# Is canon going to come back?



## leolol (Nov 29, 2012)

So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.

The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.

I want to stick with canon but if they are going to make their first competitive body in like 5 years i really have to consider switching....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> Is canon going to come back?



Come back from where? : They are the market leader, everyone else is playing catch up.



leolol said:


> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc.



Thanks for your opinion. It's not universally shared. Some folks love their D800. Some have bought one, and returned/sold it for a 5DIII. The 5DIII's AF is better (many more cross-type points, f/2.8 crosses, better overall performance), frame rate is better, shutter lag is shorter (half the lag), high ISO performance is better.

If I was a landscape/architecture shooter, the D800 would be a better choice. IMO, while the D800 has an excellent sensor, the 5DIII is the better overall camera for general purpose use.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 29, 2012)

I think you should go ahead and switch now as your comments are obviously clueless and trolling.


----------



## leolol (Nov 29, 2012)

it sure is the better general use camera but: i am doing stock, portrait, landscape stuff and the occasional low light event. And most of those are parts where the d800 shines and honestly destroys the 5d3. and it´s nearly the same price as a 6D.

and they even have the d600, which is cheaper and better then 5d2 and 6d and on the level with the 5d3 (besides the build quality). But obviously this one is out until they fix the sensor dust thing.

Yeah they are the market leader but look at their products: A 5d3 which is no real IQ improvment over the 5d2 - ok af, a bit high iso and video. 6D - a camera nobody knows who it is for... not rugged enough for landscape, no pc sync for studio, too much MP for awesome high iso. And now look at the other guys: d800 - can be the cheap medium format for everybody. d600 - take of 1000€ from the 5d3 and you have it. a99 - just wow for the video crowd.

@PackLight
Why should i be trolling? i am not trolling i just see what my beloved canon brand is doing and i´m thinking about it, yes.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> @PackLight
> Why should i be trolling? i am not trolling i just see what my beloved canon brand is doing and i´m thinking about it, yes.



You made an abolute statement that Canon is somehow behind, which on the surface apears to be a post to illicit a response from those Canon users that are dedicated to their equipment. 

From Wikipedia;
"In Internet slang, a troll ( /ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is someone who posts inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response"

It may be your opinion that you expressed about Canon trailing, while Nikon sensors do have a higher pixel count on some of their sensors but in other areas that are just as important they trail. For instace AF and Lens Quality. If you are buying in to the Nikon system based only on its sensor's ability you are not shorting yourself. I have considered Nikon because I want the best of the best and I am always comparing, however mainly because of the lens selection they have I would be switching to a product that overall would give poorer results for the type of shooting I do.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> Yeah they are the market leader but look at their products



Which is more important to overall IQ - the body or the lens? Remember that we're talking about systems here, not just camera bodies. Across the lineup, I think Canon has better lens offerings (with some exceptions, like the Nikon 14-24/2.8, and a 200-400/4 that actually exists). The 24-105/4L, 400/5.6L, 100-400L, TS-E 17, MP-E 65, 28-300L are excellent lenses for which either no Nikon counterpart exists or the Nikon counterpart offers significantly worse IQ. The Canon 200-400 will come, and for landscape shooters, the Nikon 14-24 does great on a Canon body with the Novoflex adapter, and that's a situation where AF is generally not needed, while the unique Canon lenses cannot be mounted on a Nikon body at all.



PackLight said:


> You made an abolute statement that Canon is somehow behind, which on the surface apears to be a post to illicit a response from those Canon users that are dedicated to their equipment.



This is true - the thread title is clearly trollish in nature. Anyone with a few posts on CR who's been here for a couple of months should not be naïve enough to think a topic like this won't draw in other trolls like moths to a flame. Expect a thread lock or deletion when this thread descends to flames, which is probably inevitable. If one is legitimately asking for opinions on moving to Nikon, fine, there are better ways to do that than trolling. 

@leolol - This isn't the "I'm thinking of switching to the Yellow side" equivalent of a suicide hotline. If you think the D800 is better, rent one to see if that's true, or just sell your Canon gear, take the loss and buy a D800. Who knows, maybe the grass is greener. For sure, it will require a lot more water and fertilizer (aka data storage capacity and CPU power). Just do it. Or not.


----------



## robbymack (Nov 29, 2012)

...don't let the door hit you on the way out...


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...



-1..........How? Have you ever hand on 5D III and/or D800?

Pick a camera that fit your shooting and move on


----------



## Jesse (Nov 29, 2012)

The ergonomics and menu system of the D800 are enough for me to stay away.


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...



Wait until they get the 18 micrometer thingie going... The 7D mk II is going to be extremely awesome...


----------



## crasher8 (Nov 29, 2012)

Ask the same questions on Nikon forum and get back to us. Thy at least won't pull the Troll card, they'll sing praises and welcome you into their fold. You have one thing going for you, EF lenses hold their value. If you go to Nikon and then switch back I'm not quite sure you'll have the same luck.


----------



## Jay Khaos (Nov 29, 2012)

The 5DIII is hardly comparable to the D600... other than the fact that they both have full frame sensors. If you do stock photos and regularly sell XXXL sized copies or print wall-sized murals that will be viewed up close, maybe a D800 makes sense over the 5DIII, but highly doubt that's the case. Considering you already own EF lenses, and the 5DIII is NOT that much mroe expensive than the D800 anymore, I think it would be stupid to take such a loss to gain in megapixels...

I'm not a Canon fanboy by any means, I just happen to prefer the Canon over comparable Nikon more often than not. Claiming that Canon is behind anyone, much less "far" behind is a ridiculous statement. And to say that their products aren't up to par with Nikon's is even stupider. There is not a single lens that Nikon makes that tempts me to switch--Canon has a rival to match or beat everything they offer. Am I wrong?


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...



Canon's sensor tech is behind sony/nikon but its not as bad as some make it to be.

What really set's canon apart is the EF lens selection. Its simply the best, excluding the ultra-wide department. The d800 is a great camera but, overall the 5D3 is a better package.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 29, 2012)

Jay Khaos said:


> Canon has a rival to match or beat everything they offer. Am I wrong?



Yes, Nikon does have a few specialty lens that have no Canon match yet. 
There are a few nice Nikor lenses, there might even been one or two that have Canon matches that are close.
But when comparing the set of lenses as a whole offered by Nikon and Canon, Canon is well ahead.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> ...i am doing stock, portrait, landscape stuff and the occasional low light event. And most of those are parts where the d800 shines and honestly destroys the 5d3....



I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim the D800 "destroys" the 5DIII in low light. In fact, just the opposite. Every credible review I have read and every comparison of images I've seen shows very clearly that the 5DIII way outperforms the D800 in low light/high ISO. 

In fact, the choice between the D800 and the 5DIII is generally characterized as one of resolution vs. high ISO performance. If you absolutely must have the high resolution, go with the D800. If you absolutely have to have high ISO performance, go with the 5DIII. For everyone else it's a coin flip.


----------



## Sony (Nov 29, 2012)

To get a good photo depends on many factors, not one. Sensor is just one of them. So let say D800's sensor is better than 5DMKiii's; how about the rest: loser! Think it. LOL.


