# Based purely on specs, used only for landscapes: D800 or MKIII?



## AdmiralTwizzler (Mar 17, 2012)

I'm too much of an amateur to tell from the specs which is better for landscape photography. 

I've read multiple posts on various sites that the D800 is better. 

If you wanted to just do landscape photography, in a variety of environments, for the purpose of selling framed prints, selling cards, and entering contests, can you tell just by looking at the specs which one is better?

Thanks! I'll go back to my T1i now. But I'm going to buy one of the two.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Mar 17, 2012)

What did we do before the d800 and 5d3? What did we do before the d700 and 5d2?


----------



## Alker (Mar 17, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> What did we do before the d800 and 5d3? What did we do before the d700 and 5d2?



Exactly


----------



## dtaylor (Mar 17, 2012)

AdmiralTwizzler said:


> I'm too much of an amateur to tell from the specs which is better for landscape photography.
> 
> I've read multiple posts on various sites that the D800 is better.
> 
> ...



If you want to print larger than 24", the D800 is better.


----------



## chito (Mar 17, 2012)

I'm getting a 5D3, but being absolutely honest, for the sole purpose of landscape then the D800 is better..


----------



## pharding (Mar 17, 2012)

The D800 is better for landscape photography, however the D800E is even better yet. The requirements of architectural photography are similar to landscape photography. According to one of the finest architectural in US that our firm has used and a personal friend, the Nikon D800 is better for architectural photography. He would switch except Canon offers a 17 mm perspective control lens. Based upon that the Nikon D800E is better for landscape photography. The other benefit to Nikon is that their controls are more intuitive than Canon.


----------



## traveller (Mar 17, 2012)

As dtaylor has correctly pointed out, for landscape prints the higher the resolution of the sensor the better. This is the reason why serious landscape photography was generally the preserve of the larger formats in film days. 

It is very exciting that Nikon is offering a camera with a megapixel count that offers resolution that was previously the domain of medium format. Of course, image capture at 30MP+ will hold short shrift for those with careless technique. For a photographer armed with a sturdy tripod, head, remote release, mirror lockup, great lenses and knowledge of the trade offs between depth of field, optical abberations and diffraction softening, 36MP should allow indulgence of their desire to see their work printed at a size that allows for immersive viewing. 

If you do not fully appreciate the requirements or desires that I have described in the previous paragraph, then I would seriously reconsider whether such high resolutions meet your photography requirements.


----------



## Radiating (Mar 17, 2012)

AdmiralTwizzler said:


> I'm too much of an amateur to tell from the specs which is better for landscape photography.
> 
> I've read multiple posts on various sites that the D800 is better.
> 
> ...



The D800/E is your best bet. The D800 and 5D3 aren't too different overall for normal use, because the 5D3 has a very weak AA filter, so for general purpose it's not that big of a deal. 

Here's a comparison with randomly arranged samples, with the 5D3 uprezed to the D800 resolution at 100% and one of the sharpest lenses in the world a Sigma 70mm f/2.8:

http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/7801636/img/Picture-Box/crops5d3vsd800.jpg


The D800 is still better but if you're not using the best techniques, lenses etc or pushing base iso raw files a lot, it will be a wash, plus the 5D3 has in camera HDR for jpgs.

The D800E is going to be extremely supperior to the 5D3 though for landscape work. It doesn't have an AA filter which means you might have to do a lot of work to reduce moire but it will be decidedly sharper and noticably so. 

Nikon cameras also have much better dynamic range, while signal to noise ratio tests show that they are similar they are not because the Canon has what's called banding noise, which noise reduction cannot remove. Noise reduction is good for 2-5 stops of improvement so there is a noticable difference when you're trying to make the shadows more than 7 times brighter on a Canon camera. This video should explain that:

http://testcams.com/blog/2011/05/03/nikon-dx-vs-canon-aps-c-dynamic-range/

So in conclusion: Landscape Pro = D800E, Landscape Amateur = either one


----------



## thure1982 (Mar 17, 2012)

_ Don't give me S___ now all you guy's at CR. I always been Canon fanboy... _

If you have some or any good lenses with either brands, go with that brand.
Its a super-camera witch ever you get. Either will be just fine.

