Reality Check: @ numerous posts
Not bashing or soliciting a debate, the D800 is a great camera for Nikon to have in its stable, but it is not 'revolutionary' to the industry other than megapixel count - and the correct term in that regard is 'inevitable'.
As for the performance of the D800, any camera with a high megapixel count presents an opportunity to bin the output and increase the perceived noise levels and dynamic range performance. The 'advantage' the D800 provides is a ~78% binning as used by DxO (8mp image = 8x12 @ 300dpi) to achieve its 'record breaking' score - simply a higher compression than other sensors currently provide, not superiority of the sensor. Comparisons at the same compression ratio are not performed (24mp = ~5mp image, 22mp = ~4.5mp image, 12mp = ~3mp image, etc).
As for the sensor itself (per pixel level performance) there are several other cameras that have better performance results. Against its direct competitor, aside from pixel count, Nikon simply played catch up.
Run back to your Hasselblad forum - you're another Medium Format snob who can't accept that Nikon can produce something at a quarter of the price of anything Blad can and still produce an image that few if anyone can tell the difference between. You're post makes you as bad as the hysterical Canon faithful who are running round with a PowerShot in their hands.
Cue more jealousy and petty comments from Canon forum 'faithful' no doubt. This award is merely another endorsement of this class leading technology, nothing we don't know.
ddolde: I will NEVER buy a D800
Because he's small minded :)
The hysteria in these comments below from what look like teenage Canon flag bearers who have probably never picked up a camera of the quality of the D800 is staggering. What gives? All this energy and hate driven by total insecurity is what leads to world wars.
What is it about this site that breeds such contempt? I don't see it in the field - some of the best photographers I know shoot Canon, they have huge credibility as individuals and they're not immature deranged morons like much of the pack mentality on display here. Equally they respect my choice to shoot Nikon and pour over my D800 when I'm out there at the moment with a huge amount of interest in how it operates in the field. Equally I lusted after their 1DSMKIIIs and 5DMKIIs for years too. It's called MUTUAL RESPECT - it's time there was much more of that on here because there is no space for the small minded little pricks that have polluted a large part of the intelligent comment below.
russbarnes: Where is this 5DMKIII "low light king" blah blah blah? So much for lower resolution being cleaner - it's obvious the sensor is old tech now and shows nominal to no improvement over the MKII. No comparison to the D800 - it's light years ahead. The only improvement is JPEG noise reduction, whoopee doo, problem is most serious photographers don't use JPEG. MKII owners should be very happy indeed because there's nothing to upgrade for here at that ridiculous premium...in fact I'm expecting the MKII price to start increasing across the board because it looks like a bargain now.
That's what I meant Mr Nuts ;) For the D800 to get at least the same ISO performance out of a sensor that delivers at least 14MP MORE that the Canons is incredible. But at low ISO, it is a landscape photographer's dream.........the detail is off the chart.
Castle Cameras in the UK is selling the MKII at £1529 - you can have two for the same price as a MKIII. Looks like an awesome deal to me.... 5DMKIII price needs to plummet fast to sell all that excess stock everyone is tripping over in these camera stores.
MichaelK81: Ok, I admit, I pixel-peeped. Am I the only one who thinks 5D III has absolutely no advantage over 5D II when shooting RAW at high ISO? In fact, in some images, 5D III has noticeably more noise.
I think we're reaching a point where technology is limited by the laws of physics?
No, you're not the only one Michael!
Where is this 5DMKIII "low light king" blah blah blah? So much for lower resolution being cleaner - it's obvious the sensor is old tech now and shows nominal to no improvement over the MKII. No comparison to the D800 - it's light years ahead. The only improvement is JPEG noise reduction, whoopee doo, problem is most serious photographers don't use JPEG. MKII owners should be very happy indeed because there's nothing to upgrade for here at that ridiculous premium...in fact I'm expecting the MKII price to start increasing across the board because it looks like a bargain now.
lensberg: These sample images are truly impressive... outstanding levels of detail across the board at virtually every ISO setting... Comparing these 5D III images to the recently released "real world" D800 samples is like comparing flawless diamonds to cubic zirconium...
And people try to insinuate that the D800 has better detail retention & ISO performance at reduced resolutions... yeah right... dream another dream... because this one's not materialising into reality...
The 5D III's colour reproduction is spectacular... far superior to even the Nikon D3X or Pentax 645D... the dynamic range is at least 2½ stops better than the 5D II... and the ISO performance... is second to none... minimum 1½ stops better than the D800... and comparable with the D3S uptil 12800... and blows it away from 25600 onwards...
This is basically a no contest as far as overall IQ is concerned... the Canon 5D III wins hands down...
Lol. And we shall all kneel in the magnificent presence that is the 5DMKIII. These joke posts are so funny. So let me get this clear, it out-resolves and out-performs everything from medium format technology to the low light spectacular D3S and of course the dirty lowly D800 isn't even comparable even though DxO just rated it as having the best sensor ever. The Canon fan club sure needs some more brains on board! Lol.
