M Lucca wrote:
Nothing to add. But only to say current Nikon dslrs are daft when it comes to ergonomics. I don't look at charts and numbers for photography. Usage based on reality is what matters. Most of the time I cannot even tell a web photo was taken with a Rebel or a D4.
The current raft of issues with Nikon D800 and D4 is troubling. It remains to be seen the QA on D600.
Having used Nikon for a number of years I have to disagree ... at least Nikon provides buttons for quick access....Canon bodies remind me of Apple computers...their great, provided you think the way Steve Jobs wanted you to.
skibum5 wrote:
Well the D800 has 36MP which means it pulls more detail than 22MP unless you are using coke bottles so actually it kind of erases a lot of the Canon lens advantage now that I think about it (obviously that is not the case with D4,D600, etc. though). Although the 24mm T&S II is still better and the 17 T&S is unique and Nikon still lacks some nice lighter stuff like 70-200 f/4 IS.
There in lies half the problem.
Many of the Nikon lenses fail to be able to deliver the extra detail either through quality in the glass or as is being found lack of AF accuracy.
With the new 24-70 now out Canon have excellent zoom quality from 16 through to 200 all with little to nil CA great sharpness and extremely good IQ.
The D800 pulls more detail when able but also shows lens flaws to the maximum...it also shows AF accuracy issues clearly.
Canons lenses combined with he D800 sensor and 5Dmk3 AF would be the ideal combo.
2 out of those three are Canon items something no amount of DR nor shadow recovery can help with if your shooting with one and after the "best".
Direct comparisons in hypothetical test cells ignore the differences in glass and AF accuracy...real world photography doesn't..
n0b0 wrote:
Nikon sensor DR vs Canon lens MTF. Which one would you pick?
Sensor resolution being equal, I would go with superior lens performance. As I mentioned earlier, I rarely find myself in situations where I feel DR limited. When that happens, it's often static scenes that can be exposure bracketed and blended in post, which arguably provides even better DR than a single exposure.
Perhaps to prove my point, for the last 1.5 years I've been shooting a lot with a Leica M9, which apparently has terrible dynamic range, by many accounts. But damn, the lenses are sharp.
rscheffler wrote:
Sensor resolution being equal, I would go with superior lens performance.
Same here, and there are a few reasons for that. Moreover, there is a bunch of camera characteristics which influence image quality, therefore, the sensor DR is just one of them.
I like the way my 1DX + 400 f/2.8 IS MkII perform, not only in terms of IQ, but also regarding ergonomics and a sharp capture probability.
Great photo, the more expensive your gear gets, the better your photography is, I think that's money well spent.
PetKal wrote:
Same here, and there are a few reasons for that. Moreover, there is a bunch of camera characteristics which influence image quality, therefore, the sensor DR is just one of them.
I like the way my 1DX + 400 f/2.8 IS MkII perform, not only in terms of IQ, but also regarding ergonomics and a sharp capture probability.
thw2 wrote:
Canon needs to buy over the Sony sensor design team.
I agree!
Another point is why if Sony are really serious about the DSLR market do they sell sensors to Nikon?
I think it's crazy if they have this great sensor they go and sell it to Nikon to put in DSLR's which are selling in preference to yours.
Sell what is the best all around sensor in the world to my direct competitor..just crazy business sense for a company trying to bust into the big two.
