measured ISO of 592 with as Dynamic Range of 12.23 EV.

The 5D Mark III is equal, or more typically, below the D610 in Dynamic Range at every single ISO setting, up to 25,000 ISO. The 5D-II is below both Nikon's in color depth, across the entire ISO range. Same in SNR, which by the way is a very poor metric...signal to noise ratio doesn't reveal a lot of useful information in terms of pictures.

As far as Tech Radar's testing...re-read what they wrote, and pay close attention to what they SAY...don't just look at the lines on the graph.

 

[runnah]

Anyone want to buy my pos camera?

 

[robbins.photo]

I own none of these but from friends that have the 5d and nikon d600

The 5d3 has an amazing autofocus system. If you want to shoot fast moving subjects it is likely a better choice. Canon do excellent tilt/shift lenses and do a very fancy super macro lens with up to 5x macro.

The nikon is cheaper, has a simpler but still good a/f system and excels as a low iso shooter due a massive dynamic range sensor, while still being good at high iso (as is the 5d3)

If you are not specifically doing sports or a big macro shooter they are similar

According to some tests, it would seem the 5d mk III would have greater dynamic range than D600 past 800 ISO (and thus better than the 610). Does anyone know any good real world tests in order to bring clarity to this issue?

And as a general rule, is it better to underexpose a stop with a camera that has one stop better dynamic range given that ISO value compared with another camera? (shooting with ISO 800 vs shooting with 1600).

Well I won't bother going into depth on the charts and graphs and such, there are others here far more qualified for that - I'll just break it down into a simple decision. If you want the better still image quality, get the Nikon. Beleive it or not even my old D5100 has a better dynamic color range than the Canon 5d Mark III.

If you want better video the Canon would probably be the better choice. If you go with the Nikon since your looking at the 600 or 610 it will give you more money to spend on better glass, just sort of depends on your budget.