n0b0 wrote:
It's not that they're making a sensor comeback. In this market, the manufacturers only react to the market, ie. They only offer "more" when they have to. (Un)fortunately, Canon has the biggest portion of the market so don't ever expect them to come up with something better before the competition. You can see it with the Video and AF. Nikon was first to offer video and first to offer highend AF in their cheaper body.
That said, you can expect Canon to "one-up" Nikon. Again, you can see it with the video and AF.
I am not so sure about video. Granted Nikon was the first to announce DSLR with video capability in the form of D90 on Aug 27 2008. HOWEVER, shortly after, Canon announced their 5D2 on 17 Sep 2012 with 1080p video capability. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a company to equip a new camera body with some brand new functionality in less than a month. It takes years of designing and testing. We can therefore say BOTH companies release video capable DSLRs simultaneously although Nikonians and anti-Canon folks will never agree to it.
Mast3rChi3f wrote:
Almost as good as 1Dx, but far away from D600/D800.
I suspect the 6D will inherit the 1DX sensor technology, making it perform better than 5D3 and all other Canon full-frame cameras before it, but still a far cry from D600/D800. Sigh...
I hope Canon's new sensor tech shows up in the Canon 7D Mark 2 and megapixel cameras.
The samples here are at ISO 100, four stops pushed. The original pics would not show significant visible differences, imo. After what I saw D600/800 does not keep on par with 6D/5D III at ISO 1600/3200 and higher. ISO 12.800/25.600/51.200 are fantastic with 5D III and even better with 6D. I would not purchase any new camera, that does not deliver great (usable) ISO 25k.
Ralph Conway wrote:
After what I saw D600/800 does not keep on par with 6D/5D III at ISO 1600/3200 and higher. ISO 12.800/25.600/51.200 are fantastic with 5D III and even better with 6D. I would not purchase any new camera, that does not deliver great (usable) ISO 25k.
I know your link, snapsy. Thank you again.
I know the DXO test charts, too.
In my impression even in your samples 5D III still beats the downsampled D800 files at ISO 12.800/25.600. And the new 6D offers an further advantadge. Next to that I need usable (this) high ISO jpeg files OOC, too. Nothing Nikon delivers in comparable quality to Canon now as far I know.
D3S is not made for me. If I would be able to spend € 5000 (still our price here) for any camera I would prefere to add onother € 1.200 and go 1D X instead.
thw2 wrote:
I am not so sure about video. Granted Nikon was the first to announce DSLR with video capability in the form of D90 on Aug 27 2008. HOWEVER, shortly after, Canon announced their 5D2 on 17 Sep 2012 with 1080p video capability. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a company to equip a new camera body with some brand new functionality in less than a month. It takes years of designing and testing. We can therefore say BOTH companies release video capable DSLRs simultaneously although Nikonians and anti-Canon folks will never agree to it.
You're probably right. It's also too convenient for them to bring video into DSLR in the same year. In a market where there're virtually only two major suppliers, it's really easy for Canon to collude with Nikon.
In this case, Canon and Nikon might've colluded to bring video into DSLR but in bodies from different class to prevent clashing in the market. Look at D700, it doesn't record video eventhough it has an HDMI video output and was announced only a month before the D90.
Ralph Conway wrote:
I know your link, snapsy. Thank you again.
I know the DXO test charts, too.
In my impression even in your samples 5D III still beats the downsampled D800 files at ISO 12.800/25.600. And the new 6D offers an further advantadge. Next to that I need usable (this) high ISO jpeg files OOC, too. Nothing Nikon delivers in comparable quality to Canon now as far I know.
D3S is not made for me. If I would be able to spend € 5000 (still our price here) for any camera I would prefere to add onother € 1.200 and go 1D X instead....Show more →
In my samples, the RAW performance of the d800 and 5dIII are identical at ISO6400, which is the highest I ever shoot.Sometimes the d800 looks better, sometimes vice-versa. It's too close to call, in my experience. To extract that performance, though, the d800 has to be processed RAW. OOC JPEGs from the Canon are better, and if you are shooting volume at high ISO, that is a great advantage.
No one pushes four stops - 5dIII images are responsive to moderate processing - more so than 5d2, albeit marginally more. There are a few cases where the Nikon will save a shot that the Canon could not save, but it's not frequent. That said, the d800 is cleaner in shadows and darker colors that have to be pushed. The 5dIII will sometimes band if the images are really pushed (ie around +2), even in realistic scenarios, and I have had to use a selective noise brush to deal with it in shadows and dark fabrics/hair. With careful processing, the shadow noise in pushed images between the two are similar, though the Canon requires more work and sacrificed detail. It looks like the 6D will be easier to process, at least in this aspect.
In terms of image quality here, it does look like the 6D trumps the 5dIII in terms of DR. I assume noise performance is at least equivalent. A nice little bump in performance, but I suspect the two are basically the same in most real world situations.
rk-d wrote:
In my samples, the RAW performance of the d800 and 5dIII are identical at ISO6400, which is the highest I ever shoot.Sometimes the d800 looks better, sometimes vice-versa. It's too close to call, in my experience. To extract that performance, though, the d800 has to be processed RAW. OOC JPEGs from the Canon are better, and if you are shooting volume at high ISO, that is a great advantage.
snapsy wrote:
I agree, this is my experience as well.
I'd give the edge to the 5D3 at ISO6400 myself from all the controlled samples I've seen, but yeah it does not become better at ISO1600 or anything, nor 3200 for that matter, gotta be pushing ISO6400 I'd say not pushing 1600.
It is just me or Nikon D600 it has almost no detail at all compared with the Canon cameras ? I can push Luminance NR at 20-25 and I can obtain the same results with Canon sensors . I guess Nikon apply some NR in their Nef files in camera. So is a detail vs smoothness in shadows dillema.
