Got a D500 last week here in Oz. Usually I shoot my D810 + other cameras. After one week of occasional shooting with the D500 and FX lenses (Did not buy any DX as I have plenty of good FX), the first thing I have noticed with this body is the AF in low light. The center point allow me to capture things I just cannot capture with the D810. The speed and accuracy is quite surprising at first as well. The output is looking nice, I bought this body for birds essentially as I have the D810 for portraits and landscape. Overall after 1 week, I had 1 issue with an XQD card which gave me a read error but that's about it. Not sure if it is the XQD or the combination of settings I chose at that particular moment in time. I did reformat the XQD afterward and it was all good.Nikon is trying to charge a bundle of money for accessories such as the grip at $550 Oz...! A little bit of a rip off there. To compare, the grip for the D810 is about $370-$400, may be next year?
I have been playing with cameras since late 60's. After all these years and many different cameras this is what I think:- Digital cameras have matured into a product which in most cases deliver a satisfying to excellent image quality. Mobile phones are evoluting into portable do everything computers with a basic camera function producing an image quality which is improving all the time.- Time have changed, most people could not care less about quality and are carrying a mobile phone not a camera.- Manufacturers are trying to create a need to upgrade by emphasizing the technological aspect of the new equipment so you can take "better pictures " which for most people is irrelevant as they don't really comprehend the basic principles of Photography but they understand technology.- Current times are hard times financially and competition is fierce, there are very few reasons to justify a camera upgrade for most of us.- Photography is reaching a turning point.
DXO does lab tests. Reality shooting is a different story. Canon and Nikon both are they strength in some area and they weakness in others. I own both a 5D Mk3 and a D800; I can tell you they both are professional tools which in the right hands can produce brilliant results. I don't think photography is based only on the quality of your lens so really those results are just indicative.I think it's pointless to argue which system is best, lenses produced these days have extraordinary resolving power and really it's all about getting the best lens camera combination for the job.
copajaus: Hi everyone,
May be someone can help me on this.I got a 5D Mark 3 a couple of days ago, read the light leak issue and decided to give it a try just to see.This is what I did:
Test 1:Room completely nearly dark (98%).Using live view in A+ mode, LENS CAP NOT ON LENS - Took a shot, F1.2 at 1/20s. - Then took a shot again + switch the top LCD light ON, got F1.2 at 1/20s.
I was actually surprised that my AF could pick a picture on the wall in near total darkness using live view... may be I don't keep up to date with things enough.
Test 2:Room completely nearly dark (98%).Using live view in A+ mode, LENS CAP ON LENS.- Took a shot 0.5s at F1.2. - Took another shot + switch the top LCD light ON, got 0.5s at F1.2.
So, what am I missing...? Looks to me that it's all good.I someone could provide some infos on this it will be much appreciated...
That what I think as well.
Hi,Thanks for your reply.I put the camera on Auto ISO and did not record the ISO setting...
I own an X100, AF was not too good at the beginning but got better with new firmwares, I don't think you should worry too much, issues are going to be fixed. I found FUJI to be very pro-active until they get something "right" so it;s just a question of time before they release of fix for those issues.At the meantime I am pretty sure the picture quality is excellent.Enjoy it...!!!
As a Canon user for many years, I have to admit that Nikon has come up with very good new products recently. The D800/D800E is one of those, the image quality is excellent and not one of the existing D-SLR currently on the market is able to touch it in term of resolving power. I have been considering the 5D Mark3 but I am hesitating to throw 3.5K into a product which seems "Deja Vu" without real substantial improvement compared to the Mark 2. I have invested too much in Canon lenses and jumping ship will cost way too much but I am contemplating slowly to acquire Nikon gears as well around a D800/D800E body. I own a Canon 1Ds Mk3 and 9 Canon and Zeiss lenses, right now I love my camera and I am looking for a second lighter body. I think that Canon has been concentrating too much on Video users for the past 3 years or so, forgetting customers interested in pictures NOT videos.I am interested in image quality and I do believe the D800 delivers plenty more right now.