Guidenet: Nice selection of images and it looks like you're doing a good job of rounding out the reviews of these new cameras.
I'm not sure I totally understand the people who seem to want to compare Nikon's D800 to the 5DMKIII. They are different cameras with somewhat different ways to get to the same thing.
Secondly, they are both at a serious enough price tag where most will have already owned a full frame model and already have lenses. The aren't switching brands. Pros often are no different. They still have budgets and overhead.
Also, different cameras are designed to appeal to different types of photographers. If I were a sports photographer and needed to upgrade one of my bodies, it would be with a Nikon D4. I'd look funny trying to mount my Nikoln 500 f/4 on a Canon. ;)
I agree Guidenet, the immense resolution of the D800 is unmatched, everyone who talks about the 5DMKIII seems to want to go and shoot at 6fps in the dark. Lol. And to think the MKII used to be known for its landscape quality. Now the 5dMkIII is the new D4. lol.
Gene Smirnov: Really wish various lenses were used for this. It seems like 24-105 is a really weak lens.
Agreed, all some of these samples seem to prove is that Canon's 24-105 suffers from massive barrel distortion!
Genuinely don't understand how these are meant to show an improvement over the ageing 5DMKII! What is Canon's strategy? From these stills, looks like it is all about video again...
Taikonaut: ISO 1600 looks like D800 ISO 200.There is less noise and no nasty colour fringing on the 22mp unlike the D800 samples.
lol. Taikonaut, predictable as ever. Funniest comment of the day. You really can't bear reality can you, so insecure!
Jealousy is such a terrible thing. Look at how the green eyed monster displays itself in mankind below........
Svenson: Ok - I start to understand why Canon stopped at 22MP with their new 5DMKIII.In perfect conditions (studio?) you ou have an advantage of the 36MP - but on the street. Vibrance is missing, AF accuracy seems to be crucial with this amount of pixel...
Canon stopped at 22MP because they are more interested in video than stills. Anyone that thinks otherwise isn't concentrating on what Canon just released - it's all about the video.
russbarnes: I have no idea where half of the comments below come from, it's absolutely laughable. The D800 image in my view is BETTER than the Pentax, but someONE shot it at f/18 so it's bound to be. As for the 5DMKII, it's nowhere near, plain and simple, it's not in the same class - the details are a mush where you want resolution and I don't expect any better from the 5DMKIII based on what has been shown across the internet so far.
lol. Canon has taken over the photography world with the 5DMKIII...we shall kneel before it in its magnificent presence. One thing is for sure, Canon users have sure become obsessed by this poorly performing D800.
I have no idea where half of the comments below come from, it's absolutely laughable. The D800 image in my view is BETTER than the Pentax, but someONE shot it at f/18 so it's bound to be. As for the 5DMKII, it's nowhere near, plain and simple, it's not in the same class - the details are a mush where you want resolution and I don't expect any better from the 5DMKIII based on what has been shown across the internet so far.
GabrielZ: Even though I'm generally disappointed by the spec of the MKIII next to Nikon's D800, it is a very handsome camera, as is the 7D and pro 1-series. I've always admired the curvaceous uncluttered design, and intuitive control layout of Canon's pro/semi-pro models.
When will people realise - there is no one camera fits all; comparing is stupid and fruitless. Find the features you need to fit your style and buy accordingly, nothing but negativity comes from comparison...
raztec: Perfect compromise in terms of MP and better auto-focus. This should blow the socks off the d800 in terms of high iso capability. And I'm a Nikon shooter who was extremely disappointed in the MP race.
But the high price, lack of DX option, on board flash (for quick fill flash), usb 3.0, and uncompressed HDMI video make it still shy of the perfect camera.
Dang, why don't Nikon and Canon simply join forces and blow everyone else out of the water!
I despair at seeing the same totally short-sighted comments over and over on this forum...
"This should blow the socks off the d800 in terms of high iso capability"
The D800 is designed for studio and landscape photographers. Most of them don't shoot above ISO200. So yes, you're probably right, but if you were looking at the D800 for this capability you were looking at the wrong body all along - it's not been designed to do this. Perhaps "as a Nikon shooter" you should be comparing to the D4 or D3S for that capability which are widely regarded as the best cameras in the world to achieve this. If the D800 produces files as clean as the D700 with a 36MP resolution then it will becomes the ultimate landscape or studio choice, no question.
"who gonna need the stupid on board flash ?"
Did you even know that the onboard flash also acts as a wireless trigger? You pay another premium for that upgrade with the 5DMKIII, the question is who's really stupid?
Michael: So, it's priced like Canon Macro L IS? whats the point?
The RRP means nothing at this stage - Sigma will only be able to sell it well below Nikon's or Canon's price. No one will buy a third party lens at premium prices unless it is deemed to be exceptional - see Zeiss by means of example. Sigma just don't have that reputation - they have a reputation today that is based on mediocre delivery and have positioned themselves as a cut price alternative. Merely repositioning themselves based on price absolutely won't work unless the product is exceptional. The problem here is that both the Nikon and Canon equivalent both already fall into that bracket...