p.1 #1 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
Has anyone switched from a 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810? I am replacing my 6D, I only have 3 Canon lenses. I'm thinking about skipping the 5D Mark III and switching to a Nikon D810. I have read .Any reviews that name is a much better camera. I cannot afford a 5D Mark IV. Thanks.
p.1 #2 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
The D800/800e and D810 are all superior imaging machines to the 5D3, unless you are desiring high ISO shooting on a regular basis.
The 5Ds (used) should be about the same price as the D810, and will have much better resolution, 51MP vs. 36mp.
I'd go 5Ds in your position. That will save you the costs associated with starting up in the Nikon arena with a high resolution body that you should consider top quality lenses for ($$$).
p.1 #3 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
$2200 at the Nikon refurb store right now. That's a lot of camera for the money! Tough to switch though as it can be a hassle to switch systems and recover costs.
With rumors pointing to an updated 6D2 on the horizon you might want to wait to see what Canon has in store for it.
p.1 #5 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
The Nikon is a great camera, especially if you live close to a Nikon repair centre.
I got tired of having to continually send my Nikon gear away for weeks at a time for recalls and repairs, so I switched back to Canon (including a 5D Mark III).
p.1 #6 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
It seems that the Nikon is better than the 6D below ISO 800, but then they seem to be pretty close with read noise, in some cases the 6D beating it out.
p.1 #7 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
The d810 is better than 5d3 on 3 counts:
1) Better dynamic range at iso100
2) Better resolution because no AA filter - adds ~10% more resolution at risk of more moire but the added resolution removes some of this risk
3) Higher resolution because 36mpx vs 22mpx - allows printing ~20% bigger
However:
1) For 3 years the 5d3 has outsold the d8xx - the difference in sensor performance obviously is not "much better"
2) Assuming you have 3 lens at $1000 each and you lose 1/3 of the value in selling and buying and need new batteries, new remote shutter, new flash... you will lose about $1500 in value by switching. Not counting the d800 vs 6d difference. So likely it would cost $2000 to switch.
3) If you don't buy expensive lens you are unlikely to achieve the resolution gain because you need better lens to match with higher mpx.
4) The dynamic range gain in iso performance is at iso100 so which matters for landscape on the tripod or portrait on a tripod but does not for weddings, action, wildlife etc where your iso is above iso 400. However the gain in dynamic range at iso100-400 is not enough to overcome having to use bracketing and blending for landscape so it is mostly a theroectical gain.
5) I find the ergonomics of d8xxx are not as good as canon. The remote shutter is screw in . The c1,c2, c3 are harder to acess through menu. etc.
In short my view is canon 5d3 is betterfunctionally/cheaper with the only shortfall that Nikon can print 20% bigger with same quality vs 5d3 or 6d.
I personally would buy the 5dsr over the d8xxx (enables printing 20% bigger) because I have canon lens and like the ergonomics of canon but only you can decide whether the cost of switching (several thousand) is worth the gains in dynamic range at low iso. The only time I would see d810 better than 5dsr is if you shooting action in high light at iso100 (ignoring fps, focus and just considering sensor in dynamic range). That said, If I were you and you are not printing big, why not just stick with 6d until a 6d2 or 5dsr2 comes out.
And if you take the $1500 switching costs and add it to $2000 for a refurbished d810, you are about the costs of 5d4. So if you can afford d810, you can afford the 5d4.
p.1 #8 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
I agree, you will get better "IQ" image quality with Canon and a cheap refurbished 6D has better "low light:" capability. But can't afford a 5D4 .... such a shame
p.1 #12 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
Wow. You blew me away. Thank you for that input.
If I upgrade to a Nikon D810,and sell off my lenses, it would cost me $2000 to switch, get a new body and get new lenses.
Sticking with Canon and upgrading to a Mk III would cost me about $1800. Upgrading to the 5D Mk IV would cost me $2600.
Scott Stoness wrote:
The d810 is better than 5d3 on 3 counts:
1) Better dynamic range at iso100
2) Better resolution because no AA filter - adds ~10% more resolution at risk of more moire but the added resolution removes some of this risk
3) Higher resolution because 36mpx vs 22mpx - allows printing ~20% bigger
However:
1) For 3 years the 5d3 has outsold the d8xx - the difference in sensor performance obviously is not "much better"
2) Assuming you have 3 lens at $1000 each and you lose 1/3 of the value in selling and buying and need new batteries, new remote shutter, new flash... you will lose about $1500 in value by switching. Not counting the d800 vs 6d difference. So likely it would cost $2000 to switch.