----------



## Jesse (Nov 29, 2012)

"There is not a single lens that Nikon makes that tempts me to switch--Canon has a rival to match or beat everything they offer. Am I wrong?"

Well.... 14-24....


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 29, 2012)

Jesse said:


> "There is not a single lens that Nikon makes that tempts me to switch--Canon has a rival to match or beat everything they offer. Am I wrong?"
> 
> Well.... 14-24....



Zeiss 15mm 2.8  

If zeiss made AF lenses for canon, I'd never buy canon lenses. ;D


----------



## Simba (Nov 29, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...



Back to the old days when people compared Canon 5D II and Nikon D700, many folks in this forum would say center AF is their shooting style, high ISO is not a big deal, video is a must, etc.
Now the focus for this discussion in this forum is shifted to lenses even though Canon have not released many new ones in the past few years.
Anyway, either brands have their pros and cons and have their own fanboys, but it is centainly not a good forum for this discussion. Try dbreview or others if you are serious about getting some real comments. By the way, this is a great place for getting new product info and techniques of Canon cameras.


----------



## Jay Khaos (Nov 29, 2012)

Jesse said:


> "There is not a single lens that Nikon makes that tempts me to switch--Canon has a rival to match or beat everything they offer. Am I wrong?"
> 
> Well.... 14-24....



True... better than canon 16-35 according to reviews. Thats one anyway. I dont know enough to list out lens by lens. The 3 lenses I use primarily for portraiture and some video are the 50 1.2, 85 1.2 and 70-200 2.8 IS II. Nikon has no rival for the first 2 and I havent tried Nikon's 70-200 but general consensus based on reviews seems to be that the new canon ver. II dominates all others


----------



## Robert Welch (Nov 29, 2012)

I think Canon and Nikon really differentiated themselves when the 5D3 and D800 came out. Canon seemed to be addressing the needs of their typical users who wanted a better 5D, the main complaints being AF capabilities and better shooting performance (frame rate, build quality, etc.), they addressed these and made the near perfect 5D. Few were really complaining about IQ, though they did improve that some, particularly in the high ISO range.

Nikon stepped out with a bolder camera design, one that wasn't for their typical shooter, but has some interesting features. I know a lot of Nikon shooters who have the D800, they love it for certain things, but not for others. Resolution is king with this camera, but performance otherwise not so much. The typical complaint I hear about it is the high ISO just isn't the best, most of these users have a D3s or even D700, which they prefer for event photography. I've heard of a few who have looked at the D600, so far the comments I've heard are it looks good, but not stellar in any particular feature, just a good combination for the price. When compared to other cameras, including the 5D3, it seems to be just a little less all around, including price. You get what you pay for there.

So, is Nikon way ahead? I don't see it's possible to say that as a general statement. Nikon has no equivalent to the 5D3, nor does Canon have a D800 competitor. It depends on your needs, if the D800 is better for your needs, then Nikon is ahead for you. If the 5D3 is better for your needs, then Canon is ahead for your needs. Lenses aside, they are both great, just pick the one that suits you.


----------



## jocau (Nov 29, 2012)

Well I'm also one of those guys that worries a lot about Canon lagging behind a lot in sensor technology/performance. That's why I recently played around a bit with a D90 and a D7000 (last summer I wanted to buy the D7000 before I even held it because of its sensor performance). I must say that Nikon DSLR's are a thing of the past for me now. I really didn't like holding those Nikon DSLR's. In my opinion Canon has way better ergonomics (the grip is the best example of this). What I want to say is: don't judge a camera system only by its sensor. Do I wish that Canon made better/competitive sensors? Yes. Can I live with a better sensor but inferior ergonomics? No. Ain't no fun in shooting pictures with a camera that I don't like to hold in my hands...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 29, 2012)

crasher8 said:


> Ask the same questions on Nikon forum and get back to us. Thy at least won't pull the Troll card, they'll sing praises and welcome you into their fold. You have one thing going for you, EF lenses hold their value. If you go to Nikon and then switch back I'm not quite sure you'll have the same luck.


So go to the Nikon forum and post the reverse question asking if Nikon is going to come back? It would be a obvious troll, and you'd be bounced out. Even though Nikon profits are falling faster than Canon's in 2012, it would provoke forum members.


----------



## TriGGy (Nov 29, 2012)

Well Leolol's older posts show he is a Canon user who love the Canon ergonomics but is at the point that he would make that decision to cross over to Nikon because going FF and is more particular towards the new sensors. His only problem is now is his Canon glass and have to sell off some glass if he has to switch over. I say retain your old APS-C Canons and sell off your most seldomly used EF glass and try the D800 if it you really believe it will suit your needs. Crossing over brands as we all know is very expensive, but to me if I had the money I would love to buy Nikon D800, Olympus, Sony, and Pentax plus glass. Try to master the D800 and I hope you will be satisfied with it.

Cheers


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 29, 2012)

Jay Khaos said:


> Jesse said:
> 
> 
> > "There is not a single lens that Nikon makes that tempts me to switch--Canon has a rival to match or beat everything they offer. Am I wrong?"
> ...



You got it


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

Ok, i am going to try to answer all the responses etc.

Selling my stuff: My bill would be around 200€ higher if i switch, but i´d be switching for some good glass etc.

Honestly: Not trolling i´m just worried about my beloved canon. Maybe the title is a bit aggressive but i want a good discussion in here, not just some people beeing very friendly.

Lenses: Sure, Canon has the edge here. That´s why i chose them 4 years ago. But now, 4 years later, i came to realize that i will never really need those lenses and that Nikon has some really good glass to offer (for example the 24-70). And you can use their old glass on their new bodys too.

I have handled both, the Canon and the Nikon. In terms of ergonomics i didnt find anyone of those superior but i obviously enjoyed the canon more, as i am used to the system. Obviously the canon menu seems better to us but as soon as you get deeper into it it´s also complicated.

I didnt want to ask nikon guys as i already know their opinion. I wanted to ask us (or you guys and girls) about your opinions and if you guys think canon will be far superior when 18nm hits the market.

5d3/d600: Not comparable? Just a short list: 23/24MP, 6/5,5fps, 61/39 autofocus points (ok canon winns here by far), and now to the obviously nikon-dominant (and i just think that their testing is of) dxomark: 11,7EV/14,2EV. Thats much. Oh and ... 1200€ cheaper. 5d3 obviously is tuffer and for pros etc but IQ whise they dont have that many differences.

5d3 is a better package? I would love to know why.

"d800 destroying in most parts" (quote from myself) I never said every part, high iso is actually where the 5d3 shines, but a downscaled d800 destroys the d700 so you cant say that it´s far behind in that point either. A question: Was the d700 sensor already 18nm?

The rest besides the d800´s sensor. I dont see anything worse about the d800 against the 5d3.

dqreview. I know, if i want to have "good" statements i should post there. but i actually want the fanboy opinions and the more normal ones because i am a fanboy myself (on the canon side offcourse).

50 1.2, 85 1.2 Ok those are two really tempting canon lenses, cant argue about that.

For me it is the d800. But it is all about whats going to happen in the near future and if canon is able to make something like the d800 without beeing like "no we cant give you that" "no we had to loose some af point for the price".