Don't use spec when you shot, use your eyes.
Good lenses are far more important then high MP or ISO-performance.
They can only help you to print bigger and take pictures in less light.

PS. I'm waiting for my 5D3 because I already have my L-lenses and i love my 40D.


----------



## pharding (Mar 17, 2012)

Apparently the Nikkor 24 PCE lens does not work with the D800. Not good for landscape or architectural photographers using this wonderful lens. Someone screwed up big time at Nikon . 
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/10/nikon-support-nikkor-pc-e-24mm-f3-5d-ed-lens-cannot-be-used-with-shifting-and-tilting-on-the-d800.aspx/


----------



## traveller (Mar 17, 2012)

pharding said:


> Apparently the Nikkor 24 PCE lens does not work with the D800. Not good for landscape or architectural photographers using this wonderful lens. Someone screwed up big time at Nikon .
> http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/10/nikon-support-nikkor-pc-e-24mm-f3-5d-ed-lens-cannot-be-used-with-shifting-and-tilting-on-the-d800.aspx/



This assertion has now been denied by Nikon: 

http://www.megapixel.co.il/english/archive/28747

via Nikon Rumors (who, I believe broke the story)

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/10/nikon-support-nikkor-pc-e-24mm-f3-5d-ed-lens-cannot-be-used-with-shifting-and-tilting-on-the-d800.aspx/#more-35516


----------



## Bruce Photography (Mar 17, 2012)

traveller said:


> pharding said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently the Nikkor 24 PCE lens does not work with the D800. Not good for landscape or architectural photographers using this wonderful lens. Someone screwed up big time at Nikon .
> ...



I'm going with the 14-24 for now, but if you compare the flexibility of the Canon 24 MK2 with the Nikon, that Nikon was due for some sort of upgrade anyway. I mean why have a landscape camera that can't do perspective control? Also Nikon doesn't have a 17mm pce yet. Perhaps 2012 will be the year that both the 24 and 17 mm offerings come to pass for Nikon to compete with the Canon offerings. The 24 and 17 mm TSE Canon lenses are my favorites and also my sharpest lenses edge to edge. They are just great.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 18, 2012)

AdmiralTwizzler said:


> I'm too much of an amateur to tell from the specs which is better for landscape photography.
> 
> I've read multiple posts on various sites that the D800 is better.
> 
> ...



For landscapes and nothing more, I'd say D800, more dynamic range and more mega-pixels. More DR could surely help some shots, more MP may or may not depending upon what you do and what your goals are.

What lenses do you have for the T1i already?


----------



## justsomedude (Mar 18, 2012)

AdmiralTwizzler said:


> I've read multiple posts on various sites that the D800 is better.
> 
> If you wanted to just do landscape photography, in a variety of environments, for the purpose of selling framed prints, selling cards, and entering contests, can you tell just by looking at the specs which one is better?



As many people have already stated - the d800 is superior to the 5D3 for landscape photography. Now, the important question is... for how long?

If you are invested heavily in Canon glass, I would hold tight. The last two weeks have been a flurry of reviews, tests, and postings all over the photography forums. People are going bonkers over the d800 right now. I think it would be difficult at this time for Canon to ignore the d800, and the fact that its sensor has leapfrogged pretty much every body they have in that market and at that price-point ($2999). 

I am confident that Canon will respond accordingly. If by Photokina they do not - well - then perhaps it's time to consider other options.


----------



## AdmiralTwizzler (Mar 18, 2012)

Thanks for the replies. Very interesting. 

I only have the kit lenses with the T1i. 

My goal is to make the leap from avid amateur to semi-pro or even pro. 

I think I'll wait awhile. 

I spoke with a full time professional photographer in the Seattle area and he still shoots with the MK I.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 18, 2012)

AdmiralTwizzler said:


> Thanks for the replies. Very interesting.
> 
> I only have the kit lenses with the T1i.
> 
> ...


