D610 vs. 5D Mark III

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: Myth, Myth and Myth
In reply to ron purdy, 10 months ago

ron purdy wrote:

Mikael Risedal wrote:

It is a pity that many of you don't understand the advantage of a large DR and the exposure= intact high lights, what middle grey means and the stops from middle and grey up to clipping of high lights , stops which are the same regardless you have a Canon or Nikon.

Below middle grey is the interesting part regarding DR, it means that I can with a Nikon expose shorter/less= and reproduce in high lights more far above middle grey and later on compensate the results with lifting middle greys and shadows and also have more information from high lights down to shadow= large DR

You can scream yourself blue about exposure etc, in a comparison there are hard facts as read out noise, banding , dig down and you find it.

Confirmed.

And I do not care that much about resolution (all of these cameras have enough rez for print), but the Nikon ends up much higher rez in the end because you do not need to apply the detail killing N.R..

-- hide signature --

ron purdy dot com

my latest example are from 6D and d800 and where the banding are less visual but the noise cut details in lower levels from 6D = less DR. details high lights reproduced the same with full color resolution  out on the street and in  the  sunshine

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SushiEater
Senior MemberPosts: 1,763Gear list
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to ron purdy, 10 months ago

Banding is gone!!!!!

 SushiEater's gear list:SushiEater's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daniel Lee Taylor
Senior MemberPosts: 1,584
Like?
If this were true Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to ron purdy, 10 months ago

ron purdy wrote:

Shooting both kits each with a 50mm, the Nikon files are by far superior in terms of metering, shadow noise, detail, great colors, etc.
...
Overall, the D610 files are simply take a lot less work (due to superior noise, sharpness and metering) to get them where I need them to be.

No disrespect, but if this were true, why doesn't it show up in any of the tests here or at Imaging Resource?

The resolution difference is negligible. (Sharpness is driven by lens, camera or RAW settings, and post work.)

Noise differences in RAW are also negligible, though I would say the 5D3 is ever so slightly better (I see spots in test shots where the 5D3 has a bit less chroma noise). In JPEG the 5D3 is clearly better.

Color differences are tiny in test shots, as they are between any two modern sensors.

I believe you see differences. I just don't believe they are actually due to the cameras or sensors given that carefully executed tests show no real differences.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to SushiEater, 10 months ago

SushiEater wrote:

Mikael Risedal wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

SushiEater wrote:

I would definitely bought D600 instead of this stupid 5d3 if it had CF card instead of SD card.

If you shoot mainly BIF, sports, airshow, motorsports and wildlife you will not think this way. 5DIII AF is superior than D600/D610 AF in tracking. 5DIII has deeper buffer and most importantly cleaning buffer much faster with 1000x CF card that is critical in action shots. BTW why you still keep your "stupid" 5DIII? As a matter of fact, you're the only person bashes 5D3 down to stupid level from what I have heard.

It would save me $1500 for more lenses.

C'mon. Let's talking street price. You can get $3K 5D3 everywhere daily now. So certainly is not $1500 price difference. Nevertheless they are cameras at different levels. 5DIII better AF, build quality and handling/griping alone already put it in higher league than D610/D600.

I had so many problems and lost so many SD cards that it is not even funny. Plus even the fastest SD cards somehow slow in the camera and slow in the outside devices.

Personally I never have issues in SD cards either as never with CF cards. SD is slower compared to CF card that is true.

BTW, DXO got it all wrong probably because they don't have access to lenses as much as Lens Rentals. D600 and especially D800 outresolve 5D3 even with lesser lenses.

Yeah, including DXO DR test is 'wrong' too, lol. From where you concluded D600 outresolves 5D3 with lesser lenses?

There was an article posted here on this site but somehow DPR decided to remove it probably because a lot of Canon fanboys were upset.

I read it's between D800E and 5D3, not with D600/D610. 36mp with excellent Tamron zoom outresolves 5D3 with Canon zoom is understandable. Even DXO shows almost tied in p-mpix that is perceptual sharpness not absolute resolution, related but not the same. Two tests don't conflict each other. I doubt 2 mp difference will let D610/D600 with lesser lenses outresolves 5D3 with better lenses.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/a-24-70mm-system-comparison show D800 outresolve 5D3 even though 5D3 was using the best Canon lens and D800 was using Tamron which is even below Nikon 24-70G in resolution but not by much. I trust Lens Rentals much more than DXO.

