# Nikon user Swapping to Canon with a 5D3



## elbeasto (Aug 31, 2012)

I've been shooting a D700 for the last year or so & have found it to be a great body. That said, the FX lens offerings don't appeal to me as much as the Canon EF/L range and so I've decided to upgrade to a 5D3 instead of a D800E.

I'm not hugely invested in FX glass, quite the opposite actually so I won't be losing much at all on price.

The 6D may have me reconsidering a little but I'd really like to be out shooting now rather than waiting for a new body to be announced then actually available at some point in the future.

Cheers


----------



## wickidwombat (Aug 31, 2012)

So 36 mega pickles and all the DxO accolades didn't make you go week at the knees?


----------



## spinworkxroy (Aug 31, 2012)

Really? Nikon doenst have good FX lenses? I thought it was pretty similar to Canon..minus a "few" special ones…
But there's 1 lens i wished Canon had..it's not the best lens but i think it makes a great travel lens for FF…the 28-300…that's something i wish Canon had..something similar at least but none..


----------



## nightbreath (Aug 31, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> So 36 mega pickles and all the DxO accolades didn't make you go week at the knees?


Personally I didn't ever try shooting a Nikon body, I don't see any point if I like what I have. A lot of time ago when I was considering Canon 400D I didn't like the colors of Nikon bodies. Later I understood that everything is configurable in post, but I have already owned the equipment that was capable to get better pictures than I am.

I don't know what I'd do without this forum, lots of interesting information floats around every day


----------



## candyman (Aug 31, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> Really? Nikon doenst have good FX lenses? I thought it was pretty similar to Canon..minus a "few" special ones…
> But there's 1 lens i wished Canon had..it's not the best lens but i think it makes a great travel lens for FF…the 28-300…that's something i wish Canon had..something similar at least but none..




Canon DOES have this lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-300mm-f-3.5-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


----------



## JohanCruyff (Aug 31, 2012)

EF / L vs. Nikkor lenses?

I think that many Canon-people would like the Nikkor 14-24mm (actually, non-autofocusing adapters for this lense exist), whereas Nikon-people would like the 70-200 F/4 (IS or not)... but Canon lenses cannot fit Nikon mount, as far as I know.


----------



## Imagination_landB (Aug 31, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> Really? Nikon doenst have good FX lenses? I thought it was pretty similar to Canon..minus a "few" special ones…
> But there's 1 lens i wished Canon had..it's not the best lens but i think it makes a great travel lens for FF…the 28-300…that's something i wish Canon had..something similar at least but none..


Joke right? anyway the only lens a lot of canon shooters are missing is the 14-24 as previously said.Also the 200-400 but the canon one exists.


----------



## M.ST (Aug 31, 2012)

Congratulation for your decision. 

I test the D800E for a few weeks and all I can say => Never put more than 30 megapixel on a small FF sensor. If you want more megapixels buy a medium format camera to earn your money.


----------



## SwampYankee (Aug 31, 2012)

5DIII instead of an 800E? Thats nuts. The Nikon sensor is a generation or two ahead of the Canon. People (and the plenty of test reports) are raving about the new Nikon. dO you wnat to buy my old 8=Tracks too? Why take a step back?


----------



## Northstar (Aug 31, 2012)

candyman said:


> spinworkxroy said:
> 
> 
> > Really? Nikon doenst have good FX lenses? I thought it was pretty similar to Canon..minus a "few" special ones…
> ...



Yes...the 28-300 is a good travel/vacation lens if you want to keep things simple and don't mind a little step back in IQ....too bad canon's version costs more than twice nikon's 28-300.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 31, 2012)

SwampYankee said:


> 5DIII instead of an 800E? Thats nuts. The Nikon sensor is a generation or two ahead of the Canon. People (and the plenty of test reports) are raving about the new Nikon. dO you wnat to buy my old 8=Tracks too? Why take a step back?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2012)

Northstar said:


> Yes...the 28-300 is a good travel/vacation lens if you want to keep things simple and don't mind a little step back in IQ.



