# Philip Bloom Comparison 5d3 vs D800 vs D4



## Wilmark (May 17, 2012)

I have not seen anyone discuss this review:
http://philipbloom.net/2012/05/13/fullframeshootout/

While he does not outright declare a winner - I think he prefers the 5d Mk3 followed by the D4.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 17, 2012)

Wilmark said:


> I have not seen anyone discuss this review:
> http://philipbloom.net/2012/05/13/fullframeshootout/
> 
> While he does not outright declare a winner - I think he prefers the 5d Mk3 followed by the D4.



I didn't think he liked the D4 at all. I think he slightly preferred the 5D3 but also liked the D800 because it was sharper, 5D3 is kinda soft although it has no aliasing/moire and much better SNR.


----------



## agierke (May 17, 2012)

before i even read the review i saw the photo of the three cameras discussed.

missed focus and bad noise...i wonder what camera was used to take that shot! not sure if you should be reviewing cameras if that is the kind of photography you are offering up to represent the 3 cameras you are reviewing....


----------



## AG (May 17, 2012)

Basically like we know, the 5D3 is still the killer Video DSLR to beat. 
The D800 comes close but is let down by Moire and AA issues and the D4 has been crippled for some reason (technically it should have done better than the D800).

Also of note the D800 only was able to produce a better image once you inserted a 3rd party filter into it.

In the end this round goes to canon for video but Nikon for stills. 
The next generation will be the defining round IMHO, Nikon will have had time to work out their kinks (if they are not bought out by Sony in the mean time) and Canon will have to bring something pretty damn amazing to the fight. 

An AF upgrade and 2 stops won't cut it next time. 

We only have another 3 years to wait for round 3


----------



## Waterdonkey (May 17, 2012)

It was shot with C300.


----------



## AG (May 17, 2012)

Waterdonkey said:


> It was shot with C300.



Think you will find he was asking about the cover photo.

Which will probably just be an iPhone or a frame grab from the C300 footage. 
Either way its only a placeholder, not like they shot the whole video like that.


----------



## Chewy734 (May 17, 2012)

nice review. I feel that if you are willing to sharpen in post, the 5D3 wins hands down. Otherwise, if low-light isn't important to you, the D800 might be better. The 5D3 wins hands down in low-light too, imo.


----------



## mitchell3417 (May 17, 2012)

agierke said:


> before i even read the review i saw the photo of the three cameras discussed.
> 
> missed focus and bad noise...i wonder what camera was used to take that shot! not sure if you should be reviewing cameras if that is the kind of photography you are offering up to represent the 3 cameras you are reviewing....


That's his photographic style. A lot of his pictures are shot with that style. It's a branding decision IMO. Plus, he's a video guy and doesn't do professional stills work.



Wilmark said:


> While he does not outright declare a winner - I think he prefers the 5d Mk3 followed by the D4.


He says at the end of the video the D4 pretty much shouldn't be considered for video because of it's crap resolution. He clearly doesn't like that better than the D800. Also, the short film he shot with the cameras he used the 5DIII and D800 only. No D4. And of the two, he says he mostly used the D800. Just sayin'.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (May 17, 2012)

On a side note, I think the footage from the c300 looks pretty great.


----------



## psolberg (May 23, 2012)

Wilmark said:


> I have not seen anyone discuss this review:
> http://philipbloom.net/2012/05/13/fullframeshootout/
> 
> While he does not outright declare a winner - I think he prefers the 5d Mk3 followed by the D4.



really? I thought he didn't like the D4 AT ALL and preferred the D800 over all of them with the mosaic engineering filter because of the unnaceptably soft output of the 5DIII. I guess the fact it is hard to say which he liked best speaks to be impartial tone of the review. which is how it should be 8)



> I feel that if you are willing to sharpen in post, the 5D3 wins hands down


but sharpening doesn't bring resolution which is lacking, how is this winning hands down? If anything it sounds as lame as having to noise reduce the D800 footage. That's not "hands down" winning anything : that's more like making lemonade out of lemons which was Bloom's point all along. ;D