Personally I trust DXO more (not suggest Roger is not good). They tested in different ways but you trying to compare apple to orange.

Congrats on D610.

Agreed, good luck to OP.

well more Mp is always better, but you need a good lens, and there are plenty

Not necessary. If 7D was FF it would have 46mp. But it has less DR and more noise than 5D3. If D7000 was FF it would have 36mp with better DR and less noise than 5D3. Oh wait, it is.

So let's see if Canon can even make 46mp camera with at least the same DR and noise characteristic as D800. It has been almost 2 years already and still no answer.

if 7d was a 24x36mm sensor with 46Mp it should have better DR than 5dmk3 today at base iso and 5dmk3 picture size, and if you viewed high iso results in the same size as 5dmk3 they would be very equal, if 7d was improved by Canon in QE as 5dmk3 are compared to 5dmk2

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daniel Lee Taylor
Senior MemberPosts: 1,584
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to ron purdy, 10 months ago

ron purdy wrote:

quinp2k, here is what I just suggested to Bill:

Do you have a 5D3? Find a high D.R. file which was exposed for the highlights and bring the shadows up without using N.R.

No one does this in real life, so why should he do it here? To prove some arbitrary point about a Sony patent on ADC converters?

This is why I roll my eyes when Nikon/Sony fans start talking about DR. You can push Canon shadows quite a bit with NR, and even more if you accept that the noise at 100% on screen won't be visible even at 16x20. You can recover acceptable detail and noise from nearly black areas in a Canon crop file if you're careful.

Yeah, Sony sensors are better on shadow noise. It just doesn't amount to as much as Sony sensor fans want you to believe.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daniel Lee Taylor
Senior MemberPosts: 1,584
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to qianp2k, 10 months ago

qianp2k wrote:

Only dispute the method that you exposed on highlight that will result a severe underexposed photo, and then pushing many stops back. I am a strong believer of exposing on mid-tone (middle) or even a bit of overexposed (so-called ETTR, exposed to right).

Agreed. In RAW you have room to recover some highlight detail, so on the scene you need to take advantage of that as well. If you religiously prevent any highlight from clipping at all you are underexposing by a stop, maybe a bit more, making shadow recovery all that more difficult.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keith Z Leonard
Senior MemberPosts: 4,207Gear list
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Mikael Risedal, 10 months ago

Yes, this wasn't explicitly discussed when I posted this message, I realize now that this is the 10000000000th DR discussion and is fairly pointless.  I was silly and thought OP may have had issues with noise under typical exposure conditions.

I find the Sony sensor DR impressive, and that fill flash would have solved the problem in the example shown.  When we have 20 stops of DR though people will complain when there's a camera with 22.

In roughly 50,000 shots this has been a problem for me in about 3 of them.  Obviously it'll be a problem more often for some shooters, it depends upon how you shoot, really.  Bracketed exposure yields better results regardless of sensor, but is sometimes not possible.  Mostly though if you control the light of your photographs (which is traditionally what photography is all about) then you shouldn't have this as a show stopping problem.

Anyway, people don't really want to talk about solutions with this topic, just complain about equipment.

Mikael Risedal wrote:

Keith Z Leonard wrote:

Yeah, I can't comment on the D600 or 610, but I certainly don't need to add noise reduction to the 5D3 at low ISO. How is OP inspecting these files??

well take a look than in a contrasty motive where all high lights are intact and then in the shadows, there you find banding and noise in comparison with Sonys sensor in the lower levels

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

 Keith Z Leonard's gear list:Keith Z Leonard's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: If this were true Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Daniel Lee Taylor, 10 months ago

Daniel Lee Taylor wrote:

ron purdy wrote:

Shooting both kits each with a 50mm, the Nikon files are by far superior in terms of metering, shadow noise, detail, great colors, etc.
...
Overall, the D610 files are simply take a lot less work (due to superior noise, sharpness and metering) to get them where I need them to be.

No disrespect, but if this were true, why doesn't it show up in any of the tests here or at Imaging Resource?

The resolution difference is negligible. (Sharpness is driven by lens, camera or RAW settings, and post work.)