When i first picked up a dslr i actually enjoyed the nikons more but the canons nearly equally as much. I actually disliked the middle wheel on the canons (thumb-wheel) cause you have to move your thumb so much.

Dont wanna troll anywhere. Sure Canon is making more money. Look at their pricing, they are just thinking "oh we can give pur customers anything, we dont have to compete with nikon. Lets put 11 autofocuspoints in there and say gps and wlan are much more important!" Thats what i think about the 6D after i saw the first test footage and the whole slow wlan stuff (turning it off in video mode etc), no clean hdmi. They are trolling us.

Yes i love my canon stuff. Havent had a problem with any but i just cant afford to keep my stuff and get a Nikon. For me going FF is a big investment and that would be too much.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> I want to stick with canon but if they are going to make their first competitive body in like 5 years i really have to consider switching....



*Canon will come back when they want to, simple as that* - Nikon's sensor advantage won't last forever, but the real issue lies in Canon's "different" marketing strategy.

The 5d3 is on par with the d800 on higher iso levels when the dynamic range advantage of the d800 melts away, so it's really a matter of preference - better af over more mp, esp. since the 5d3 price is dropping.

However, the 6d specs are much more annoying - Canon did this in full view of the Nikon competition, and there's no excuse they've got caught off guard like with the the d800. It's not only the af system, but comparing the specs to the d600 is a disgrace for the higher-priced Canon. That doesn't mean that the 6d will be a bad camera and that I wouldn't/won't buy it, but it's still very underwhelming. Canon will have to loose market share to get back on a consumer-friendly track.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Canon will have to loose market share to get back on a consumer-friendly track.



cant agree more. I am just pissed about what they are doing and for that reason (not only the d800 fits my style really well) i consider switching.


----------



## robbymack (Nov 30, 2012)

Maybe I'm just a simpleton but it seems the op's post was meant to inflame rather than to start any meaningful discussion. And to be honest the Nikon/canon debate has been played out adnausem on this forum in the past so adding another thread does nothing to advance the conversation. I think most of us around here would agree if dr is the primary factor then nikon wins hands down, if high iso performance/af performance are primary then its canon. Pick your tool. If the d800 is right for you so be it, you shouldn't need/require the blessing of folks sitting behind a computer screen a thousand miles away.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

My real question was if canon is going to be better when they come out with 18nm or if they will just be on pair with Nikon.


----------



## robbymack (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> My real question was if canon is going to be better when they come out with 18nm or if they will just be on pair with Nikon.



One sentence and a good question. The answer: no one knows. I doubt Nikon is resting on their laurels. But i would be surprised if canon isnt able to at least address some of your concerns in the not too distant future. Whether they do that at a price point you agree with is maybe another important issue. Advances come and go and every few years one will pass the other, you just have to deal with the ebb and flow...or have enough cash on hand to own both...


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

You´re right. I am shure that Canon is going to come back but when and how will they make it worth the wait. And because canon isnt nice to us i´m considering switching.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> And because canon isnt nice to us i´m considering switching.



Is Nikon nicer? : Ever needed a Nikon body or lens serviced? Hope you have a LOT of patience for their 'niceness'...


----------



## PackLight (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> Lenses: Sure, Canon has the edge here. That´s why i chose them 4 years ago. But now, 4 years later,* i came to realize that i will never really need those lenses * and that Nikon has some really good glass to offer (for example the 24-70). And you can use their old glass on their new bodys too.



What makes you think the Nikon sensor will be any better for you? 

If you do not need the better lenses now with the camera equipment you have, you will not utilze the D800's potential, because that is the type of glass you will need to take advantage of the high MP sensor. If you are not striving to own the fine quality Ziess 21mm or 35m f/1.4 or other lenses of comparable quality and resolution, there is no need to want a D800 because you are waisting all that additional resolution.

Edit; a crappy lens on camera capable of high resolution, will give you highly defined crap.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

I never had problems with canon service, i am talking about their whole product line (6d).

Obviously good glass is key. I meant that i dont need the MP-E, Tilt-Shift or any of those lenses.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> I never had problems with canon service, i am talking about their whole product line (6d).
> 
> Obviously good glass is key. I meant that i dont need the MP-E, Tilt-Shift or any of those lenses.



Yes it is. But you will need lenses that are L class prime quality for it to matter. That is why not long ago Zeiss anounced a new series of lenses aimed at the high MP sensors. This is probably an idication that the rumors will be true and a high MP camera from Canon is in the works.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

It sure is in the works but it´s gonna be pricey, as always lately.
And glas is key but it is a bit overrated. We all know that we need good glass but many more lenses then you think are performing well on high MP bodys.


----------



## kubelik (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> And glas is key but it is a bit overrated.



just curious, what type of shooting do you do, predominantly? I've put good consumer lenses on my 5D Mark II and L-glass on my wife's T2i, and the images that come from the (vastly inferior) crop sensor look tons better than those coming from the full-frame. just because of the glass. what's overrated about it? the superior contrast, the better color, the improved AF response, the softer, smoother bokeh? if you have legitimately shot with both L and non-L glass and have come to the conclusion that glass quality is irrelevant, then like Neuro above I'm fairly surprised you are discussing sensor image quality issues.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Ever needed a Nikon body or lens serviced? Hope you have a LOT of patience for their 'niceness'...



I never tried Nikon, but I have tried Canon _non-CPS_ (which is what European with only one camera body get, no matter how much L glass and flashes). Repair time for a Canon lens in Berlin is ~10-14 days... it should be noted that Tamron/Sigma lenses get repaired faster...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> And glas is key but it is a bit overrated.



Sorry, but you really can't overrate the importance of a good lens... 



leolol said:


> We all know that we need good glass but many more lenses then you think are performing well on high MP bodys.



Sure...and really bad lenses can take good pictures, so can iPhones. The point is that you're claiming a significant advantage of the high MP D800, but without a lens capable of delivering an appropriately matched resolution, you're leaving most (not all) of that advantage on the table.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

I have shot with L glass but never bought any lenses because my third party 2.8´s deliver good results. Shooting a 17-35 (performs well on a 5d3, tried it), 28-75 and a sigma 70-200 (good copy).

I´m also in europe and our canon service is slow, even more slow as i am in austria and many lenses and bodyie have to get sent to germany.

Yeah, weakest link in the chain etc. i know that. I didnt mean that good glass is overrated in general but with every new body everybody says you need the best glass. Thats true! But also the best glass from some time ago is still good enough.


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.



If you really believe this there is no way we can help u here...
In normal use it doesnt matter a brick what camera brand you use...
And if ur really professional u will use ANY cam depending on the situation...


----------



## kubelik (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> But also the best glass from some time ago is still good enough.



we're just trying to understand why you're nitpicking the difference between the D800 and 5DIII sensor (which even the Nikon-favoring reviews agree is a very small difference, if any), when there is a much bigger image quality degradation imposed on whichever sensor by the lenses you're choosing to shoot.

it's like debating which motorcycle jacket is better protection, and then refusing to wear a helmet. what's the point?


----------



## PackLight (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> I have shot with L glass but never bought any lenses because my third party 2.8´s deliver good results. Shooting a 17-35 (performs well on a 5d3, tried it), 28-75 and a sigma 70-200 (good copy).
> 
> I´m also in europe and our canon service is slow, even more slow as i am in austria and many lenses and bodyie have to get sent to germany.
> 
> Yeah, weakest link in the chain etc. i know that. I didnt mean that good glass is overrated in general but with every new body everybody says you need the best glass. Thats true! But also the best glass from some time ago is still good enough.