Step back from what? IMO, it's pretty much identical to the 24-105mm across the ranges. Granted, I have sharper lenses like the 70-200L II, but the 28-300 is no slouch.



Northstar said:


> ....too bad canon's version costs more than twice nikon's 28-300.



It doesn't just cost twice as much...it's _worth_ twice as much.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> It doesn't just cost twice as much...it's _worth_ twice as much.


+1 ... good one


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 31, 2012)

Welcome to canon camp, You will enjoy a range of unique canon primes not available on any other system.

Thats why i'm here. ;D


----------



## Sony (Aug 31, 2012)

Yes, only 1 Canon glass is missing: 14-24mm. Im sitting on kitchen range awaiting it. Pocket is ready but item not seen yet!


----------



## JohanCruyff (Aug 31, 2012)

SwampYankee said:


> 5DIII instead of an 800E? Thats nuts. The Nikon sensor is a generation or two ahead of the Canon.
> 
> Why take a step back?



Probably Mr elbeasto thinks that lenses are more important than bodies.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Welcome to canon camp, You will enjoy a range of unique canon primes not available on any other system.
> 
> Thats why i'm here. ;D


+1


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> So 36 mega pickles and all the DxO accolades didn't make you go week at the knees?


Ha ha ha ... I nearly went the D800 way but returned unscathed from the dark side ;D


----------



## Northstar (Aug 31, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Northstar said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...the 28-300 is a good travel/vacation lens if you want to keep things simple and don't mind a little step back in IQ.
> ...



You're right that it's no slouch, and the IQ is better than the Nikon version, but from what I've read it's average IQ at best when comparing across the board - that's the step back I'm referring too.

As I think more about the canon version, I think what's most important is that it's not as practical as the Nikon version.(Nikon version is 50% lighter and quite a bit shorter) I would think most would use a 28-300 generally for travel, vacation, or as a walk around, but the Canon version is too big/heavy to be used for these purposes. 

I have the Nikon 28-300 on my D7000 - it's perfect for it's intended use....travel, walk around, vacation, or when you want to cover your bases without a bunch of gear/weight. I've been interested in something similar from Canon, but they don't have a comparable zoom that can be used as a travel/walk around at a reasonable cost like the nikon 28-300.....so on my 5d3 I use the 24-105.

Due to the size/weight, I think Canon missed the mark from a product strategy standpoint with their 28-300 version...IMO


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 31, 2012)

I bought a D800, keeping my Canon lenses for a while, I bought a 24-70 f2.8G, a 80-200mm f/2.8D, and a older 200-400mm f/4 AIS. I also already had a 50mm f/1.8D and several lesser lenses.
Thats when I discovered that Nikon lens quality was not up to the D800 resolution. The 24-70 had way too much CA, the 80-200mm was just OK.
But, when I went to look for a replacement for my 24-105mmL, my 135mmL, my 70-200mm f/4L, my 100-400mmL, there was nothing worth buying, even at the higher prices.
I was disappointed, a nice body that was excellent at low ISO's (800 was marginal), but the lens selection was poor. I also discovered there were no sraw settings for when I wanted smaller files sizes, I could crop, but I can crop in post.
I sold it after about 1200 images and bought a used 5D MK II while waiting to see how the D1 X turned out. 
If it weren't for the lens situation, I would have kept it.


----------



## wickidwombat (Aug 31, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Northstar said:
> 
> 
> > Yes...the 28-300 is a good travel/vacation lens if you want to keep things simple and don't mind a little step back in IQ.
> ...


Correct no other manufacturer has a super zoom that even comes close to the 28-300 L


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> Correct no other manufacturer has a super zoom that even comes close to the 28-300 L


Amen to that


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 31, 2012)

JohanCruyff said:


> SwampYankee said:
> 
> 
> > 5DIII instead of an 800E? Thats nuts. The Nikon sensor is a generation or two ahead of the Canon.
> ...



Agree.
D800 was so attractive to me. However, I gave up because of my Canon lenses. If I sell my gears, I will loss 1000+ right a way. Moreover, I don't know if Nikon has a lens close to my favorite Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 L MK2.
Lucky for me. I just ordered 5D3 for 2800. Cannot be happier.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> JohanCruyff said:
> 
> 
> > SwampYankee said:
> ...