 
It really depends on what level you are shooting at, and the size of prints you are making.

Remember, the nef file from a D800 opens up into a 200mb file for your computer to manipulate. Certainly, most newer computers with 9gb or more can easily handle the 200mb file, assuming only one or two are open, but processing special effects, nr, etc might take a bit longer.

Those who are running windows 32 bit might have a real challenge though to keep things from slowing way down. I suppose we will hear about that.

One thing that appeals to me is to have as many pixels as possible in the original image. What seems large and excessive today, will be tiny in a few years.


----------



## traveller (Mar 18, 2012)

Radiating said:


> AdmiralTwizzler said:
> 
> 
> > I'm too much of an amateur to tell from the specs which is better for landscape photography.
> ...



Interesting, but where this guy's credibility falls apart a bit is where he claims that this show a "real world example" of the Sony sensor's lower read noise. Yeah, pushing an image six stops is really a real world example. Can you imagine a conversation between a professional architectural photographer and their client: 

"No, I didn't bother to light your interior photo correctly, I decided to shoot it six stops underexposed and then push the shadows in post; look it's fine if you don't want to print it larger than 8"x10", especially if you only want it black and white". 

This doesn't change the fact that the 16MP Sony crop sensor has lower read noise than the 18MP Canon, just that it's not quite as relevant as is made out in these videos. I doubt you would see such vast differences in actual "real world" use, which is probably why we don't see it in 99.9% of photos. 

I would also mention that the jury is still out on how well the latest Canon sensors will perform until we have some real world tests; this shouldn't be far away with the 5D MkIII now shipping. There is also this point made by Thom Hogan about the sensors in the latest Nikons:

"Also, the thing that is a bit unique about the D3/D3s/D700 sensor tech is that it is relatively friendly to highlights. More so than any other Nikon camera, I can recover more highlight detail, even if my exposure is a little hot (but not too hot). What's happening with the new sensors (J1/V1, D7000, D800) is that we're getting really good detail definition in the shadows (partly due to the on-board ADC and very low read noise). We're all finding an amazing level of detail down in the lower bits with these latest sensors. To a small degree, more so than with the D700. But at the highlights, not the same. So one thing everyone is going to have to adjust slightly is their exposure practices--highlight recovery is tighter on the D800 than on the D700. Thus, maximizing a D700 is a bit different than maximizing a D800 (okay, I'm theorizing here, as I don't have a D800 in my hands yet to test that assumption; but still, I'm pretty sure from everything I've heard and seen so far and the side evidence of other recent sensors that this will be the case)." http://www.bythom.com/d800intro.htm.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 18, 2012)

traveller said:


> Interesting, but where this guy's credibility falls apart a bit is where he claims that this show a "real world example" of the Sony sensor's lower read noise. Yeah, pushing an image six stops is really a real world example. Can you imagine a conversation between a professional architectural photographer and their client:
> 
> "No, I didn't bother to light your interior photo correctly, I decided to shoot it six stops underexposed and then push the shadows in post; look it's fine if you don't want to print it larger than 8"x10", especially if you only want it black and white".



You can't re-light nature though.



> This doesn't change the fact that the 16MP Sony crop sensor has lower read noise than the 18MP Canon, just that it's not quite as relevant as is made out in these videos. I doubt you would see such vast differences in actual "real world" use, which is probably why we don't see it in 99.9% of photos.



it depends how and what you want to shoot, plenty of shots it's no big deal at all, but it's not easy for some to run into a barrier relatively easily at times either



> I would also mention that the jury is still out on how well the latest Canon sensors will perform until we have some real world tests; this shouldn't be far away with the 5D MkIII now shipping. There is also this point made by Thom Hogan about the sensors in the latest Nikons:



released version already tested, the one copy looked at had 10% more read noise than the IR pre-release copy, so again 5D3 looks to be the same as the 5D2 in this regard


----------



## Ricku (Mar 18, 2012)

D800 is the obvious answer. It has everything that the 5D3 has, + more, and at a lower price. Most importantly, the D800 has wider dynamic range at low ISO, and captures way more detail.