Im sorry and don't mean to sound condescending but, if you are making the selection to go to FF and debating 5D III vs the D800 with the experience and opinion of glass you expressed then IMO the D800 is not even a contender. To take advantage of the denser pixel count you should be talking tripod style of shooting and the highest resolving lenses you can get. You can talk DR and ISO performance and compare those but I think you lost the majority of the D800's argument.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

I can understand that you guys dont get my view on lenses. If i go the nikon way i´ll get the 20-35, 35-70 or 28-70 and the 70-200ed (the first "normal" non pull push) which all are lenses that arent the best but also far from worst. 

Maybe i didnt express right in this point. I love good glass but i just think you always need the newest and very best.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> I can understand that you guys dont get my view on lenses. If i go the nikon way i´ll get the 20-35, 35-70 or 28-70 and the 70-200ed (the first "normal" non pull push) which all are lenses that arent the best but also far from worst.
> 
> Maybe i didnt express right in this point. I love good glass but i just think you always need the newest and very best.


This will likely fall on deaf eyes, but honestly, if you're considering jumping to Nikon for the sensor advantages, but you're going to use old lenses on the new Nikon body, why bother? The point I think we're making is that you will probably see no meaningful differences in your IQ with the Nikon setup you propose acquiring, compared to the Canon setup you propose abandoning. You'd be better off spending the money on better Canon lenses.



kubelik said:


> it's like debating which motorcycle jacket is better protection, and then refusing to wear a helmet. what's the point?


Well, if you're comparing the red stripe vs. the yellow stripe...










I know which one I think looks better...


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

Yeah i actually like old glass and prefer it to some of the new ones. not because of price just because of build quality.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> Yeah i actually like old glass and prefer it to some of the new ones. not because of price just because of build quality.



I hear you.
I have a collection of 78's that are ancient now and still playable. 
But they really don't work very well when I try and play them on a CD player.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

The only one of the three which sint that great is the 20-35. The other ones handle well on high MP bodies, at least the internet says that.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > I can understand that you guys dont get my view on lenses. If i go the nikon way i´ll get the 20-35, 35-70 or 28-70 and the 70-200ed (the first "normal" non pull push) which all are lenses that arent the best but also far from worst.
> ...



I'll take the "RED" ;D ;D ;D


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

Nope, 20-35 2.8 from nikon more like that http://www.bythom.com/2035lens.htm

and thanks for deleting your post.


----------



## kubelik (Nov 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Well, if you're comparing the red stripe vs. the yellow stripe...



both will look equally ugly after a high side  which of course I wish upon nobody :-[

but yes, I'd much rather take red jacket with me on the rear seatpad. actually, I don't think yellow jacket would get the invite, ever.


----------



## Rob Wiebe (Nov 30, 2012)

LAst years data but ....








from Petapixel


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 30, 2012)

The 5D3 is a better overall package because of these things. 

1. AF superiority
2. Better video functions and controls
3. Better ergonomics. The d800 is a step back from the d700. 
4. Silent shutter is whisper quiet. 
5. In-camera RAW processing which is great for photo booths. 
6. Small, medium and full RAW settings
7. 6 frames per second shooting
8. Simplified menu system
9. Double exposure. (Not sure if the d800 has this)
10. Shares all the battery's from the semi-pro lineup. 

These are practical things that make the 5D3 a better overall camera body.


----------



## Jay Khaos (Nov 30, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The 5D3 is a better overall package because of these things.
> 
> 1. AF superiority
> 2. Better video functions and controls
> ...



11. Canon


----------



## dtaylor (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> it sure is the better general use camera but: i am doing stock, portrait, landscape stuff and the occasional low light event. And most of those are parts where the d800 shines and honestly destroys the 5d3. and it´s nearly the same price as a 6D.



I see one part where the D800 is clearly better, *if* you regularly produce large (i.e. >30") prints, and that's landscape.

I'm one of the people who complained when these cameras came out, and I still complain. The 5D3 should be priced lower, and there should already be a high MP body from Canon. That said, you have to keep this in perspective. For 95% of photographer / subject / print size combinations, the D800's sensor advantages simply do not show up. If you are a careful (i.e. tripod mounted, pro glass, perfect technique) landscape photographer who prints really big, then the D800 advantage is significant. If not, then it's a non issue.



> and they even have the d600, which is cheaper and better then 5d2 and 6d and on the level with the 5d3 (besides the build quality). But obviously this one is out until they fix the sensor dust thing.



It's not as good as a 5D3. But it does clobber the 5D2 and (likely...it's not out yet) the 6D.



> Yeah they are the market leader but look at their products: A 5d3 which is no real IQ improvment over the 5d2 - ok af, a bit high iso and video.



OK AF??? No, sorry, excellent AF, which is one of the things that distinguish it from the D600. The high ISO is also quite good and the JPEG engine when shooting high ISO is phenomenal.



> 6D - a camera nobody knows who it is for... not rugged enough for landscape, no pc sync for studio, too much MP for awesome high iso.



MP is not related to high ISO in the manner you believe. We don't know much about the 6D yet. It's supposed to be an entry level FF, but I think Canon needs to slash the price for it to fulfill that roll.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

6D: ok it´s not out yet but i would have loved it with 14mp i can tell you that now. But with 20 its only 1 too low for a bigger size on istock so it´s out.

Yeah 11 Canon 

1. Ok
2. But they again didnt want us to have clean out. thanks to magic lantern!
3. Used them both? Better ergonomics for us, worse for nikon guys.
4. Ok, but d800 has that too (dont know how noisy)
5. Who would use that? I dont.
6. If you get a high MP body dont you wanna shoot at high res?
7. Totally, but i dont shoot fast sports or wildlife. And 6FPS arent really enough for action
8. Simplified from what? yes the 5d2, but i actually dont really know th nikon one so i cant give you a +for the canon here.
9. Why would you use it and not just do that in post? 
10. Nikon can use the d4 battery...


----------



## dtaylor (Nov 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > I can understand that you guys dont get my view on lenses. If i go the nikon way i´ll get the 20-35, 35-70 or 28-70 and the 70-200ed (the first "normal" non pull push) which all are lenses that arent the best but also far from worst.
> ...



This 10x.


----------



## dtaylor (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> 6D: ok it´s not out yet but i would have loved it with 14mp i can tell you that now. But with 20 its only 1 too low for a bigger size on istock so it´s out.



Why would you have loved it with 14 MP? This would not make a significant difference in high ISO performance, though it would have increased DR slightly.

I suppose iStock has some arbitrary MP classes because of the volume they deal with, but this is stupid. Depending on lens / technique a lower MP camera can mop the floor with a higher MP camera. Depending on subject MP may not even be that important. (Example: you can scale a good 12 MP portrait all day long and make door sized prints.) If I had a 20 MP camera and an agency demanded 21 MP, I would scale the shot and fake the EXIF. Seriously. I bet I could pass *12 MP* images as 21 MP images to stock agencies all day long and they wouldn't notice.