I sold my Nikon D700 to partially fund the 5D MK III (but I also had 7D and several Canon lenses so it wasn't a "major" swap) ... the main reason I went the 5D3 way is because of 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II & 100-400 L IS plus the all-round performance of 5D MK III, especially the superior high ISO capabilities.


----------



## gary samples (Sep 1, 2012)

Welcome back from the dark side !!


----------



## Click (Sep 1, 2012)

Welcome to the dark side


----------



## SwampYankee (Sep 1, 2012)

I'm a Canon owner, fan , and prospective buyer of a 5DIIi, but this review, from a reputable source I have been following for years, gives me pause. Right now the images form the Nikon are just better. Tell me where I am wrong? http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html


----------



## mrmarks (Sep 1, 2012)

M.ST said:


> Never put more than 30 megapixel on a small FF sensor. If you want more megapixels buy a medium format camera to earn your money.



Could you explain your statement?


----------



## moreorless (Sep 1, 2012)

Northstar said:


> I have the Nikon 28-300 on my D7000 - it's perfect for it's intended use....travel, walk around, vacation, or when you want to cover your bases without a bunch of gear/weight. I've been interested in something similar from Canon, but they don't have a comparable zoom that can be used as a travel/walk around at a reasonable cost like the nikon 28-300.....so on my 5d3 I use the 24-105.
> 
> Due to the size/weight, I think Canon missed the mark from a product strategy standpoint with their 28-300 version...IMO



Different markets being targetted IMHO, the Canon seems to be aiming more at the pro user who wants to limate lens changes rather than the travel zoom market.


----------



## M.ST (Sep 1, 2012)

I shoot a castle with the 1Ds Mark III, the Nikon D800E and the Hasselblad with the same settings at ISO 100 from an tripod.

If I compare the 1Ds Mark III images with the Nikon D800E image I realize, that the pictures out of the 1Ds Mark III are pretty sharp and had a perfect color. The Nikon D800E images looks a little bit unsharp and the colors don´t came up to my expectations.

With a 21/22 megapixel camera you can make prints in the range DIN A2 and you can crop in. The pixels on the D800E sensor are very small. If you have small pixel, then you have normally more noise, less light sensivity and a poorer image quality. Same you get if you put 24 megapixels on an APS-C sensor. 

No other FF camera nearly can reach the image quality of the old 1Ds Mark III in the range ISO 50 to ISO 800 until today. 

Compared to the Hasselblad the images of the Nikon D800E looks totally unsharp. But you can´t compare a 60 megapixel medium format camera with a 36 megapixel FF camera.


----------



## Northstar (Sep 1, 2012)

Click said:


> Welcome to the dark side



love that darth vader smiley!


----------



## elbeasto (Sep 1, 2012)

Ta for the welcomes, appreciated.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 1, 2012)

elbeasto said:


> Ta for the welcomes, appreciated.


You are a new "convert" to our religion, so we have to be nice ... else you might stray from the path of light and go back to the dark side ;D


----------



## JohanCruyff (Sep 1, 2012)

@elbeasto

I am your father.

i'm your father
Buzz i am your father!!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 1, 2012)

@ JohanCruyff

What was that all about? ???


----------



## Gino (Sep 1, 2012)

I also recently switched from Nikon to Canon, and I am very happy the change. In the past I've owned the Nikon D90, D700, and D800....in my opinion the D800 is best for a studio environment with a tripod. The 5D MarkIII is a better all around camera and more fun to shoot with...my only complaint is I wish it had better dynamic range.

Also, Canon appears to offer more frequent, and better, discounts/rebates than Nikon offers.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Sep 1, 2012)

Rienzphotoz said:


> @ JohanCruyff
> 
> What was that all about? ???



Sorry, it was just an Off-Topic comment about the Dark Side. 
May the Force be with you, BTW.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 1, 2012)

JohanCruyff said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > @ JohanCruyff
> ...


