Just Posted: Canon EOS 5D Mark III review

I've got my 5d3 since a week, had no chance to shoot a lot so far (next week'll be much better as I travel to Scandinavia for a photo tour). But what I can tell from first trials is that I do not regret my huge investment. It looks like the 5d3 is simply an amazing allround FF tool, I am in particular impressed by its low light AF performance with a good lens and high ISO IQ (first trial with a 70-200/2.8 II and a 50/1.4 during a late evening barbecue).

I also appreciate its 22 moderate, big pixels, because I want to do a lot of landscaping with it during the next weeks. And I know from my 7D that with such small pixels diffraction degrades sharpness visibly in at f >= 10. No engineering can overcome electromagnetic wave physics with this sort of traditional optics that rules the camera world.

By the way: after all those sometimes nasty comments I'd like to thank Lars Rehm and dpreview for their great review, I appreciate your thourough work!

For what concerns Dynamic range, I see the depth of D800's shadows and it is really amazing, but mostly produces flat and uncontrasty images (in my experience I often tend to "close" the shadows instead of opening them), instead the Dinamic range of the 5DmkIII tends to better cover highlights, which is quite important in shooting landscapes and overcontrasted images (mostly common in real life conditions, excluding studio shots).
From My point of view 5DMkIII is the clear winner here, for evey kind of shooting condition, except Studio shots, in which D800 is the real King (or if you prefer Queen ).

Very good job Canon!
Nice job Nikon!
(Disclaimer: I am a Canon and Oly shooter)

I have read carefully the review, and I've seen the jpeg and raw samples at different sensitivities... Reviewers tend to say the D800 is very good for shooting landscapes, but what I've seen from the samples is that at f:11 diffraction is very visible and affects crispness, resolution and sharpness (why resolution charts are shot at 4,5? Is it a correct aperture for most landscape shooters?) . I can't see the point of shooting at 36 Mp for most landscape professionals and amateurs if you can't reach f:11, to enhance depth of field.

To add to my previous post: I own a Canon 7D, 40D, Rebel XTi. Surely NOT top shelf but damn GOOD even by today's standards.
My plan is to purchase a 5D MK-III this year.

IMHO, it is about time lens manufacturers improve their overall quality and at the same time, set reasonable prices. All of the pixel peepers can crow about who's the top dog in the camera market, but if the quality of available lenses is not up to the challenge, then all of this is just a waste of time. I for one am sick to death of ridiculous prices (and poor performance ) of most lenses. I do not understand why it should cost as much as a top tier camera body every time a "good" lens is released. C'mon... How can the camera makers hope to sell their newer models if so many of us cannot afford to "upgrade" our lenses to get the performance we pay for?

I don’t understand why there is so much negativity around here... Both Nikon and Canon are producing some of the best and most sophisticated cameras... Users should be happy that they have a choice and either way they get the best. These cameras don’t need endorsements from anybody.

I would rather like to see the reviews on “the users” of these cameras… Both Canon MK III and Nikon D800 deserve it!

It seems that Nikon has chosen an offensive strategy to gain market share. Specification and pricing of D800 and D3200 are indicating such a strategic objective.
Canon developed this camera for the current customer base, and their strategy seems as to maintain MS and ensuring continuous income. Sooner or later Canon may have to come up with a counter strategy against Nikon. (Whatever the expert opinion is, 36 MP is more than 22 MP, and this is the new top of the line spec.)
For us customers this means new great spec and better priced cameras coming.

I don't get it, why kids fight which is better between two cameras with totally different specs. It's like comparing Ferrari with Rolls-Royce.

The advantages move way beyond the ability to shoot on your SLR - the wealth of high-speed lenses and shooting accessories that make EOS photography so remarkable can be used in shooting video. Where interchangeable lens video cameras cost thousands of dollars, with the EOS 5D Mark II their operation, including HDMI output, is simply an added bonus to a remarkable camera.

The EOS 5D Mark II has a sophisticated AF system consisting of 9 user-selectable AF points, along with a total of 6 additional vertical and horizontal AF assist points. With Live View Function on the EOS 5D Mark II, you can zoom in and navigate the composition 5x or 10x normal size.

More Detail : http://canonslr.babybi.com/detail.php?id_detail=Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-21-1MP-Full-Frame-CMOS-Digital-SLR-Camera-(Canon-USA)-(Body)-id10

nice expansion from the author of the video portion of this review

http://www.eoshd.com/content/8138/eoshd-at-dpreview-final-summary-of-5d-mark-iiis-video-abilities

I couldn't agree more with him. For video the 5DmkIII is a total non starter. It's lack of true 1080p resolution combined with the lack of an uncompressed HDMI out put it squarely behind the D800. It may be good at low light and show less moire (although the D800 + mosaic engineering filter eliminates moire). But for 3500 dollars, the 5DmkIII simply fails to keep up with the competition all which will undoubtedly offer better effective resolution and your choice of HDMI recording.

D800 + mosaic filter looks seems far more practical (and non warranty voiding than mutilating the 5DmkIII by removing the OLP just to get a little more resolution)
http://www.dslrnewsshooter.com/2012/04/22/d800-moire-solution-on-the-way-from-mosaic-engineering/

I find it silly to give such a complex instrument an overall score - and even sillier to put any importance on that figure.