> 7. Totally, but i dont shoot fast sports or wildlife. And 6FPS arent really enough for action



It's not ideal for action, but it is certainly fast enough for action.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> 6D: ok it´s not out yet but i would have loved it with 14mp i can tell you that now. But with 20 its only 1 too low for a bigger size on istock so it´s out.
> 
> Yeah 11 Canon
> 
> ...



I'm not going to debate further because those things are stuff that the d800 doesn't offer. Which you may not use, but I use regularly, and thus couldn't do the things with a d800. 

As for video, you still lack the controls the canon has, have moire, and that magic lantern still ports to canons first. So no, the canon is a better overall camera.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

RLPhoto: then dont say it´s a better body. say it´s a better body for you. I just try to find out which one is better for me.

@dtaylor
14MP=Bigger pixels=better noise performance? 
If not i am misinformed.
You cant scale it up, honestly there are people who tried it and it doesnt work. iStock doesnt like files without exifs.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> RLPhoto: then dont say it´s a better body. say it´s a better body for you. I just try to find out which one is better for me.
> 
> @dtaylor
> 14MP=Bigger pixels=better noise performance?
> ...



It's a better *overall* body.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

For *you!*


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> For *you!*


For *Many*.


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

Yeah, the 5d3 is trying to be pleasing everybody. But i am not everybody, non of us is everybody. I know that the d800 is the better camera for me but i am trying to find out if it justifies switching sides just for that fact, or if canon is going to be far better when they release their new technology.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> Yeah, the 5d3 is trying to be pleasing everybody. But i am not everybody, non of us is everybody. I know that the d800 is the better camera for me but i am trying to find out if it justifies switching sides just for that fact, or if canon is going to be far better when they release their new technology.



Technology moves on, and it will get better. The d800 has the better sensor and the 5d3 is a better multi-media camera. I wouldn't jump ship for either one.


----------



## Rockets95 (Nov 30, 2012)

robbymack said:


> ...don't let the door hit you on the way out...



I'd like to help him out. Which way did he come in?


----------



## leolol (Nov 30, 2012)

But canons full frame announcments are done for some time and they kinda dissappointed me with their politics and products etc.


----------



## crasher8 (Nov 30, 2012)

I tried them both and the 5D3 was a better body for me. Ergonomics on the Nikon are for shite. Don't get me started on the menus either. I'm far from a fanboy, I just know when to balance the pro's and con's and make a rational decision. I simply cannot purchase a ~$3k body based upon one feature, a feature which severely limits my lens choices and in the end would ctapult me into spending far more on the few and I mean very few higher quality Nikon lenses that the 800 is a match for. The 5D3 worked with all my lenses and will have a much lower ROI.


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 30, 2012)

Still awaiting the 7D Mark II!!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> I just try to find out which one is better for me.



Fair enough, and that's a really good goal. But...I can think of a dozen or more better ways to determine that, and no ways worse than posting this topic that you posted on this forum.


----------



## pwp (Nov 30, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> I want to stick with canon but if they are going to make their first competitive body in like 5 years i really have to consider switching....



Yawn...troll. Please go ahead and get your Nikon. Take your misinformed negativity elsewhere.

-PW


----------



## jondave (Dec 1, 2012)

Pixel peeper and spec-list sniffer. True photographers use the camera (and the whole system) first before making an opinion. Not the other way around.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Dec 1, 2012)

pwp said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> ...



+1

but I would actually be surprised if he is in the market for a full frame camera at all.


----------



## Alrik89 (Dec 1, 2012)

Always the same story:
I don't like the actual products of brand x (e.g. Canon, Nikon, Practika, Zenit,...) anymore.
So, i come to the following conclusion:
NOBODY LIKES THAT BRAND ANYMORE!!!!111
AND IT WILL DISAPPEAR FASTER THAN MY TAX MONEY IN GREECE!!!!1111

What a bullsxxt... the world doesn't turn around you.


----------



## shutterwideshut (Dec 1, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > For *you!*
> ...



+100... And for so many Canonistas who can afford to buy a 5DIII body.


----------



## shutterwideshut (Dec 1, 2012)

pwp said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> ...



+1... Go ahead and jump over to Nikon. And good luck with the after sales services down there.... Here's a link to prove myself: http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2012/10/31/bad-experience-with-nikon-professional-services/


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Dec 1, 2012)

leolol said:


> For *you!*


 well, "for you" it's only a better camera at low iso and controlled lighting conditions like studio and landscape. If I were you I'd just buy the bloody camera already and stop whining. Or perhaps you should apply for R&D at Nikon because it seems like you're more worried about tech than actual photography.


----------



## shutterwideshut (Dec 1, 2012)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > For *you!*
> ...




;D ;D ;D


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 1, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Fair enough, and that's a really good goal. But...I can think of a dozen or more better ways to determine that, and no ways worse than posting this topic that you posted on this forum.



Still fun to read it :-> ... but indeed given the large differences in requirements and esp. the amount of people who exhausted their budget to buy a $3500 camera body and those who cannot/don't want to afford it at all it's very tricky to get a unbiased view (if there is such a thing).

Better ask "I want to shoot xyz, already have got xyz gear, have xyz $$$ for lenses+body now and would be ok to invest xyz $$$ more later on".


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Dec 2, 2012)

The D800 offers the highest resolution currently available in 35mm format, but do you need it? I certainly don't!
There is another issue - reliability. Have a look on Twitter at Andy Rouse's posts. He has a tump of Nikon gear so why is he moving back to Canon? Well it's simple his D4 and D800 don't always work - not a good situation for one of the worlds top wildlife photographers! I was at a talk given by him on Friday and he was very cagey about his shift back to the bright side but he couldn't praise the 1DX highly enough (pity about his D4/D800 sitting at home).
The bottom line is that he has 2 of Nikon's top cameras that have problems that Nikon cannot fix - if the OP wants to go there then be my guest!
Now if he were advocating a D7000 that would be a different story, in it's class it is a cracker!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...


Since you have no clue whatsoever about 5D MK III capabilities, do us all a favor and swith to Nikon ... that way the good folks at Nikon Rumors will have to deal with your complaints. ;D


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Dec 2, 2012)

Rienzphotoz said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> ...


Best response so far ;D . But I do have to say that many of the guys there are very nice people. I have asked a couple of questions around lenses and stuff to help friends and have gotten a lot of really friendly and informative replies. I wish those guys well.


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

Rienzphotoz said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> ...



what a nice comment. i know about its capabilities but it´s not the camera for me, especially at over 600€ more than the d800, which is much more a camera for me.


----------



## motorhead (Dec 2, 2012)

I'm not sure why everyones getting so heated about this. Nikon has a lead on Canon at the moment and its likely to remain that way unless Canon spend more cash on R & D.

Unlike the negative comment about Nikon service, I used Nikons for years and they were always OK with me.

I believe Canon have to come back or suffer financially. It will not be quick, maybe a couple of years, but I have high hopes for the 1Ds replacement when it eventually arrives. We need a high MP camera with waaay less noise than Canon can offer right now but if Nikon can do it, then so can Canon.

We should thank our lucky stars that we have these two big players fighting for our custom.