Noise differences in RAW are also negligible, though I would say the 5D3 is ever so slightly better (I see spots in test shots where the 5D3 has a bit less chroma noise). In JPEG the 5D3 is clearly better.

Color differences are tiny in test shots, as they are between any two modern sensors.

I believe you see differences. I just don't believe they are actually due to the cameras or sensors given that carefully executed tests show no real differences.

IR doesn't  use the same time when they compare cameras and iso, often Canon are 2/3 stop more exposed in comparison example 1/740 sec compared to 1/1250 sec and Nikon

Nikons CFA is better than Canon which shows in DXO measurements

Now colors are rather subjective and I can get Canon and Nikon to look very similar but the facts are Nikon has better color depth than Canon

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ron purdy
Senior MemberPosts: 2,493Gear list
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to SushiEater, 10 months ago

SushiEater wrote:

Banding is gone!!!!!

Yes banding is gone, and so is all the detail and texture in the hair. On the top and sides of the hair (which got more light) there is detail, but in the back?? Nothing.

That is why the D610 ends up a lot higher in resolution - because you do not need to add the N.R. which kills detail and texture.

-- hide signature --

ron purdy dot com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Daniel Lee Taylor, 10 months ago

Daniel Lee Taylor wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Only dispute the method that you exposed on highlight that will result a severe underexposed photo, and then pushing many stops back. I am a strong believer of exposing on mid-tone (middle) or even a bit of overexposed (so-called ETTR, exposed to right).

Agreed. In RAW you have room to recover some highlight detail, so on the scene you need to take advantage of that as well. If you religiously prevent any highlight from clipping at all you are underexposing by a stop, maybe a bit more, making shadow recovery all that more difficult.

you have the same room with Nikon and  high lights and  still less noise and no banding in lower levels due the  larger DR

so what do you  exactly mean ?

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ron purdy
Senior MemberPosts: 2,493Gear list
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Daniel Lee Taylor, 10 months ago

No one does this in real life, so why should he do it here? To prove some arbitrary point about a Sony patent on ADC converters?

ow noise. It just doesn't amount to as much as Sony sensor fans want you to believe.

But I just did this in real life and posted the result. I would like to have had some detail in the back of his head, but there is either a: bad noise and banding, or if you apply NR, there is no detail at all.

So, one camera (the Nikon which has 3 stops better D.R. at ISO 100) does a better job on files like this. End of story. To say "no one does this in real life" is silly.

-- hide signature --

ron purdy dot com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Daniel Lee Taylor, 10 months ago

Daniel Lee Taylor wrote:

ron purdy wrote:

quinp2k, here is what I just suggested to Bill:

Do you have a 5D3? Find a high D.R. file which was exposed for the highlights and bring the shadows up without using N.R.

No one does this in real life, so why should he do it here? To prove some arbitrary point about a Sony patent on ADC converters?

This is why I roll my eyes when Nikon/Sony fans start talking about DR. You can push Canon shadows quite a bit with NR, and even more if you accept that the noise at 100% on screen won't be visible even at 16x20. You can recover acceptable detail and noise from nearly black areas in a Canon crop file if you're careful.

Yeah, Sony sensors are better on shadow noise. It just doesn't amount to as much as Sony sensor fans want you to believe.

detailing facts ? because you can not do it with a Canon as you can with a sony sensor??

i do it lots of time, open up the shadows so that details can be seen and also keep the high lights information intact , lesson, how to use raw and and partially give life in the shadows as the eye sees it with out noise and banding.

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to ron purdy, 10 months ago

ron purdy wrote:

SushiEater wrote:

Banding is gone!!!!!

Yes banding is gone, and so is all the detail and texture in the hair. On the top and sides of the hair (which got more light) there is detail, but in the back?? Nothing.

That is why the D610 ends up a lot higher in resolution - because you do not need to add the N.R. which kills detail and texture.

-- hide signature --

ron purdy dot com

quite right, simple as that

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to qianp2k, 10 months ago

qianp2k wrote:

ron purdy wrote:

qianp2k, yes for a while I was not seeing the banding issue with this camera. That is because Digital Photo Pro does a better job with the noise and banding (it has always on NR) but it also removed a LOT of fine details so I use it only rarely now.

Like many who first tried cameras with Sony sensor, you seem now want to expose on highlight and then pushing up shadows many stops back on contrast scenes and truly believe this is the right way to generate photos. Wrong, most serious photographers will tell you this is not the right way. It also a beaten-to-death debate in DPR forums.