> Basically like we know, the 5D3 is still the killer Video DSLR to beat.
> The D800 comes close but is let down by Moire and AA issues and the D4 has been crippled for some reason (technically it should have done better than the D800).


the problem is that the killer dslr doesn't even had 4:2:2 output and the codecs fall appart easily with motion, and additionally it's Full1080p mode doesn't resolve detail to be called true 1080. this makes the D800 the better "killer" IMO for a lot of applications. Moire/AA aren't a problem with the D800 unless you are shooting horizontal patterns, and even then you can opt for the mosaic engineering filter when that is a problem. On the canon side, softness is there unless you take the one way street of removing the OLP filter and there is absolutely no way to get 4:2:2 color or higher bitrates to address motion/compression artifacts present in all 5DIII footage. If you remove the OLP to increase detail, then you can't put it back on easily, and become prone to IR artifacts which then require even more correction or additional IR filters. Contrast that to the mosaic AA filter can be removed anytime in seconds and does not void your warranty. Given as 5DmkII's had significant worse moire than the D800 (as Bloom also confirms) I also have to question the real impact of moire when we have such great 5DmkII footage being used in high budget films all the time. I have shot a lot of D800 video so far and have seen far less issues than with the 5DmkII and the perveived resolution is much better than sharpened 5DIII outputs. So I'm just not seeing a problem here, literally.

so I'll dissagree that the 5D3 is the video DSLR to beat because it clearly lags in critical areas like image quality in full HD (it is more like upsampled 720p at best as mentioned by eoshd.com) and its innability to record to prores with a recorder in 4:2:2 color or better which is a non starter for post procesing. Both issues were ok in 2007 but the expectations are much higher now and the "DSLR to beat" should not suffer/lack such key aspects if it was really the one to beat. So IMO neither the D800/5DIII can really claim victory when you're having to work around problems that shouldn't be there if they were the cream of the crop.



> In the end this round goes to canon for video but Nikon for stills


I think that is the case ONLY for low light filming which the 5DIII does a great job (although it will likely get blown out the water by the 1Dx). But for artifical light or daytime shooting, I can't think of a single reason why one would opt for the soft look of the 5DmkIII footage over the crisper 4:2:2 high bitrate option of the D800. shooting wildlife and detailed scenes, or even high motion scenes of anything, are just ruined with the 5DIII unless you really shoot in dark places where the benefits of the D800 are offset by the noise. In particular, scenes with lots of motion fall appart with both camera's built in codecs which make the HDMI+external recorder the only solution. The mosaic filter, like on the 5DmkII makes for a more practical solution than sacrificing detail permanently. IMO. 

Sharpening simply isn't going to bring detail that is gone and as Bloom says, it just isn't ideal. Neither is the filter but as he says, neither camera can do it all at this point (D800 image quality and resolution with 5DmkIII high ISO).

So calling either a "winner" is like saying the hammer is a winner over the screwdriver. total nonsense. I can both think of scenarios where one is clearly a better tool than the other. So the fact is that ther is no "DSLR to beat" yet for video because they all suck at something badly ;D



> I didn't think he liked the D4 at all. I think he slightly preferred the 5D3 but also liked the D800 because it was sharper, 5D3 is kinda soft although it has no aliasing/moire and much better SNR.


that's my take too. The soft output of the 5DIII and lack of uncompressed clean output are the main two things keeping it from winning over the rivals. The need for the mosaic filter is a shame on the D800 because it was otherwise perfect. And the D4 clearly blows the 5DIII out of the water in low light but its even softer output rules it out.

what a shame really and here is where I agree with Philip. Why can't these companies get it right.


----------



## JasonATL (May 23, 2012)

psolberg said:


> the problem is that the killer dslr doesn't even had 4:2:2 output and the codecs fall appart easily with motion, and additionally it's Full1080p mode doesn't resolve detail to be called true 1080. this makes the D800 the better "killer" IMO for a lot of applications.



psolberg - Do you have a link to where someone has tested or established the actual video resolution of the D800? I've done shot my own test charts with the 5D3, but I've not yet seen the same done with a D800.