----------



## Kernuak (Dec 2, 2012)

There are a number of factors to consider when buying a camera (or lens for that matter) and it is the answers to all the points that ultimately decides. Each person will have different considerations, even if their subject matter overlaps.

1. What do I like to shoot?
a) Do I need a fast frame rate?
b) Do I need fast or accurate AF?
c) Is DR more important than anything else?
d) Do I need to shoot in low light at high ISO?
e) Can I control the lighting?
2. How large do I want to print?
3. What range of lenses will I need?
4. Is the exta cost (i.e. camera or other accessories, including computer hardware) worth it?
a) Will it give me improved image quality?
b) Will it give me a competitive edge?
5. Will something that is cheaper do just as good a job?

I shoot a combination of wildlife and landscapes mostly, often in low light. For me, the most important features were good AF speed and reliability, good image quality and good high ISO capabilities. The silent shutter has come in very useful already and dynamic range would be nice, but not a high consideration and certainly not at the expense of something else. In fact the IQ is improved so much over the 7D (despite the lack of reach) and the AF is such a big improvement over the 5D MkII and even the 7D, that the 7D has been relegated to a back up body, instead of the main wildlife body. For lansdscapes, I use filters, which mostly give much better results than an extra stop or two of DR for my style and I can print up to A1 without any problems (at east in theory, I can't actually print that large), so the extra resolution would be overkill. In fact, there are very few lenses that will get the best out of the D800 sensor, even the 14-24 seemed to struggle going by Nikon's sample images, athough sample images aren't always the best examples of what a camera or lens is capable of. You are probably looking at recent, expensive pro-grade lenses to have a hope of getting the best out of the sensor and even then, if you aren't printing very large or pixel peeping, I doubt you'll notice the difference.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

motorhead said:


> I believe Canon have to come back or suffer financially.



Again, I ask - come back from where? They're ahead! They sell more cameras and lenses than Nikon. Nikon has had 'better sensors' (as far as DxO scores, anyway) for years - years during which Canon gained market share while Nikon lost it. Having 'worse' sensors certainly hasn't made Canon suffer so far...


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

Thanks for those two very helpfull comments, and i totally agree with both of you.

@meuroanatomist
They´re ahead because they sold so many 5d2 and now they give those users everything they wanted in the first place with the 5d3. They are forced to upgrade, even tough the camera doesnt provide anything fantastic or revolutionary and is pretty pricey (when you look at the competition).


----------



## PackLight (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> Thanks for those two very helpfull comments, and i totally agree with both of you.
> 
> @meuroanatomist
> They´re ahead because they sold so many 5d2 and now they give those users everything they wanted in the first place with the 5d3. They are forced to upgrade, even tough the camera doesnt provide anything fantastic or revolutionary and is pretty pricey (when you look at the competition).



Nikon bodies fell behind when the 5D II was released. They didn't make any real progress to be in any kind of lead till the D800. They have played leapfrog with bodies for years. With the rumored 46 mp Canon in the wild, who will be behind in bodies when it is released.

Lets not forget, Nikon has always been behind with glass.

I stand by the first comment I made in the thread.


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

We all know that Canon is still on the 50nm process so i´m sure they will come back. It´s much more about the when, at which price. And I am not shure if i want to support a company that makes products which arent really new, and just lay on there 5d2 glory.

Nikon has been behind in glass. Ok that´s fine with me, i dont need the MP-E etc.

46mp body for i say ~8k if i look at their picing right now. Thats ok, but not for me. And even if it would be cheaper, that doesnt mean that it will be on par. And if the 14-24 struggles with the d800 then imagen the 16-35 with a rumored 46MP Body. lol


----------



## Simba (Dec 2, 2012)

PackLight said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for those two very helpfull comments, and i totally agree with both of you.
> ...



Unfortunately the statement 5D II leads D700 can only be found in this forum. You will see different opinions if you open your mind and look at different forums or do a google search. To be fair, they are very different cameras. 5D II leads in mega pixel and video. D700 leads in AF and ISO. They are obsolete now, but check out their resale values on eBay or amazon. You will know the truth.


----------



## PackLight (Dec 2, 2012)

It seems that with the d800 Nikonians tout the MP count, but with the D700 it doesn't matter?

It would be sad to buy in to a camera system that has a one hit wonder, but hardly any glass to back it up with. 
I would hate to go to the woods with Nikons huge 600mm f/4 around with it's mediocre resolving power, just so I could say I owned a 36mp camera.

This started out as and still is a troll's thread. It wasn't even well disguised.


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

Yeah obviously i must be trolling if i consider a nikon over a canon. fanboy shit all over the place, honestly like 4 people in this thread were actually able to give their thoughts and the rest of you has not really opened their eyes nor minds (yet). But you should all do because if you dont Canon is gonna continue to make overpriced products that arent revolutionary.


----------



## PackLight (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> 46mp body for i say ~8k if i look at their picing right now. Thats ok, but not for me. And even if it would be cheaper, that doesnt mean that it will be on par. And if the 14-24 struggles with the d800 then imagen the 16-35 with a rumored 46MP Body. lol



When given the answer to your original question, is Canon going to make a come back you give this response.
You never wanted to debate the answer to your original question as it is immaterial to your true intent.
If such a camera is released next year it leap frogs Canon back ahead of Nikon. You apparently didn't want this answer.

So yes this thread is a troll's thread.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> ... the 5d3. ... doesnt provide anything fantastic or revolutionary and is pretty pricey (when you look at the competition).



Just the 1-series AF system that is better than anything else Canon or Nikon offers - nothing fantastic about that... Maybe those old lenses you prefer are all manual focus only, but for most of us, that's pretty fantastic. 



leolol said:


> They´re ahead because they sold so many 5d2



Not really. Sales of high-end bodies and L-series lenses are a very small fraction (both in units and revenue) compared to the entry-level Rebel/xxxD bodies and kit lenses. But one reason they sold so many 7D's and 5DII's is because of that huge customer base at the entry level - upgraders are much more likely to stay with their current brand. That customer base still exists, and is much larger than Nikon's. 



Simba said:


> Unfortunately the statement 5D II leads D700 can only be found in this forum. You will see different opinions if you open your mind and look at different forums or do a google search. ...check out their resale values on eBay or amazon. You will know the truth.



LOL. Seriously? What's stated here or on any other internet forum is opinion and is totally irrelevant. The 5DII *far outsold* the D700 in the marketplace. That's the "truth" - at least, the only one that matters. In fact, your last statement just proves the point - basic supply and demand, used 5DIIs are cheaper than used D700s because there were a lot more 5DIIs sold, therefore more are available on the used market. Truth, indeed...



leolol said:


> Yeah obviously i must be trolling if i consider a nikon over a canon.



Considering Nikon over Canon isn't trolling. Stating that you're considering Nikon over Canon isn't trolling. Starting a thread to state that you're considering Nikon over Canon isn't trolling. Giving that thread a title like, "Is canon going to come back?," with an opening post stating, "Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon," - that *IS* trolling, in every way.


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

Ok AF is fantastic but it isnt a revolution! We had great AF systems before, but we never had 36Mp in a FF Body. 

Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.