As for your samples, I do not see any 100% crops from recovered shadow areas without NR applied.

I have no problems to show some 100% cropped photos that is still sharp that I showed before. NR applied or not determine by content and light condition. I don't need apply NR or only little if under good light. If you push up shadows 4-6 stops back even without banding it will show ISO 1600 to 6400 eq noises/grains anyway. You will still need to apply NR in that scenario or noises will be very prominent especially if you view in big size.

am I missing something? (maybe I just can't tell as I am now on looking on a cell phone browser at the moment.)

Much better view on a big and high definition monitor. I'd also love to see your D610 samples on my Dell U2713H wide gamut monitor.

It's a key to expose correctly and process properly.

-- hide signature --

ron purdy dot com

it is a key to expose a Canon camera and lose either high lights information or information in the lower levels

you seem to have problem with what larger or smaller DR means when you are exposing your camera and do not understand the benefits of up to 3 stops more dynamic range

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Just another Canon shooter
Senior MemberPosts: 2,880Gear list
Like?
your claim does not pass a simple test
In reply to ron purdy, 10 months ago

A quick look here or here or here makes your claims of better sharpness sound unbelievable. I can see more aliasing with the D610, which is hardly a plus.

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Samsung Galaxy S III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daniel Lee Taylor
Senior MemberPosts: 1,584
Like?
Re: If this were true Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Mikael Risedal, 10 months ago

Mikael Risedal wrote:

IR doesn't use the same time when they compare cameras and iso, often Canon are 2/3 stop more exposed in comparison example 1/740 sec compared to 1/1250 sec and Nikon

This is not true. IR precisely controls lighting and exposure in the Dave Box test. And I see the same differences (about 1 stop in JPEG; negligible with slight edge to 5D3) both there and here.

Nikons CFA is better than Canon which shows in DXO measurements

DxO is a joke, and you will convince me of nothing by quoting them. I will not rely on a site that makes such gross errors as rating a crop DSLR higher then a medium format back, or claiming >14 stops of DR from a linear 14-bit ADC.

Color differences are negligible in tests with equal lighting and WB. I don't buy the color claims from either direction.

Now colors are rather subjective and I can get Canon and Nikon to look very similar but the facts are Nikon has better color depth than Canon

I see no evidence of this "fact."

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Just another Canon shooter
Senior MemberPosts: 2,880Gear list
Like?
Re: If this were true Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Mikael Risedal, 10 months ago

Mikael Risedal wrote:

Nikons CFA is better than Canon which shows in DXO measurements.

Not really. There is no way to measure what "better colors" are. Many people switch to Canon for "better colors".

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Samsung Galaxy S III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: your claim does not pass a simple test
In reply to Just another Canon shooter, 10 months ago

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

A quick look here or here or here makes your claims of better sharpness sound unbelievable. I can see more aliasing with the D610, which is hardly a plus.

I se moire, and?

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mikael Risedal
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,276
Like?
Re: If this were true Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Just another Canon shooter, 10 months ago

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

Mikael Risedal wrote:

Nikons CFA is better than Canon which shows in DXO measurements.

Not really. There is no way to measure what "better colors" are. Many people switch to Canon for "better colors".

The Canon CFA is thinner and off course there are ways to meassure color depth

http://www.dxomark.com/About/In-depth-measurements/Measurements/Color-sensitivity

that Canon has better colors are highly  a subjective statement based on ignorance

-- hide signature --

Member of Swedish Photographers Association since 1984
Canon, Hasselblad, Leica,Nikon, Linhoff, Sinar
Member of International anti-banding and read out noise Association

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
lancespring
Senior MemberPosts: 2,406Gear list
Like?
Re: D610 vs. 5D Mark III
In reply to Slideshow Bob, 10 months ago

Slideshow Bob wrote:

I'm not doubting how happy you are with the camera (and I'll admit that I haven't used a D610), but for "people" photographs, I'd expect the 5DIII to have better skin tones. Of the cameras I've used (Canon, Nikon, and Fuji), I'd rate the Nikon last for skin tones.

I use my Nikon D600 this past year a great deal for people photography.   I've not been disappointed in it at all.

 lancespring's gear list:lancespring's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D600 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads