Great to see TheCameraStore guys in Calgary getting some recognition. This is the store I try to support when I can make it work. They will be getting a nice order from me once the 600f/4 mk2 ships!!! I got to play with a bunch of my dream lenses including the 400f/2.8 mk2 and 200f/2 when I was in town back in March.
the D800 seemed to have the DOF on the dirt centered right on the horse every frame and the canon seemed to drift front to back and so on then again he said he used central 9 and was trying to target both dogie and horse at the same time, which seems trickier while the nikon was centered on teh horse, so not sure what you can say for sure about it.
skibum5 wrote:
the D800 seemed to have the DOF on the dirt centered right on the horse every frame and the canon seemed to drift front to back and so on then again he said he used central 9 and was trying to target both dogie and horse at the same time, which seems trickier while the nikon was centered on teh horse, so not sure what you can say for sure about it.
and they don't compare images at the same scale
Yo should just stick to DXOMark. Even if 2 stops of dynamic range difference means little in real life shooting (as verified in their first RAW file comparison shoot-out), it'll probably satisfy you more than anything else.
Please give those threads where they compare cameras in real world usage a miss.
Nice to see cameras compared as cameras rather than graphs.... And it brings up something that I've mentioned several times - nikons wb system is just worse. My assistant shoots Nikon and it costs me an extra half hour in post to process it...
That said I agree with the conclusion - both fantastic cameras and you wouldn't be unhappy with either.
Great vid. I really liked the 1st one of the series too. Both are excellent camera's. Still, IMO the D800 is better suited for studio work where you need high rez output and the 5D3 seems to be better for PJ or event type of photography.
Having the 5d, 5d2 and 5d3 the largest improvements are the speed of the focus, accuracy of the focus, buffer speed, and jpeg accuracy. I am now shooting raw+jpeg (on the sd card) for a while to make sure the jpegs are going to be the way I want then I may actually start shooting more jpegs (blasphemy !) All of these improvements are noted in the review but really cannot be understated.
Funny, up through the first 2 parts nothing is mentioned about poorly lit AF points or random light leaks...and it look like they have done more situational testing than most of us...mmmm , makes you think
twistedlim wrote:
Having the 5d, 5d2 and 5d3 the largest improvements are the speed of the focus, accuracy of the focus, buffer speed, and jpeg accuracy. I am now shooting raw+jpeg (on the sd card) for a while to make sure the jpegs are going to be the way I want then I may actually start shooting more jpegs (blasphemy !) All of these improvements are noted in the review but really cannot be understated.
Funny, up through the first 2 parts nothing is mentioned about poorly lit AF points or random light leaks...and it look like they have done more situational testing than most of us...mmmm , makes you think...Show more →
Noticed the same thing.... on vid 2 the shooter mention the 5Dmkiii is just like using the 7D.
Seriously... there are shooter who want the camera to work just like there old camera...
heaven forbid we have to learn something new.
While the light leak is incredibly trivial, the AF point issue isnt. I use a camera that is designed and acts the same way A77, and it is very annoying. At least with 5d3 you can make it manually light up for a moment, yes?
Still, an illuminated point during AF attempting would be nice (for my camera too!)
Honestly, I have been extremely impressed by the JPEG output of the 5D Mark III... With any other camera I had to convert with RAW to get the most out of any image, the 5D3 is much improved in that regard. I still will shoot RAW for editing purposes, but in general, if I had to I would be extremely happy with just JPEG.
thw2 wrote:
Yo should just stick to DXOMark. Even if 2 stops of dynamic range difference means little in real life shooting (as verified in their first RAW file comparison shoot-out), it'll probably satisfy you more than anything else.
Please give those threads where they compare cameras in real world usage a miss.
You obviously missed the part where it has been pointed out that when they compared DR in real world, they did the comparison at high iso, which is exactly where there is NOT expected to be any big difference and it's not hard to see plenty of examples all over the net where at low ISO the difference has been shown to be large.
Also, believe it not, we don't just care about charts, we first notice something in the real world and THEN go to charts to figure out what is going on or what products might avoid the things noticed.... IN THE REAL WORLD.
.