This topic is in the 2012 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 20125Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
p.2 #15Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
I looked at every single shot posted at that link, and to be honest, they both look extremely good. One is clearly not better then the other, the D800 just has a larger image (magnified) due to the higher MP.
Dynamic range looks comparable (looked at very closely on my calibrated monitor in a dark room)... Details look equal (yeah I know... you can resize the D800 and blah blah)... I don't know, they both look pretty equal to me.
*shrug*
Thanks for the comparison!
Edited on Apr 18, 2012 at 08:14 PM · View previous versions
Dynamic range looks comparable (looked at very closely on my calibrated monitor in a dark room)... Details look equal (yeah I know... you can resize the D800 and blah blah)... I don't know, they both look pretty equal to me.
*shrug*
Thanks for the comparison!
Edited on Apr 18, 2012 at 08:14 PM · View previous versions
Apr 18, 2012 at 07:29 PM
p.2 #25Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
chez wrote:
They do have the 14-24. My understanding the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 are just as good as Canons. I also understand their consumer grade glass is better than Canon's. Overall, given another year or two, I don't think you'll see any difference. I've seen wonderfull images shot with both systems....I don't see the glass being the determining factor in the images.
The 14-24 is clearly the best wide zoom. Canon have the 14L, 17tse and 24tse though (nikons 24pce isnt as good and is more limited).
16-35mkII is ok, 17-40L is a bargain and much smaller and lighter than the 16-35f4vr, and IMO optically better.
Canons old 24-70 isnt as good as nikons current lens, the mkII should kill it.
Canons 70-200mkII is a better all round lens but by how much is arguable. Canon also sell a bunch of other 70-200's that are quite decent too.
Nikons 24-120 isnt a patch on canons 24-105.
24/35/50/85 primes are pretty much a wash.
Consumer glass?
Canons 17-55, 15-85, 10-22, 60macro, 55-250 are all great
Nikons 70-300 is certainly better than canons non L
af-s35mm f1.8 is great, canon has two comparables both a fair bit more money
50/1.8 and 85/1.8s are abotu equal now with nikons new ones, but they are more money.
Super tele's (200/300/400/500/600/800) goes to canon.
And when are nikon going to produce a decent 100-400 competitor?
Nikon have some decent glass but they do have some way to catch up in some areas, I'd have ordered a D800 already if i could see an affordable good landscape setup in the lenses, but I prefer canons options.
They do have the 14-24. My understanding the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 are just as good as Canons. I also understand their consumer grade glass is better than Canon's. Overall, given another year or two, I don't think you'll see any difference. I've seen wonderfull images shot with both systems....I don't see the glass being the determining factor in the images.
The 14-24 is clearly the best wide zoom. Canon have the 14L, 17tse and 24tse though (nikons 24pce isnt as good and is more limited).
16-35mkII is ok, 17-40L is a bargain and much smaller and lighter than the 16-35f4vr, and IMO optically better.
Canons old 24-70 isnt as good as nikons current lens, the mkII should kill it.
Canons 70-200mkII is a better all round lens but by how much is arguable. Canon also sell a bunch of other 70-200's that are quite decent too.
Nikons 24-120 isnt a patch on canons 24-105.
24/35/50/85 primes are pretty much a wash.
Consumer glass?
Canons 17-55, 15-85, 10-22, 60macro, 55-250 are all great
Nikons 70-300 is certainly better than canons non L
af-s35mm f1.8 is great, canon has two comparables both a fair bit more money
50/1.8 and 85/1.8s are abotu equal now with nikons new ones, but they are more money.
Super tele's (200/300/400/500/600/800) goes to canon.
And when are nikon going to produce a decent 100-400 competitor?
Nikon have some decent glass but they do have some way to catch up in some areas, I'd have ordered a D800 already if i could see an affordable good landscape setup in the lenses, but I prefer canons options.
