Just got my D750. I am not a pixel peeper, but I usually like to do a few quick tests just to see how far I can push things. Here was the very first thing I did 15 minutes ago. Both shot with a 35 (the 5D3 with my St. Sigma 35mm and the D750 with the cheapo $160 1.8G) at 2.0 1/200 iso 200. Boosted 5 stops in LR...no other adjustments at all.
Ross Harvey posted one like that during his review. Certainly impressive, especially if you don't shoot with wireless lights. HDR compositing can look like full strobist image — all it takes is a little layer masking.
joelconner wrote:
Just got my D750. I am not a pixel peeper, but I usually like to do a few quick tests just to see how far I can push things. Here was the very first thing I did 15 minutes ago. Both shot with a 35 (the 5D3 with my St. Sigma 35mm and the D750 with the cheapo $160 1.8G) at 2.0 1/200 iso 200. Boosted 5 stops in LR...no other adjustments at all.
joelconner wrote:
Just got my D750. I am not a pixel peeper, but I usually like to do a few quick tests just to see how far I can push things. Here was the very first thing I did 15 minutes ago. Both shot with a 35 (the 5D3 with my St. Sigma 35mm and the D750 with the cheapo $160 1.8G) at 2.0 1/200 iso 200. Boosted 5 stops in LR...no other adjustments at all.
stevez32 wrote:
Just curious, but I didn't think there was a cheap Nikon $160 35mm 1.8G, that lens sells for $600, unless you meant one was taken at 50mm?
There is The DX version of the 35 1.8g. It works with FX but has heavy vignetting.
joelconner wrote:
Just got my D750. I am not a pixel peeper, but I usually like to do a few quick tests just to see how far I can push things. Here was the very first thing I did 15 minutes ago. Both shot with a 35 (the 5D3 with my St. Sigma 35mm and the D750 with the cheapo $160 1.8G) at 2.0 1/200 iso 200. Boosted 5 stops in LR...no other adjustments at all.
Congrats. good tool. The advantage is mostly at iso 100, iso 200 if in real world you push 4+. Though we've seen tests like this, for some of us, that might be a minor feature and rarely play out in real world shooting
based on what I'm seeing in 7d2 sensor optimization, I believe Canon's 3 year old release of the 5d3 will once again in 2015 become the hi iso leader once the 5d4 (x instead of 4) is released - with no banding, and I think it will be close to a 1 stop hi iso improvement over the 5d3
Below is link to Michaels epic shootout - I think he does a fairly nice job with the comparison. What he says at the end about the better 5d3 AF system because of wider distribution of cross types is what I think will make more difference as a feature than pushing 4+ stops at iso 100/200 as a feature - - also the raw only bursts of the 5d3 are more robust as he shows. but to each their own. both will do the job. but I think 5d4 (x) in fall will separate from the competition again with a new high iso leader
Tony Hoffer wrote:
Going to wait on the 5D4 in August then re-evaluate. More than likely it will be good and we'll upgrade our cameras then. If it's an absolute bomb, I'll switch systems. It's seems ridiculous to me that I can't use an amazing marketing tool (instant Instagramming with hashtags) in 2015 because Canon hasn't delivered wi-fi yet.
My biggest hesitation towards switching is that I'm fairly convinced that we'll want to switch to mirrorless within 3-5 years if it catches up. So I don't really want to switch to Nikon and have to switch again shortly after.
Famous last words
D750 does have better sensor tech, no denying it. I can count on one hand the number of shots I underexposed by 3 or more stops last year. A big reason I haven't switched is the lenses...
- Nikon 200/2.0 is ~1 pound / 0.5kg heavier than Canon 200/2.0
- Nikon's 400/5.6 does exist, but only in used form (mid-90's?) and not nearly as good AF as the Canon 400/5.6L- personally important, although I don't use it much for weddings
Another big barrier to switching... Nikon NPS suuuuuuuucks compared to Canon's CPS (weeks to get stuff back, terrible service record, way more $$$, have to be Ansel Adams to get in, etc). I like knowing that if I happen to break my stuff on a Saturday, I send it in and have back in my hands by Thursday. And they pay the shipping.
And finally, a big reason why is I don't want to be forced to have to spend hours and hours learning the nuances of a new camera system. The cost to switch (financial and time) is high, so the return on that investment has to be tremendously worth it. Same reason Mac users won't switch to PCs even though PC's have caught up to Macs on OS stability.
The reality is, D750 / 5D3 are both capable. We're just fussing over that last 1-2%. Seriously, look at your portfolio on your website, and ask yourself how many of them could or could not have been captured as-is if you had one camera or the other. Most/all of them are either going to be ISO100-1600 and/or strobe-lit.