----------



## psolberg (May 24, 2012)

JasonATL said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > the problem is that the killer dslr doesn't even had 4:2:2 output and the codecs fall appart easily with motion, and additionally it's Full1080p mode doesn't resolve detail to be called true 1080. this makes the D800 the better "killer" IMO for a lot of applications.
> ...



I have not seen it done with charts side by side comparison but you can just google it and you'll find several reviews having the same conclusion. Philip bloom even mentions it and his review is about as fair to all cameras as I have ever seen. The issue is that a lot of people are looking at re-compressed video or youtube and that's a poor evaluation of any camera.

The best evaluation of the sampling of the D800 comes from
http://falklumo.blogspot.de/2012/04/lumolabs-nikon-d800-video-function.html
as per his conclusions, the D800 is actually a 2240 x 1260p camera which then scales that down to 1080p. I think that is what accounts for the better image quality.

Their guess is that the canon's sampling method pixel bins to a lower resolution before encoding and then creates 1080p video which Andrew from ESO hd calls 720p upscaled to 1080p. The exact details will likely remain unknown but the footage of the D800 is definitively sharper regardless of how it arrives to it.

Andrew over at EOS HD mentioned he'll be doing a shootout of the D800 soon so stay tuned for his comparison since he posts still images of frame grabs which is the proper way to compare video short of the original mov file.

Meanwhile I would refer anybody curious about the uncompressed HDMI out (which is far more interesting than the resolution) to this video (download the original and not the vimeo embedded video)
https://vimeo.com/40788982

then compare STILLS
http://proofs.iamron.com/Personal/Atomos-Ninja-VS-D800-In-Camera/22567372_w9PxNn#!i=1806243743&k=fmHtjv9

there you can see the weakness of the built in codecs. the 5DIII's codec is equaly weak with motion leading to a blocky output. But you can also see how the D800 image can be sharpened even beyond its already good levels if you capture it at high bitrates.

I'm ordering the mosaic engineering filter as soon as they sell it. I'm hoping it will not soften the output too much. Philip bloom didn't say if it did but I'm wondering if the scrutinzed it.


----------



## awinphoto (May 24, 2012)

psolberg said:


> there you can see the weakness of the built in codecs. the 5DIII's codec is equaly weak with motion leading to a blocky output. But you can also see how the D800 image can be sharpened even beyond its already good levels if you capture it at high bitrates.
> 
> I'm ordering the mosaic engineering filter as soon as they sell it. I'm hoping it will not soften the output too much. Philip bloom didn't say if it did but I
> 'm wondering if the scrutinzed it.



If i'm not mistaken, didn't bloom say the d800 COULDN'T be sharpened without introducing bad artifacts but the 5d3 COULD be sharpened to correct it? It may have been another video but i got from blooms video was the 5d3 had to be sharpened in post and the D800 needed a 3rd party filter and assuming you corrected for both, they both are great cameras, noise issues aside for the d800.


----------



## bp (May 24, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> If i'm not mistaken, didn't bloom say the d800 COULDN'T be sharpened without introducing bad artifacts but the 5d3 COULD be sharpened to correct it? It may have been another video but i got from blooms video was the 5d3 had to be sharpened in post and the D800 needed a 3rd party filter and assuming you corrected for both, they both are great cameras, noise issues aside for the d800.



I think you're remembering the CameraStore video (the 3rd in their series of 3). They did specifically say that the D800 can't be sharpened without really bringing out the artifacts. And their example shot certainly backed that up. 

That said, they didn't have a pre-production Mosaic filter like Bloom did. They also weren't recording to an external, higher bitrate recorder - which was what was done in the example psolberg was referring to. They just tried sharpening the 24mb/s internally recorded D800 footage

I think it's funny how adamantly people are STILL arguing over who's dad can beat up the other guy's dad. As Bloom said, these are both GREAT cameras. Both require a fix - the D800 requires the filter if you don't want moire/aliasing - the MK3 requires sharpening in post to bring out the details. Noise in low light/high ISO on the D800 isn't fixable, but if you usually shoot in controlled conditions, and don't ever need to shoot above 3200, no worries, the D800 will be great.

The one thing Bloom didn't talk about, which I found very surprising in the CameraStore video, was the weird jumpy laggy picture when you magnify the D800 live view to check focus. In practical use, this would probably drive me more crazy than all the other gripes combined, because I use that constantly in a shoot. Then again... I'm sure you could get used to it.

I think Philip is right - they're both great cameras. If a close friend of mine buys a D800, and another buys a 5D3, I'll tell them both the exact same thing... "CONGRATS!!! Now shut up and go shoot something"


----------



## bp (May 24, 2012)

psolberg said:


> Andrew over at EOS HD mentioned he'll be doing a shootout of the D800 soon so stay tuned for his comparison since he posts still images of frame grabs which is the proper way to compare video short of the original mov file.
> 
> Meanwhile I would refer anybody curious about the uncompressed HDMI out (which is far more interesting than the resolution) to this video (download the original and not the vimeo embedded video)
> https://vimeo.com/40788982



Man... Great demonstration of that extra tiny little bit of quality you can get when you're not relying on the internal codec. Canon definitely screwed up by not giving us clean HDMI out. I'm SO happy actually, that Nikon did in the D800, because just that could be the impetus for Canon to do the same via a firmware update.

Now I just wish Nikon had added zebra and focus peaking so Canon would also have to follow suit with those as well. heh


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2012)

bp said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > If i'm not mistaken, didn't bloom say the d800 COULDN'T be sharpened without introducing bad artifacts but the 5d3 COULD be sharpened to correct it? It may have been another video but i got from blooms video was the 5d3 had to be sharpened in post and the D800 needed a 3rd party filter and assuming you corrected for both, they both are great cameras, noise issues aside for the d800.
> ...



Thanks for clarifying the video... yes i think your right. I got to say i've seen enough review/comparison videos/blogs/websites to last me a life time between these two cameras it's rolling into one big beating. I agree both are very respectable cameras and both have their strengths and weaknesses. I will say it is amazing how bloom crushes the D4 compared to both the 5d3 and the d800. Granted the d800 is slightly newer than the d4, but then again if it was canon, they may have dumbed down the d800 so it was lesser than the d4, but given the d800 and it's specs, it's video, and it's capabilities, i really would find it surprising to hear how much if any d4's nikon sells from this point forward compared to the D800.. Just like how the 5d2 crushed the 1ds3 sales.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 2, 2012)

bp said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > Andrew over at EOS HD mentioned he'll be doing a shootout of the D800 soon so stay tuned for his comparison since he posts still images of frame grabs which is the proper way to compare video short of the original mov file.
> ...



Canon has become such a sad follower, all they ever say is we see no need to do this or that until we see someone else bother. That is sort of attitude that sends companies on the long slide down. Instead of having the 5D3 hti up all the video sites by storm they leave out silly little costless things like focus peaking, zebra stripes, 1920x1080 1.6x cropped mode, etc. etc. and instead of getting amazing press and taking video world by storm again they get "meh" after "eh, ok". For what? To try to protect some $20,000 C-line??


It probably doesn't help how out of touch most Japanese electronics management has become, read some eye opening stuff about how insular they are and how they won't even employee student who decided to go to college outside of Japan, never mind if is Oxford or MIT, and if a younger employee knows that an older one is talking out of date rubbish, even if they try to bring it up in the most gentle terms, they get admonished and black listed as trouble makers.


----------



## psolberg (Jun 6, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> bp said:
> 
> 
> > awinphoto said:
> ...



well don't confuse apples and oranges. the D800 is a different camera. The D4 will sell less because it is much more expensive and much more specialized and aims at the niche market that demands really fast frame rates and really high ISOs. Most people buying a D4 are buying a really fast still imaging tool and all these dslrs, including the 5DmkIII are primarily still imaging devices with video tacked on as a bonus.

so the video performance of the D4 is unlikely to impact sales since that really isn't the niche market it is going after. Even the D800 and 5DmkIII are too expensive and crippled and will be outsold by cheaper camcorders.


----------