Apr 18, 2012 at 08:09 PM
p.2 #35Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
RobDickinson wrote:
The 14-24 is clearly the best wide zoom. Canon have the 14L, 17tse and 24tse though (nikons 24pce isnt as good and is more limited).
16-35mkII is ok, 17-40L is a bargain and much smaller and lighter than the 16-35f4vr, and IMO optically better.
Canons old 24-70 isnt as good as nikons current lens, the mkII should kill it.
Canons 70-200mkII is a better all round lens but by how much is arguable. Canon also sell a bunch of other 70-200's that are quite decent too.
Nikons 24-120 isnt a patch on canons 24-105.
24/35/50/85 primes are pretty much a wash.
Consumer glass?
Canons 17-55,...Show more →
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.
chez wrote
They do have the 14-24. My understanding the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 are just as good as Canons. I also understand their consumer grade glass is better than Canon's. Overall, given another year or two, I don't think you'll see any difference. I've seen wonderfull images shot with both systems....I don't see the glass being the determining factor in the images.16-35mkII is ok, 17-40L is a bargain and much smaller and lighter than the 16-35f4vr, and IMO optically better.
Canons old 24-70 isnt as good as nikons current lens, the mkII should kill it.
Canons 70-200mkII is a better all round lens but by how much is arguable. Canon also sell a bunch of other 70-200's that are quite decent too.
Nikons 24-120 isnt a patch on canons 24-105.
24/35/50/85 primes are pretty much a wash.
Consumer glass?
Canons 17-55,...Show more →
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.
Apr 18, 2012 at 08:20 PM
p.2 #45Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
True, but then its always good to give yourself the best opportunity to get the shot, and in as good a quality as you can.
Apr 18, 2012 at 08:34 PM
p.2 #55Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
chez wrote:
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.
By the same token, if you cannot take amazing photos without D800, you cannot take them with D800...
Edited on Apr 18, 2012 at 10:40 PM · View previous versions
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.
By the same token, if you cannot take amazing photos without D800, you cannot take them with D800...
Edited on Apr 18, 2012 at 10:40 PM · View previous versions
Apr 18, 2012 at 08:35 PM
p.2 #65Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
KaaX wrote:
By the same token, if cannot take amazing photos without D800, you cannot take them with D800...
Yes, I agree to a point. I haven't rented a d800 yet, but I believe you can make better larger prints with the D800. I'll have to prove that to myself. From the images I down loaded from various test sites shows more detail in the D800 images...which will result in more detailed large photos.
chez wrote
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.Yes, I agree to a point. I haven't rented a d800 yet, but I believe you can make better larger prints with the D800. I'll have to prove that to myself. From the images I down loaded from various test sites shows more detail in the D800 images...which will result in more detailed large photos.
Apr 18, 2012 at 08:43 PM
p.2 #75Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
Marco, thanks so much for sharing your hard work. That's very helpful...If you get bored I wouldn't at all mind if you were to throw in the 800E!
Apr 18, 2012 at 08:53 PM
p.2 #85Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
This is one of the reason why i don't like about latest canon sensor. We've seen this while 5d2 released but our message has not been loud and clear enough for canon to hear. Most chroma & banding shadows noise threads got killed by fanbois before taking off. Well, another 3 years is a long wait.
http://i.pbase.com/o6/98/10898/1/142760890.rHW4UmC2.FillLight100crop.png
and this shadows noise effects getting worse and worse while capturing wider DR. To see better just click on comparison image to zoom in.
Thanks for the comparison, Marco
Edited on Apr 18, 2012 at 10:33 PM · View previous versions
http://i.pbase.com/o6/98/10898/1/142760890.rHW4UmC2.FillLight100crop.png
and this shadows noise effects getting worse and worse while capturing wider DR. To see better just click on comparison image to zoom in.
Thanks for the comparison, Marco
Edited on Apr 18, 2012 at 10:33 PM · View previous versions
Apr 18, 2012 at 09:46 PM
p.2 #95Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
I did not notice at first, but make sure you realize this is a 5D Mark TWO comparison, 5D2, 5D II, 5DII (however you label it) and not the 5D III.
Apr 18, 2012 at 09:55 PM
p.2 #105Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
Invertalon wrote:
I did not notice at first, but make sure you realize this is a 5D Mark TWO comparison, 5D2, 5D II, 5DII (however you label it) and not the 5D III.
Same diff at those ISO's
I did not notice at first, but make sure you realize this is a 5D Mark TWO comparison, 5D2, 5D II, 5DII (however you label it) and not the 5D III.
Same diff at those ISO's
Apr 18, 2012 at 09:57 PM
p.2 #115Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
I noticed the latitude in my shadows with Nikon even with the D5100 over my 5D2. The 14-24 is an excellent lens. I didn't care for the Canon 17-40 because of the edge and corner quality. I have high hopes that the Nikkor 16-35 is better. I had the 24TS-E II and it was an amazing lens, just got the 24 PC-E and haven't played with it much but it looks close to the 24 TS-E once you correct the CA. Still not quite there, and no 17 tilt shift to speak of. I think the 24-120 is better than people give it credit for, pretty close to the Canon 24-70 f/2.8, but I am only shooting cropped until my D800 arrives, so maybe its worse in the corners (not that the Canon 24-70 corners were spectacular). Anyway, bottom line is Nikon glass has some good lenses. Overall though I do with I could use my EF lenses, especially the TS-E line.
Apr 18, 2012 at 10:04 PM
p.2 #125Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
chez wrote:
Same diff at those ISO's
+1, ....these effects take away the smoothness of the files after NR which often called "so digital look...." while compared to older canon sensor low iso files. Just look at the shadows of your latest cam low iso high DR shots and find out for yourself.
Invertalon wrote
I did not notice at first, but make sure you realize this is a 5D Mark TWO comparison, 5D2, 5D II, 5DII (however you label it) and not the 5D III.+1, ....these effects take away the smoothness of the files after NR which often called "so digital look...." while compared to older canon sensor low iso files. Just look at the shadows of your latest cam low iso high DR shots and find out for yourself.
Apr 18, 2012 at 10:27 PM
p.2 #135Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
KaaX wrote:
By the same token, if you cannot take amazing photos without D800, you cannot take them with D800...
If guns dont kill people, people kill people, then toasters dont toast toast, toast toasts toast.
chez wrote
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.If guns dont kill people, people kill people, then toasters dont toast toast, toast toasts toast.
Apr 18, 2012 at 10:58 PM
p.2 #145Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
RobDickinson wrote:
The 14-24 is clearly the best wide zoom. Canon have the 14L, 17tse and 24tse though (nikons 24pce isnt as good and is more limited).
16-35mkII is ok, 17-40L is a bargain and much smaller and lighter than the 16-35f4vr, and IMO optically better.
Canons old 24-70 isnt as good as nikons current lens, the mkII should kill it.
Canons 70-200mkII is a better all round lens but by how much is arguable. Canon also sell a bunch of other 70-200's that are quite decent too.
Nikons 24-120 isnt a patch on canons 24-105.
24/35/50/85 primes are pretty much a wash.
Consumer glass?
Canons 17-55,...Show more →
This is exactly why I ended up staying in the Canon camp this time around. Nikon has one lens that I lust over....Canon has at least 10 or more....don't forget the 400f/5.6 for BIF, Nikon has nothing to touch this with. Also the 300f/4 with IS, Nikon's doesn't have IS.
If Nikon had comparable lenses then I would have probably jumped ship to the D800. However, I'm really happy with the 5D3 and looking towards some more great glass purchases this year. Good to see Nikon will continue to push Canon to improve.
chez wrote
They do have the 14-24. My understanding the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 are just as good as Canons. I also understand their consumer grade glass is better than Canon's. Overall, given another year or two, I don't think you'll see any difference. I've seen wonderfull images shot with both systems....I don't see the glass being the determining factor in the images.16-35mkII is ok, 17-40L is a bargain and much smaller and lighter than the 16-35f4vr, and IMO optically better.