The camera company marketing departments win. They get us to buy $3000 new cameras every 2-3 years... back in the film days, you bought a Hassy or Contax and were set for 10+ years.
Andrew Welsh wrote:
D750 does have better sensor tech, no denying it. I can count on one hand the number of shots I underexposed by 3 or more stops last year.
This is the thing that most people seem to get hung up on where it is missing the point. It has nothing to do with saving underexposed images. It has everything to do with drastically superior DR where you can expose for the highlights you want without completely sacrificing the shadow detail. The example I posted was not to show how I could save screw-ups...it was to show just how much viable and quality detail is retained in the shadow details in the Nikon compared to the Canon.
I have been using the D750 around the house for 4 days now, and I am convinced that this camera is so much better than the 5D3 that it's not even funny. There are muscle memory things I will have to re-learn if I fully switch (mainly the position of the dials), but overall I just love how the camera feels and operates. The images are gorgeous, and I am just using a $165 lens designed for crop bodies. I cannot even imagine how great my Sigma lenses would look.
Another big barrier to switching... Nikon NPS suuuuuuuucks compared to Canon's CPS (weeks to get stuff back, terrible service record, way more $$$, have to be Ansel Adams to get in, etc). I like knowing that if I happen to break my stuff on a Saturday, I send it in and have back in my hands by Thursday. And they pay the shipping.
Yeah. Once I did the math and realized that I'd actually save money by switching, I was more curious. Then I saw the files and was convinced.
Regarding CPS, I'm not sure how much you've used them in the past year or so, but they've gone drastically downhill. I used to have amazing experiences with them, but every since they changed their business model, they've gone money hungry, they've become slower and and the customer service has been much worse. I was considering just dropping CPS altogether and going to a local repair shop.
Tony do you mean by saving money that the kit you have now was cheaper to get than what you're selling your Canon stuff for?
What kit are you planning to work with now?
I'm still thinking the 600EX system's something that is hard to replace (yes you can get flashes with transmitters and stuff but as far as I know Canon's option with having it all in one unit is still unique); that would be something that would hold me off.
Almost all of my associates and seconds shoot with team N. As much as I love the weight/cost/performance matrix of the D750, all of those shooters marvel at the 600 speed lights at weddings and echo "WTH can't Nikon do this?" Feeling like I'd go through this huge drama just to be disappointed, fiddling with Mitros+ or going back to Strato II's.
LeeSimms wrote:
Almost all of my associates and seconds shoot with team N. As much as I love the weight/cost/performance matrix of the D750, all of those shooters marvel at the 600 speed lights at weddings and echo "WTH can't Nikon do this?" Feeling like I'd go through this huge drama just to be disappointed, fiddling with Mitros+ or going back to Strato II's.
not seeing that with my Odin system...
I run 2 Odin triggers and 3 Odin receivers on Canons. I just tested on my 7d2 and they work perfectly and great on my other Canon bodies also. From my odin triggers on my cameras, easy operation, nothing to be done at the slaves. Fast, no fiddling, no misfires, ETTL -3 thru +3, Manual 1/1 thru 1/128, HSS using up to 1/8000.
Has anyone run across some wider comparisons of the d750/5D3? More specifically, retaining highlight detail in the sky/sun and shadow detail of subjects. Back-lit photos to be exact.
In the past 7 years I can think of maybe 5 times that I've had to pull 5 stops of shadow out of a photo. Not saying the d750 isn't worth it, but dynamic range in real world scenarios is what I'd be curious to see.
Edit: I also just realized that this thread id 5DS, so I apologize for continuing the d750/5D3 comparison game.
tgillespie wrote:
Has anyone run across some wider comparisons of the d750/5D3? More specifically, retaining highlight detail in the sky/sun and shadow detail of subjects. Back-lit photos to be exact.
this is not a great example, because my 18 month old son would only stand there for about 5 seconds. So, I could not get him where I wanted him, and the original shot is underexposed. But, it might give you some idea. I have seen others' examples, though, which was really pushed me to look this direction.
First shot editted with only global changes...no local adjustments.
second shot is sooc
joelconner wrote:
this is not a great example, because my 18 month old son would only stand there for about 5 seconds. So, I could not get him where I wanted him, and the original shot is underexposed. But, it might give you some idea. I have seen others' examples, though, which was really pushed me to look this direction.
Looks solid. With the 5D3, I'd roll it +2 on EC and forfeit the background... which sucks. Or, move myself 45 degrees to change the light, but we're not afforded that luxury all of the time either. I'm not a huge fan of a high dynamic range in tight portraits, and more concerned about wider shots with skys... but I realize this is an example also. Thanks.
The DX version of the 35 1.8g. It works with FX but has heavy vignetting. 