3) If you don't buy expensive lens you are unlikely to achieve the resolution gain because you need better lens to match with higher mpx.
4) The dynamic range gain in iso performance is at iso100 so which matters for landscape on the tripod or portrait on a tripod but does not for weddings, action, wildlife etc where your iso is above iso 400. However the gain in dynamic range at iso100-400 is not enough to overcome having to use bracketing and blending for landscape so it is mostly a theroectical gain.
5) I find the ergonomics of d8xxx are not as good as canon. The remote shutter is screw in . The c1,c2, c3 are harder to acess through menu. etc.
In short my view is canon 5d3 is betterfunctionally/cheaper with the only shortfall that Nikon can print 20% bigger with same quality vs 5d3 or 6d.
I personally would buy the 5dsr over the d8xxx (enables printing 20% bigger) because I have canon lens and like the ergonomics of canon but only you can decide whether the cost of switching (several thousand) is worth the gains in dynamic range at low iso. The only time I would see d810 better than 5dsr is if you shooting action in high light at iso100 (ignoring fps, focus and just considering sensor in dynamic range). That said, If I were you and you are not printing big, why not just stick with 6d until a 6d2 or 5dsr2 comes out.
And if you take the $1500 switching costs and add it to $2000 for a refurbished d810, you are about the costs of 5d4. So if you can afford d810, you can afford the 5d4. ...Show more →
p.1 #14 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
I purchased a D800 when they came out. At ISO 800, the noise per pixel was horrible, and at high ISO's, I just did not like the results. I had bought three high end Nikon lenses, and the resolution was great outdoors on a bright day, and DR in that situation let me raise shadows. But, since most of my use was in low light at extreme high ISO's, I turned around and sold it after a month. The camera was still difficult to find in stock, so I netted what I had paid. I had kept my camera gear, I was shooting the Nikon alongside my 1DMK IV at ISO 12800, and much preferred the Canon images.
There was, of course, the ergonomic issues, but the weird menu is something I'd learn in time and be comfortable with. Then, the 24-70 f/2.8G I had had absolutely horrible CA's. I had to shoot wide open in the dark, and that made it so bad that Lightroom could not correct enough to get rid of it all. I have learned my lesson, the reviews don't always cover the way you use a camera. Oh, I also use live view a lot for product photos, but Live view on Nikon cameras was a bad joke.
p.1 #15 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
Thank you so much for your input!
scalesusa wrote:
I purchased a D800 when they came out. At ISO 800, the noise per pixel was horrible, and at high ISO's, I just did not like the results. I had bought three high end Nikon lenses, and the resolution was great outdoors on a bright day, and DR in that situation let me raise shadows. But, since most of my use was in low light at extreme high ISO's, I turned around and sold it after a month. The camera was still difficult to find in stock, so I netted what I had paid. I had kept my camera gear, I was shooting the Nikon alongside my 1DMK IV at ISO 12800, and much preferred the Canon images.
There was, of course, the ergonomic issues, but the weird menu is something I'd learn in time and be comfortable with. Then, the 24-70 f/2.8G I had had absolutely horrible CA's. I had to shoot wide open in the dark, and that made it so bad that Lightroom could not correct enough to get rid of it all. I have learned my lesson, the reviews don't always cover the way you use a camera. Oh, I also use live view a lot for product photos, but Live view on Nikon cameras was a bad joke....Show more →
p.1 #16 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
Sounds like cost is about equal.
If you don't give it a try, you'll never know.
I really liked the 5D3 off center focus points. Small change, but a big deal for narrow depth of field portrature.
p.1 #18 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
I am estimating switching to a NEW body.
So it doesn't give me any issues when I'm out shooting weddings. Camera bodies are the only thing I always buy new.
psharvic wrote:
Vees, looking at our B&S board 6d's are in the 900 range, Mk III's are around 1500. $600 vs your 1800 estimate
p.1 #19 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
Vees_3188 wrote:
I am estimating switching to a NEW body.
So it doesn't give me any issues when I'm out shooting weddings. Camera bodies are the only thing I always buy new.
Canon refurbished are safe to buy. I would argue even safer than new, because every refurbished body has been checked out individually and repaired if required. New bodies aren't tested individually, only samples pulled from each batch.
p.1 #20 · ** SWITCH from 5D Mark III to a Nikon D810?
Thank you. Last time I checked, I couldn't find a refurbished Canon 5D Mk. III. I'll check again.
moondigger wrote:
Canon refurbished are safe to buy. I would argue even safer than new, because every refurbished body has been checked out individually and repaired if required. New bodies aren't tested individually, only samples pulled from each batch.