The 5D3 is a sports / photojournalism / general purpose camera.

I'm selling all my gear right now and moving to Nikon for the D800.


----------



## Seamus (Mar 18, 2012)

Ricku said:


> D800 is the obvious answer. It has everything that the 5D3 has, + more, and at a lower price. Most importantly, the D800 has wider dynamic range at low ISO, and captures way more detail.
> 
> The 5D3 is a sports / photojournalism / general purpose camera.
> 
> I'm selling all my gear right now and moving to Nikon for the D800.



Will you come back to Canon in six months when they release their high megapixel camera? :-*


----------



## justsomedude (Mar 18, 2012)

Seamus said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > D800 is the obvious answer. It has everything that the 5D3 has, + more, and at a lower price. Most importantly, the D800 has wider dynamic range at low ISO, and captures way more detail.
> ...



+1, and exactly why I'm not selling my Canon gear... yet.

I'm going to wait and see how they respond. If the 7DII is a dud, or there's no FF high MP body by Xmas, I'll probably bail. But I at least have to give Canon a chance.


----------



## Seamus (Mar 18, 2012)

That's the spirit!!!


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (Mar 18, 2012)

People spend too long worrying about bodies when, for most, lenses will make the biggest difference. You buy into a system, not a body.

Now, for the last generation of cameras both Nikon and Canon had significant problem areas: resolution for the d700 wasn't fantastic and focussing for the 5dii wasn't fantastic. Both great cameras, but with problems.

Both manufacturers have fixed these problems now so they will both do a great job for anyone.

However, they both still have their advantages and disadvantages:

Canon has (outside of maybe the 12-24) better lenses. Be aware though that a significant amount of lendscape work is done at more than 24mm. The 5diii seems like the better generalist camera (you wouldn't really want to shoot a wedding with 36MP files) and for my photography that's important as I do weddings, studio beauty and landscapes.

Nikon has a cheaper body, more resolution, more dynamic range and maybe even better high ISO (yet to see).

Personally for my photography I believe lenses are more important than bodies and the same is true *for a large amount of photographers*. The key is to understand whether that is the case for you or not.

If lenses are more important, invest in Canon. If they're not or you are particularly attracted to landscapes, the d800e with 12-24 may be a great camea. However, be aware that you'll start being diffraction limited by f8 (so someone else has calculated) on the d800 so you might not get the resolution and DOF you really want unless you get T&S lenses.

I'm not knocking the d800 btw. I suspect it has the better sensor overall. Just be aware that the lens makes the photo. Consider what your photography will be limited by most.

Remember that 36MP is only useful if your lens can resolve it, and in that Canon have the edge. Don't fall into the trap of many people who come up to me at weddings and say "wow - that's a great shot - it must be a great camera!" when in reality the photographer > lens > body _in most cases_.

Good luck with your decision 

(take a look at some of my work below - all with a 5dii)


----------



## pharding (Mar 18, 2012)

Seamus said:


> Will you come back to Canon in six months when they release their high megapixel camera? :-*


Nobody knows when Canon will choose to respond. It is hard to justify waiting 9 months or more based upon what Canon might do. Canon rarely if ever does anything within a rumored time frame.

I have a 5D3 on order and I look forward to receiving it. I may sell some of my equipment and get the Nikon D800E after I rent one and test it myself on my typical subject. If Nikon had 17 mm tilt shift lens I would shift back to Nikon completely and sell my Canon gear.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 18, 2012)

But the question still stands. What if it will take a year? And they deliver 45mp? Will you switch back? And then maybe Nikon will release the D900 at 60mp? What then?


----------



## Ricku (Mar 18, 2012)

Seamus said:


> Ricku said:
> 
> 
> > D800 is the obvious answer. It has everything that the 5D3 has, + more, and at a lower price. Most importantly, the D800 has wider dynamic range at low ISO, and captures way more detail.
> ...


When Canon release their high MP camera, it still won't matter much, because I seriously doubt that they will be able to match the DR output of Nikon's (Sonys) new sensors.

You are mistaken if you think I'm moving to the D800 just for high MP. 

But if Canon actually do manage to create a new sensor that can match (or even beat Nikon's), I will eat my words + socks.


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 18, 2012)

DavidRiesenberg said:


> But the question still stands. What if it will take a year? And they deliver 45mp? Will you switch back? And then maybe Nikon will release the D900 at 60mp? What then?


I was burned waiting for Canon to respond to the 200-400/f4 lens. I had been waiting since 2009, patiently knowing that Canon would give me the lens I wanted and that's a significant chunk of my professional career. It's still not out and rumors are that it will cost up to 70% more than the Nikon version and possibly double what you can buy a good used one for.

I wouldn't patiently wait for Canon to do anything anymore. Besides, the original poster has a Rebel and a kit lens so he has practically zero invested in Canon. I'd never buy a D800, but it would seem that for landscapes it seems more appropriate. 

And I do find it a bit ironic that those howling "wait for Canon's response" often in the same breath say "you don't know what the D800 can do until all the evidence is in." As of now, there is plenty of evidence that the D800 will be better for certain types of photography and the Canon for other types. All you've got is a CR1 that Canon is working on a high MP camera. 

I would wait until the end of the month and read the full reviews. Then make your decision and go out and try to make a career out of it.


----------



## matto0 (Mar 18, 2012)

I'm debating one way or the other on these and I've decided to let the dust settle because specs are just specs and while they are fun to look at they only tell part of the story.

Here's some food for thought for both sides:

Is the D800 is limited by the 36MP massive files? It has multiple modes (FX/DX/1.2 etc) and a small/medium/large resolution for each, so you could shoot FX (Full Frame) at 25MP if you'd like, and probably many will. 

Nikon included the the D4 Metering in the D800, and has focal point metering, 5DMKIII doesn't (that said its not a deal breaker for me on the 5D)

D800 has Auto Focus up to F8, Canon is limited to F5.6, the D800 also has manual focus assist where apparently the focal point will light up when properly focused, I can't find too much info on this, and I can't find anything one way or the other for the 5D (the auto focus is a big deal)

Can't say much about low light on either one other then both currently appear to be great, we'll know this in a few weeks.

Lens, both companies have some great lenses and are competitive.

Ergonomics & ease of use - Supposedly Nikon has better ergonomics, lighter, etc. My canon has been fine and the MKII is easy to use the bottons etc., this seems to be more marketing then anything else. Ease of use, I've heard Nikon's are clunky and Canon's are great, I'm can't comment on the Nikon side, but Canon is easy to use.

Finally, the D800 is cheaper, it is!, now go look at their lens prices 

All that said, I am considering jumping, yes Canon _MAY_ come out with a high MP camera, but what will they cut to fit the 3K target, or will it be another 1.5k? Canon does everything possible to make sure one camera doesn't infringe on another by cutting/not including certain features.

Also it seems lately Canon has been going after profits while Nikon is going after marketshare, it makes me a bit hesitant to believe Canon will ever build something that actually rivals the D800 in anything but MPs (In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if they put the 7D auto focus/19point system in their D800 killer).

Good luck which ever you choose, I keep bouncing back and forth ;D


----------



## traveller (Mar 18, 2012)

To quote Thom Hogan again: 

"1Dx v. D4, 5DIII v. D800, Canon v. Nikon: this is really the Brand argument, though people keep trying to wrap in the Price, Performance, Quality, and Feature arguments. Personally, I don't see enough differences in those latter four arguments to make a strong call one way or another, thus the discussion is really about Brand. I just don't understand the brand switchers. We've had at least four measurable migrations in 13 years, and really only the first two had enough difference in the other factors to be remotely justified. If you're switching brands now, it's because you're switching brands, period. " http://www.bythom.com/index.htm [ - see "_And Speaking of Buying [March 12 (commentary)_"]

I don't see much point switching brands if you have decent lenses and accessories. Sure if you're just starting off and are into landscape/studio work, then the D800 is probably a better camera... than your abilities! 