If you would open your eyes you would see that they are behind. d4 outperforms the 1dx in high iso, and autofocous is good in both. d800 is the best studio camera on the market, 1ds3 isnt what i once was, 5d2 and 5d3 cant compete here either. The 5d3 is the best press camera out there for sure. But i dont need somethign like that.


----------



## PackLight (Dec 2, 2012)

What makes you think no one here has compared. 

My kit consists of a 500mm f/4, 300mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8 and various wide and macro lenses. I am getting ready to upgrade to a 600mm f/4. I look at all the options when I upgrade, especially to a $12,000 lens. 

Nikon trails behind almost all the way across my kit for what I do.


The Nikon 300mm isn't as sharp as Canon's old version. 

The Nikon 600mm isn't as sharp as Canon's and weights several pounds more. 

The AF system of the 1D's are the best of the best. 

For my landscape picture now Nikon would have a slight edge with sensors but only if you go to Zeiss lenses. For low light conditions and high ISO the 1D X is still the animal to have.

Your opinions are the ones that are limited, and if you would open your eyes to how other people shoot you would see that Nikon isn't as far ahead as you think.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.
> 
> If you would open your eyes you would see that they are behind.



Yep, that same old 4 year old sensor is hurting their sales. They are behind. Open _your_ eyes and look at the list below. Now...who's behind? : Any Nikon bodies in the top 5? Do your eyes see the D800's on that list? It's way down at #25, with 16 Canon entries ahead of it. Maybe when you buy one, that'll be enough to push it all the way up to #24...a spot currently held by the totally outmoded, no-longer-competitive Canon 5D Mark II.


----------



## Simba (Dec 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Simba said:
> 
> 
> > Unfortunately the statement 5D II leads D700 can only be found in this forum. You will see different opinions if you open your mind and look at different forums or do a google search. ...check out their resale values on eBay or amazon. You will know the truth.
> ...



Opinion does matter. We are talking about qualities of products in forums, and that's why we are here. Market share is determined by many factors, and that's why Rebel outsold 5D, not because Rebel is better than 5D.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

Simba said:


> We are talking about qualities of products in forums, and that's why we are here. Market share is determined by many factors, and that's why Rebel outsold 5D, not because Rebel is better than 5D.



You were comparing the 5DII to the D700, not to a camera costing 1/5 as much (at least, you weren't to begin with, and I don't see your point in doing so now, except perhaps as a concession to the main point). I think you're missing the point. You may post on a forum that the D4 is the best camera in the world, but unless you use your fingers to hand your money to a vendor and buy one, your posted opinion isn't worth the 2 cents worth of electricity you wasted posting it. In any case, the people who post their opinions on forums represent a very small fraction of real buyers. It's the opinions of those buyers that matter, in aggregate, and the 5DII was the clear winner over the D700 in that arena.


----------



## Simba (Dec 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Simba said:
> 
> 
> > We are talking about qualities of products in forums, and that's why we are here. Market share is determined by many factors, and that's why Rebel outsold 5D, not because Rebel is better than 5D.
> ...



Subjective and bias.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

Simba said:


> Subjective and bias.



Yes, _now_ you're getting the point. Opinions on Internet forums - this forum and others, your opinions and mine - are just that: subjective and biased. That's why I brought up sales figures, which are objective. One person may fervently believe that Nikon is better than Canon, while another rabidly believes the opposite. But in aggregate, the data on dSLR market share indicate that more people have bought Canon dSLRs than Nikon dSLRs, consistently for the past several years. Is Canon better? That's subjective. But the fact that Canon has outsold Nikon is an objective fact. I know what conclusion I draw from that fact...


----------



## witeken (Dec 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> leolol said:
> 
> 
> > Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.
> ...



I think he means Canon is behind with their (crop sensor) technology, not the amount of sales. Canon's crop bodies are far behind of Nikon's . They cost a lot more and have an old sensor .


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

I never meant that they are behind sales whise. But technology whise.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

witeken said:


> I think he means Canon is behind with their (crop sensor) technology,



Ahhhh. Next time I'm in the market for a naked piece of silicon imaged as a CMOS image sensor, I'll keep that in mind. Usually, though, I prefer to buy _cameras_, not sensors. All that other technology wrapped around the sensor is sort of important to me.



leolol said:


> I never meant that they are behind sales whise. But technology whise.



For anyone who believes technology trumps sales, how many Betamax video tapes did you buy? That was a demonstrably better technology than VHS. Who won? 

And with that blanket 'Canon is behind' statement, you've brought us right back to where the thread started. Troll-ville.


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

So what do they make better outside the af department?


----------



## Kernuak (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> And if the 14-24 struggles with the d800 then imagen the 16-35 with a rumored 46MP Body. lol


It's my opinion that Canon have been concentrating more on updating old lenses before adding a high MP camera body top their line-up for that reason. As it stands, you're probably looking at the super-teles, the 70-200 f/2.8 MkII and the new 24-70 MkII, plus a few others (mostly primes) that can actually cope with a high resolution sensor in Canon's line-up. To my mind, they have got it the right way around, although I still wouldn't get it, as I don't want to have to change half of my lenses to get the best out of a high MP sensor, as out of my current lenses, probably only three at best, would stand a half-decent chance of being a good match.


----------



## jondave (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> So what do they make better outside the af department?



Cameras.

Haven't you decided what to buy? Why do you still keep asking?


----------



## Rocky (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> I never meant that they are behind sales whise. But technology whise.


DSLR is a system. So you need to look at is as system: lens performance, color redition, AF accuracy and speed, ergonomics etc. You can not just single out pixel count, noise level and say who is more advance in technoloy. Have you ever compare the facial color between Canon and Nikon with the same level of camera under the same condition? Have you compare the handling of Canon and Nikon with the same level of cameras?? If you have done them, you will understand why the sales of Canon is better than the Nikon.


----------



## RVB (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> So what do they make better outside the af department?



I shoot with both systems so I'm no fanboi.. canon makes some amazing glass,the new flash system is excellent too.. the supertele's are the best around....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> So what do they make better outside the af department?



Oh, let's see...faster frame rates, better metering (1D X vs. D4), a radio-triggered flash system, better real-world high ISO performance...I could go on, but I'm growing bored with feeding this particular troll. 



Rocky said:


> DSLR is a system. So you need to look at is as system: lens performance, color redition, AF accuracy and speed, ergonomics etc. You can not just single out pixel count, noise level and say who is more advance in technoloy.



Well, of course you can. I mean, if that's not what the Internet is for, then what good is it?!? :


----------



## leolol (Dec 2, 2012)

I am all for what you say that canon makes better but you may have read what i shoot. And i dont need any of that. And no i havent decided what to buy yet. 

So if you guys think so good of canon then i am sure you can give me some stuff they make better for what i shoot. Or not?


----------



## jondave (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> I am all for what you say that canon makes better but you may have read what i shoot. And i dont need any of that. And no i havent decided what to buy yet.
> 
> So if you guys think so good of canon then i am sure you can give me some stuff they make better for what i shoot. Or not?



No, it seems you've already decided even before you asked your question. 

Canon isn't coming back from wherever you think they are. Just go get your Nikon and start doing what a real photographer does.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> Ok AF is fantastic but it isnt a revolution! We had great AF systems before, but we never had 36Mp in a FF Body.
> 
> Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.
> 
> If you would open your eyes you would see that they are behind. d4 outperforms the 1dx in high iso, and autofocous is good in both. d800 is the best studio camera on the market, 1ds3 isnt what i once was, 5d2 and 5d3 cant compete here either. The 5d3 is the best press camera out there for sure. But i dont need somethign like that.