DRoca: I think this cam is an ERROR, a marketing error, nobody expected 36Mb of raw files. You have to increase a lot your hard disk capacity and also procesor speed if you don't want to bore betweed rotation and rotation. It's not possible to reduce the size of raw files, thought it is posible jpg sizes, this does not help much.By now Canon 5D III has no rival in this way, thought Nikon will launch the D700x with video full HD features, and it's 21Mb sensor... this would be a dream, or a wish for those who have been waiting a long time and are deceived with that big raw sensor, market didn't expect that.
Yep, 36Mp is definitely a serious appeal to most people. It's just evolution; in 10 years it will go over 50Mp or more... just look at the evolution since end 90's...!It's just a computer in constant evolution, it doesn't need to make sense, it's just happening. Saying you don't need many pixels is futile. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything.The D800 is to my view the most serious piece of gear put on a market by Nikon in a long time. It comes with initial issues which certainly will be addressed with new firmware updates.But overall, it's a step ahead in what I think is the inevitable direction... and I am a Canon man...!!!
copajaus: I personally don't see significant differences in image quality between this 5D mk3 and my 1Ds mk3; with today's post processing, anything is possible.I will not pay the asking price for that body unless I am desperate for some basic video capabilities and money is no object. To me this is a $2500 camera, not $3500. I am afraid to say but at around the 3K + mark, it looks like you get more for your money with a D800... and I have been using Canon since 1979...!!!I am pretty sure Canon will launch a new camera with (I am hoping...):- 35 Mega pixels +- Decent auto focus, as good as my 1ds is perfect, 5D Mark 1 was NOT GOOD AT AUTO FOCUSING.- Sealed body without the integrated motor drive such as the 1ds to save weight, may be like a 1V or similar- Decent HIGH ISO Quality (Picture quality is subjective though).- Less VIDEO functionality which only appeal to a certain market. I want a camera for STILLS NOT VIDEOS, if I want a VIDEO I buy a VIDEO CAMERA...!!!
The problem is, nobody will ever win, it becomes a computer war, more processing = more features... if your work flow can cope with big files why not...?So what it is worth to you is like putting a price on technology not art... always keeping in mind that photography is about vision, not camera.
I personally don't see significant differences in image quality between this 5D mk3 and my 1Ds mk3; with today's post processing, anything is possible.I will not pay the asking price for that body unless I am desperate for some basic video capabilities and money is no object. To me this is a $2500 camera, not $3500. I am afraid to say but at around the 3K + mark, it looks like you get more for your money with a D800... and I have been using Canon since 1979...!!!I am pretty sure Canon will launch a new camera with (I am hoping...):- 35 Mega pixels +- Decent auto focus, as good as my 1ds is perfect, 5D Mark 1 was NOT GOOD AT AUTO FOCUSING.- Sealed body without the integrated motor drive such as the 1ds to save weight, may be like a 1V or similar- Decent HIGH ISO Quality (Picture quality is subjective though).- Less VIDEO functionality which only appeal to a certain market. I want a camera for STILLS NOT VIDEOS, if I want a VIDEO I buy a VIDEO CAMERA...!!!
I am a non professional Canon guy and I have the chance of owning about 8 lenses all up most of them being L lenses and 1 Carl Zeiss lens.I am into landscape , travel, portraits and still life. Occasionally I do wildlife and sport but not as much. I don't do videos.
I use a very simple workflow with Aperture and sometimes DXO, shoot Large JPEG mainly and sometimes RAW. I have plenty of computer power, file size is not an issue.I feel that the Canon product line currently does not offer an outstanding products such as the Nikon D800.
I own a 1ds mk3 which has been my main camera since 2009 and yes I am considering the D800. It is to me the only camera out there which is a significant improvement on image quality compared to my 1ds mk3.
I know that the camera does not make the picture, the photographer does but one must admit that the D800 is a serious piece of gear highly worthy of consideration.
After looking at those shots,the advantages (And disadvantages...) of a high pixel count are obvious.For me cropping is the most important point and the possibilities with 36mp are pretty good.Not sure in low light though, but that's predictable.Let's keep in mind that those pictures are taken without really knowing the camera well, meaning potentially every shot could be a lot better.I think the D800 is well priced if we evaluate its capabilities. On the other end, the Canon EOS-5D mk3 is $500 to expensive... and I am a Canon man.Both are great camera but let's not forget that the photographer vision is the most important thing... not the photographic gears.To conclude, "Bravo" to Nikon and Canon for moving the SLR technology 1 step further in the right direction.