Canons old 24-70 isnt as good as nikons current lens, the mkII should kill it.
Canons 70-200mkII is a better all round lens but by how much is arguable. Canon also sell a bunch of other 70-200's that are quite decent too.
Nikons 24-120 isnt a patch on canons 24-105.
24/35/50/85 primes are pretty much a wash.
Consumer glass?
Canons 17-55,...Show more →
This is exactly why I ended up staying in the Canon camp this time around. Nikon has one lens that I lust over....Canon has at least 10 or more....don't forget the 400f/5.6 for BIF, Nikon has nothing to touch this with. Also the 300f/4 with IS, Nikon's doesn't have IS.
If Nikon had comparable lenses then I would have probably jumped ship to the D800. However, I'm really happy with the 5D3 and looking towards some more great glass purchases this year. Good to see Nikon will continue to push Canon to improve.
Apr 19, 2012 at 07:05 AM
p.2 #155Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
Handels wrote:
Marco, thanks so much for sharing your hard work. That's very helpful...If you get bored I wouldn't at all mind if you were to throw in the 800E!
mmm... the D800E would be probably the version I'd get if I had to go Nikon.
Maybe you've already seen Mr. Reichmann article
Sadly I don't have a friend with one
Btw guys stay tuned... I'm uploading 1.7 Gb of Raw files right now, so you can see for yourself how great the Nikon sensor is, how much does it matter in real images and how bad a tester I am!
If all goes fine this evening I'll post the link.
Marco, thanks so much for sharing your hard work. That's very helpful...If you get bored I wouldn't at all mind if you were to throw in the 800E!
mmm... the D800E would be probably the version I'd get if I had to go Nikon.
Maybe you've already seen Mr. Reichmann article
Sadly I don't have a friend with one
Btw guys stay tuned... I'm uploading 1.7 Gb of Raw files right now, so you can see for yourself how great the Nikon sensor is, how much does it matter in real images and how bad a tester I am!
If all goes fine this evening I'll post the link.
Apr 19, 2012 at 07:31 AM
p.2 #165Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
Looks like the canon wins in this one just comparing the photo's.
Apr 19, 2012 at 07:41 AM
p.2 #175Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
Thanks for taking the time to do the test.
The resolution differences don't matter to me. Would rather have 22 MP and 6 FPS than 36 and 4 FPS. That said, the DR advantage is significant for the bulk of my shooting. Just spent the weekend shooting waterfalls and would have dearly loved to have that extra 2.5 stops in the shadows.
The resolution differences don't matter to me. Would rather have 22 MP and 6 FPS than 36 and 4 FPS. That said, the DR advantage is significant for the bulk of my shooting. Just spent the weekend shooting waterfalls and would have dearly loved to have that extra 2.5 stops in the shadows.
Apr 19, 2012 at 07:42 AM
p.2 #185Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
Please show me where the 24-105L is better than the 24-120VR F4, I've owned both by the way.
Apr 19, 2012 at 07:54 AM
p.2 #195Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
DoogieH wrote:
Looks like the canon wins in this one just comparing the photo's.
Maybe take off your rose colored glasses and have a better look.
Looks like the canon wins in this one just comparing the photo's.
Maybe take off your rose colored glasses and have a better look.
Apr 19, 2012 at 08:05 AM
p.2 #205Dmk2 vs D800 shootout with Zeiss Makro-Planar
morganb4 wrote:
By the same token, if you cannot take amazing photos without D800, you cannot take them with D800...If guns dont kill people, people kill people, then toasters dont toast toast, toast toasts toast.
My, my. Would Socrates ever have fun playing with you on this one!
KaaX wrote
chez wrote
I'm just saying,if you cannot take amazing photos with Nikon glass, you cannot take amazing photos with Canon glass.My, my. Would Socrates ever have fun playing with you on this one!
Apr 19, 2012 at 08:49 AM