Lol. 1Dx >>>>>> D4 all day everyday! Many pros already agree on this conclusion. 

The d800 is the best 35mm studio camera. The 5D3 is the best 35mm multi-media camera. 

I don't understand what the argument is here? Two tools for different fools.


----------



## pwp (Dec 2, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...



OMG is this thread still going? 
Buy a horse.

-PW


----------



## crasher8 (Dec 2, 2012)

I think when you know (multiple bodies) what isn't for you you may just have narrowed down the playing field to know what's left and that makes it easy to pick just what is for you, especially when you're so knowledgable and opinionated.


----------



## Radiating (Dec 3, 2012)

leolol said:


> So i´m in the market for a full frame camera right now. I only have FF lenses for EF mount, so switching would at least mean the loss of a lens or two (money reasons).
> Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon.
> 
> The d800 is 2300€ the 5d3 is 2900€ and the Nikon just is the superior camera. If you downsize the image even high iso is awesome, af is good etc. It´s just a really good body and much more in the price range of a 6d.
> ...



The d800 is in no way shape or form the clear superior camera. I compared every aspect of each camera while consulting for a well known photography equipment testing website:

5D3 has 0.5 stops more ISO which is a huge difference, half of that is from being under rated ISO wise (meaning when both are shooting at 800 ISO the 5D3 is ACTUALLY shooting at 1000 effective ISO) and the other half is due to better response to noise reduction algorithms.

5D3 has 50% more FPS (though only without the grip)

5D3 has better autofocus (though this will be hotly debated, and they are close)

5D3 has SRAW

D800 has crop mode.

D800 has better dynamic range, which evens out at normal ISO, and the 5D3 actually has better dynamic range at high ISO

D800 has more accurate color (although it's worth nothing Canon has more traditionally "pleasing" color out of the box as a result of it's inaccurate color, before editing)


Both have 100% identical indistinguishable resolution. What defines the resolution, quite frankly, is the optics more than the sensor. This has been proven by numerous sources, zoom lenses tend to be limited to just over 21 megapixels across 90% of their imaging area off the center axis, and there is no meaningful difference between a zoom lens image captured with the D800 or 5 Mark III in resolution, even when upscaling 5D Mark III images to 36 megapixels and comparing with the same zoom lens.

Prime lenses will sometimes but infrequently show a difference in resolution, but only the best prime lenses in the world (EXcluding the vast majority of Zeiss lenses even due to lacking resolution). And ONLY images with primes between f/4.0 and f/8.0 will show any difference in resolution, and then only at lower ISO (you can read more about how ISO affects resolution negatively elsewhere, or simply look at the lensrentals tests)

So in effect there is only a marginal difference in system resolution (and it's nowhere near 36 megapixels vs 22.3, more like around 22.3 vs 27 max)

My personal conclusion is simply put that the Nikon D800 slightly edges out the Canon in a studio or landscape setting (and Nikon's lenses back this up) and Canon's 5D Mark III slightly edges out the Nikon in documentary usage. (and Canon's lenses back this up).

Overall I've found both cameras to be more similar than they are different, and there is little compelling reason to go with either unless you really need something oddly specific. Nikon's lenses and grips are expensive so the price for a typical full kit is practically identical. 

Here are a few very compelling lenses to go with either manufacturer:

D800 + 14-24mm 2.8 + 35mm 1.4 AF-S + 50mm 1.4 AF-S + 105mm & 135mm DC lenses + 28-300mm FX compact superzoom


(product, studio and full frame compact superzoom) 

5D Mark III + 35mm f/2.0 IS + 50mm 1.2 + 85mm 1.2 + 24-70mm 2.8 Mk II + 70-200mm f/2.8 Mk II IS + 24-105mm f/4.0 IS + 200mm f/2.0 IS + 200-400mm f/4.0 IS TC + 24-70mm f/4.0 IS

(reportage, wedding and portrait, and super low light photography)


----------



## PackLight (Dec 3, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> I have problems with categorical responses about for example AF, it should take a month to find out pro and cons regarding 1dx and d4 AF
> One criterion is to see how the AF works in really bad/low light
> Morten has tried them both side by side in ugly conditions and low light, It is now clear to me that the autofocus in my EOS 1DX is way behind the one in my Nikon D4 in very low light.
> http://mortenhilmer.com/2012/photo-gear/working-with-d4-and-eos-1dx-autofocus-in-very-low-light/
> ...



Really, does the D800 have the D4 AF system.

I have a hard time giving credibility to an article about low light abilities, and the lens they are testing is a slow 70-300mm 4-5.6L. If this person primarily does low light why are they using such a slow lens?

Did you notice which Nikon lens he was using?


----------



## PackLight (Dec 3, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> you can read his answers here (Hilmer)) http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50378831 regarding similar issues that you ask about, lens settings etc.
> 
> And my answer about AF tests you can read above



He was given the 70-300mm L and a 600mm by Canon to test. You did notice his comments about the weight of the new 600mm Canon. I am sure after a few months of carrying it versus the 11 pound Nikon he will have an opinion.

Also, he posted this on November 29th;
"Well while it is really not interesting for most of you guys what camera I use, I have got quite a few questions about that, so let me do it very shot.
I would never make a decision based on reviews and other photographers opinions – therefore I want to use the system for several months so I can be perfectly familiar with the handling and the pros and cons. I am privileged to have the option to try the different lenses on the camera witch is a great help."

So I think you need to give him a couple more months to formulate an opinion, since he is just starting his comparison.

http://mortenhilmer.com/2012/photo-gear/working-with-the-nikon-d4-and-the-canon-eos-1dx/


----------



## PackLight (Dec 3, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> The D800's AF system is, in all the important ways, the same the D4. Not all ways, though; Nikon has kept a few AF-related features exclusive to the higher-priced model. The ones we're aware of are:
> The D4 can optionally show all the active points in a Dynamic AF grouping. If, for example, the camera is set to 9-point, the main point in the group will appear as a red square, while eight small red dots will light up around it. The D800 doesn't do this, it will light up just the main point.
> 
> AF-C Priority Selection, the Custom Setting that dictates whether priority will be given to release or focus when tracking a subject, has four options in the D4: Focus, Release, Release + Focus and Focus + Release. The D800 has only the first three (making it the same as the D700).
> ...



A friend of mine owns a D800. He asked me a while back about keeper rate and we started comparing. My keeper rate out of my 1D IV is well over 90%. His average is about 30%. When I say keeper I mean pictures in focus that if the framing or composition would have been right they had the technical aspects he or I would require.

Real world comparison, real world test and my opinions were from comparisons.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 3, 2012)

I can say that when I hold a 5DII shutter button for 2 s, I get 8 images with at best 3-4 in perfect focus. Holding a 7D shutter for 2 s gives me 16 images with 12-14 in crisp focus. Holding the 1D X shutter button for 2 s, I get 24 images with 23-24 perfectly focused. Means triage takes more time...sacrifices must be made, I suppose...


----------