Perhaps the more relevant group might be those that are looking to upgrade from crop to full frame, i.e. reasonably experienced photographers with existing lenses . Where it starts to become interesting is when you consider how much 'crop-only' glass you have. If you've kept your collection to just an ultra-wide zoom and have some 'L' glass, then it probably makes sense to stick with Canon. The difficult decisions come when you have a lot of EF-S lenses and only consumer glass (like someone I know that owns a Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5, Canon EF-S 17-85mm and EF 70-300mm IS USM (non-L) and is considering a move to full frame); if you need to buy a large number of new lenses anyway, then a brand switch becomes more realistic. 

Canon aren't helping their cause with the last group by pricing the 5D MkIII above the D800 (and by a reasonable margin), as the price differential will offset losses on lens sales. Nikon also have a marketing advantage with their 'DX' lenses, as they can still be used with the D800's crop mode. [OK, so I don't actually think this is too useful, if you're a Nikon user and want to keep using 'DX' glass then I think that the D7000 or waiting for the D400 is a better option. Nevertheless, I find it hard to dispute that it is good marketing.]


----------



## poker_jake85 (Mar 18, 2012)

A month with the Nikon D800: Interview with Jim Brandenburg (abridged)


----------



## kirispupis (Mar 18, 2012)

Based purely on the specs, I would use a camera to take a landscape photo. A tripod may also be very useful.

Seriously, these are both great cameras. They both will take awesome photos and when you take a shot that sucks, it will not be the camera's fault.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 18, 2012)

For your stated purpose I think the Nikon but more becasue of the Nikkor 14-24 than because of the body

enjoy!


----------



## traveller (Mar 19, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> For your stated purpose I think the Nikon but more becasue of the Nikkor 14-24 than because of the body
> 
> enjoy!



+1. 

Maybe the reason that Canon didn't go for a higher pixel count is that they simply lack wide angle glass that could resolve 36MP at non-diffraction limited apertures (TS-Es excepted).


----------



## moreorless (Mar 19, 2012)

traveller said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > For your stated purpose I think the Nikon but more becasue of the Nikkor 14-24 than because of the body
> ...



You can use the Nikon on Canon of course minus the AF(not a great problem at those focal lenghts for landscape I'd say) with the coverters on the market now although Canon obviously wouldnt view that as acceptable.

There is the patent for a new 17-40mm but I wonder whether Canon view high megapixel landscape shooting as something best targetted with high end lenses like the TS-E's? perhaps a hint that if they release a high MP body in the future it'll cost a good deal more than the D800/5D mk3?


----------



## tuankid (Mar 19, 2012)

you should not be asking that question in a Canon forum. just saying ;D


----------



## Orion (Mar 19, 2012)

blah blah blah

MP aside, based purely on specs, close your eyes, and just pick one . . . 


anyway,

I am more interested in the minor details, such as WHY would they design the doors to all the ports/connections on the side with ONE LONG mofo door instead of giving each compartment a seperate one!? For the amount of money, they COULD at the very least make it a better design . . . . to get to one port, you need to open all post and fuss with one LOOOONG rectangular flap. 

DAMN!

look at those annoying things at 2:50
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=o17ukBqt30Q#t=170s


----------



## Orion (Mar 20, 2012)

I still think about it more and I get MORE frustrated by it still!!!! WHY such moronic design for a $3500 camera!? Afraid of cost due to 3-4 more hinges and from having the machine cut specific shape rubber instead of simple rectangle????????????????????

God all mighty! I am the kind of crazy mofo that will go with a 1Dx/D4 just to get away from such trash in the simplest of design shit, even though I can't afford it! I would rather go on a credit card debt than to fuss with that shit! Just seeing it, amkes me barf and laugh at the same time!

sorry for worthless rant . . . . . . just one of those things.


----------



## vuilang (Mar 20, 2012)

Will you slap the kit lense 17-55mm f3.5-5.6 on the 5d3/d800?? IF so, what the point of new body?


----------