Thanks ... May the force be with you as well


----------



## Tammy (Sep 1, 2012)

Welcome to the family!


----------



## Dylan (Sep 1, 2012)

The Fred Miranda review doesn't say the D800 is a better camera, just that it offers more dynamic range. Too many people get tunnel vision with DR and shoot down the 5D3 without having used both. I have, and can say without a doubt that I'm glad I have the 5D3. For video the D800 lacks the sharpness on the LCD to tell whether you've achieved perfect focus and it also is choppy with expanded view. Two things that videographers use all the time. (I was using a D800 and 50 1.4).


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 1, 2012)

If you want to argue Nikon vs. Canon, there is no camera in the world that can even come close in matching the 1DX for sports. I didn't realize this until recently, but it's ridiculous.


----------



## moreorless (Sep 2, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> If you want to argue Nikon vs. Canon, there is no camera in the world that can even come close in matching the 1DX for sports. I didn't realize this until recently, but it's ridiculous.



I actually think this explains Canon's recent focus, FF DSLR's are right at the top of the food chain when it comes to "action" photography where as there operating below MF DSLR's when it comes to studio/landscape work.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Sep 2, 2012)

Dylan said:


> Too many people get tunnel vision with DR and shoot down the 5D3 without having used both.



Actually my guess is that the most vocal people are those that haven't used _either_.


----------



## heptagon (Sep 2, 2012)

M.ST said:


> With a 21/22 megapixel camera you can make prints in the range DIN A2 and you can crop in. The pixels on the D800E sensor are very small. If you have small pixel, then you have normally more noise, less light sensivity and a poorer image quality. Same you get if you put 24 megapixels on an APS-C sensor.


But the pixels of the D800 are better than the Canon pixels. Especially at low ISO they have lower noise.


----------



## bigmag13 (Sep 3, 2012)

heptagon said:


> M.ST said:
> 
> 
> > With a 21/22 megapixel camera you can make prints in the range DIN A2 and you can crop in. The pixels on the D800E sensor are very small. If you have small pixel, then you have normally more noise, less light sensivity and a poorer image quality. Same you get if you put 24 megapixels on an APS-C sensor.
> ...



wow, it goes RIGHT to his argument of LESS light sensitivity... smaller pixel fit more onto any given grid, so for the sake of this silly 5D3 vs. D800 thing YES, more pixels = more res. but the NEW 22.1mp 5D3 sensor handles light BETTER, period!low iso is a stiffles me in a lot of situations today. I dont always have a tripod for 800-3200 iso shots. All given I'd take the 3 compared to the 800 for my style of shooting anyway.

landscapes, studio, street and weddings have been shot LONG BEFORE THIS SILLY CONTEST! 

as far as which is better- what are your end results with the kit you have???


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 3, 2012)

Exaclty. With the combination of lenses and my 5D Mark III, I wouldn't even consider buying a D800. I don't care about all that technical crap, I'm getting much better results than I thought I would when I bought the camera.


----------



## RichM (Sep 3, 2012)

Welcome to Canon. I've gone from FTb->F1->EOS 620->EOS 3->EOS 20D->EOS 40D->EOS 7d & 5DII. Hard to believe it's been more than 30 yrs.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Sep 3, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Exaclty. With the combination of lenses and my 5D Mark III, I wouldn't even consider buying a D800. I don't care about all that technical crap, I'm getting much better results than I thought I would when I bought the camera.


Same here


----------



## pmac (Sep 3, 2012)

Hi
Can I ask which nikon camera you were using before the switch..Im currently a nikon user with a d700 and pro glass,but i cant see
the d800 as a good upgrade for myself, so have been looking at switching to canon for the 5dmk3.
Maby im doing something wrong but find myself shooting at 6400+ alot and the d700 struggles from there on, and the d800 doesnt seem much 
of an improvement iso wise.

Ive never used a canon before so im not sure how i will get along with the controls..was it easy enough to pick up.
I also hear the canon 24-70 is very hit and miss with regards to getting a sharp copy(the mk2 is stupidly expensive) is this true..my nikon
is very sharp even wide open.


----------



## elbeasto (Sep 16, 2012)

Gino said:


> I also recently switched from Nikon to Canon, and I am very happy the change. In the past I've owned the Nikon D90, D700, and D800....in my opinion the D800 is best for a studio environment with a tripod. The 5D MarkIII is a better all around camera and more fun to shoot with...my only complaint is I wish it had better dynamic range.
> 
> Also, Canon appears to offer more frequent, and better, discounts/rebates than Nikon offers.



Thanks Gino, it sounds like you've been shooting for a lot longer than myself & your post confirms my feelings about the new Nikon body.
That said, there is the new D600 but again, Canon will have a similar offering before too long in the 6D.
On top of all that, my decision is based more on lens choice and pricing but still...

It wasn't an easy decision, I love my D700 and 50 1.8G but as I'm only invested in one, inexpensive prime, I feels as though I'm still free to pick a system.

If truth be told, I'd prefer the M9 over Nikon or Canon but their system is very expensive & I have a feeling the M9 will be replaced soon(ish).

Ta again for all the feedback.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Sep 16, 2012)

SwampYankee said:


> I'm a Canon owner, fan , and prospective buyer of a 5DIIi, but this review, from a reputable source I have been following for years, gives me pause. Right now the images form the Nikon are just better. Tell me where I am wrong? http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/index_controlled-tests.html



i thought to be fair in comparison, 163% crop has to be applied on nikon d800 while cropping 100% on 5d mark III image. please let me know as if i am wrong... however, i do not think that i need to be carefully frame my subject while shooting with nikon d800, just snap and then crop right


----------



## Northstar (Sep 16, 2012)

pmac said:


> Hi
> Can I ask which nikon camera you were using before the switch..Im currently a nikon user with a d700 and pro glass,but i cant see
> the d800 as a good upgrade for myself, so have been looking at switching to canon for the 5dmk3.
> Maby im doing something wrong but find myself shooting at 6400+ alot and the d700 struggles from there on, and the d800 doesnt seem much
> ...



the nikon 24-70 is a better lens than canon's 24-70.....I imagine that canon's new 24-70 is probably better than the nikon but your right, it's expensive.


----------



## EvilTed (Sep 16, 2012)

I made the same move, but from a D7000 DX rather than a D700 FX.

I bought a 5D MK3 and currently have a bunch of L glass and a couple of cheaper lenses:
16-35 F/2.8 II L, 70-200 F/2.8 II L, 50mm F/1.2 L, 40mm F/2.8 pancake, 50mm F/1.8 and I have just returned a 24mm F/1.4L II and a 35mm F/1.4L because I'll pickup a new 24-70 II in Japan next week.

I bought a Fuji X-Pro 1 for my wife in May and I've been using it every since 

1) The Fuji is more Leica-esque. It's light, small unobtrusive and can give IQ to rival an M9.
2) There's nothing "better" about the Canon IQ, even though the system is FF and significantly more expensive.

This site has lots of reviews of the Fuji system from real world users:

http://www.scoop.it/t/fuji-x-pro1

I would wait until the new Fuji firmware 2.0 is released on September 18th and read the reviews.
They have apparently fixed the sluggish auto focus problems.

You can start with a X-Pro 1 or the new XE-1 add the M mount adapter for $200 and start building up a system with Leica glass so that one day you can make the jump if that's where you want to end up.

I'm going to run both the Canon and the Fuji because they are different tools for different jobs.
I do a lot of street photography with the 18mm (27mm equivalent) and for this purpose, the Fuji is a better tool than the Canon.
The 40mm pancake lens is a particular favorite of mine on the 5D MK3...

HTH

ET


----------



## nightbreath (Sep 16, 2012)

EvilTed said:


> 1) The Fuji is more Leica-esque. It's light, small unobtrusive and can give IQ to rival an M9.
> 2) There's nothing "better" about the Canon IQ, even though the system is FF and significantly more expensive.


Can we see your photos? For me the difference between camera bodies is so huge, that I can easily throw away photos from one camera when using different bodies during a shoot ???


----------