For example, I do a lot of photography in concerts. For me the reduced shutter noise of the 5D Mk III is most important, wheras I don't need more than 3 frames/sec. A sports photographer won't care about the noise, but will want 10 frames/sec.

I would also challenge the claims of many commentators here that dpreview favoured the Canon. Virtually all other independent tests done on comparing those two cameras give Canon a big advantage in the high ISO range department. And that's also my finding after comparing both cameras myself.
Needless to say, you only shoot Raw with a machine like that.

It would be great if all "dpreview is biased, and I'll never come here again" people stopped spamming the comment section. I read a text on Wikipedia written by one of its members, where he/she said that if any user is going to leave Wikipedia as an editor for any reason, the user will most probably do so quietly. I think that is true also here...

Well, I decided to take the trouble and line up the ratings in an image editor, to attempt to extract the detailed figures. Below are my findings. I have used a uniformly weighted ranking of Poor=0 to Excellent=14. As others have noted, the D800 did indeed score slightly higher. DPR has responded to previous poster by stating that the scales have different starting points. If this is true then their ranking figures are deceptive. On the merit of the actual numbers, I would say that the rankings are not credible and the overall equal ranking appears to be a fabricated result.

_______________D800___5D Mk-III
Build Quality__10.0___11.0
Ergonomics_____11.0___11.0
Features_______9.35___9.70
Metering_______8.50___8.50
IQ Raw_________12.65__12.15
IQ JPG_________9.40___8.65
ISO Perf.______11.0___10.85
ViewF/Screen___13.0___13.0
Performance____7.6____8.9
Mobile/Video___10.0___9.0
Value__________9.0____8.0

TOTAL__________110.75_110.35

Average________10.14__10.07
Scaled_________82.0%__81.45%

Going back to the comparison test between the MarkIII and the D800, I still wonder how on earth DPR has managed to establish the D800 noise level advantage in the high ISO test. Clearly the black cap of the Baileys bottle on right gives a fine indication how the different cameras handle the color noise. Push the ISO to 800 for example and have a look the area around the " imported " sign. The New MarkIII clearly showing an advantage here, followed by the old and still great MarkII, despite the use of that cheap $90 lens in comparison with the $500 Nikon 85mm f/1.8G lens !!! Surely the superior lens in this comparison ! What about that for a start??? Then if you replace the Sony with the heavyweight Pentax 645D and look the same part of the frame then you can appreciate even further the enormous achievement of the new and the old full frame Canons! Bea ......utiful !DPR claims in the final conclusion that the image quality of the old Canon MarkII is still better than the new one ;)

Until rumors of the D800 started to surface I was seriously considering making the switch from Nikon to Canon. Once the high MP rumors were confirmed, I was still awaiting Canon's response. We now know that Nikon offered up a revolutionary step forward, approaching medium format quality at a surprisingly low price point, whereas Canon answered with a modest lower MP evolution at a higher price. Comparing the detailed ratings raises a number of questions. How on earth DPR is able to conclude that D800 represent a value point of 9, 1 point below average, and only 1 point higher than Canon, stands out in remarkable fashion. Overall DPR has lost significant credibility with this review. What are they going to do when the D600 comes out? Even if it's a fantastic camera, they will have to continue the farce. I suggest that DPR immediately retract the ratings for both cameras and spend some time reviewing their rating criteria.

"I'm a Canon user (oh, Nikon, forgive my lie !); I used to appreciate so deeply low noise in high ISOS when the D700 appeared; I believe with all my heart in DxO scores, and I think that the D800 is THE revolution..., so, now, DPreview has broken my heart !!!! ".

So pathetic.

C´m, just take great pictures !!!

The problem with DPR rating the 5D3 equally with the more innovative, and lower priced D800 is that it sends a signal to companies like Canon that it's OK to release modest upgrades to products using older sensor technology and increase prices by $1000.

And it sends a signal to Nikon that there's really no reason to push the envelope and offer high quality, future proof products at fair prices if doing so only gets them average ratings from review sites.

DPR can do as they please as it's their website, but in this case it's consumers who will likely suffer if in the future companies no longer bother offering cutting edge products in response to the lack of recognition of such efforts. In other words, if mediocre and cutting edge products are reviewed as equivalent, why should vendors bother making upgrades special?

I'd like to ask all the individuals bashing either the 5D, the D800 and DPreview rating if they had a in depth hands on experience with both cameras and the ones that do who has the qualifications to make a judgment

DPreview has al long standing experience and expertise, professional tools and repeatability for their tests. If you have to argue their verdict, you should first post your credentials and then solid evidence.
Nikon made an innovative camera and underpriced if, Nikon had to at the cost of cannibalizing their D3x market
Why?
here is a simple example: I just spent 4 days in the historical center of Rome. Thousands of people, I saw a ridiculous number of 5d MK II (maybe 100), and not a single D700 (although a drooled at a D4!). I have also seen photographers taking portraits, using the 5D, at least 4 weddings, 5D again, a runway at the Spanish Steps, do I need to say which camera was used?
Is the 5D better than the D700? No. But probably better specified for the most.

I really wish that DpReview will stop mentioning other camera brands (not just Nikon) when reviewing on a single product.
It gets on my nerve that they are trying to compare Canon to Nikon, which I believe is completely off-topic. I don't care what D800 has (I bet D800 is a wonderful camera—it's just that I don't have any investment in Nikon as of the moment). If the title of the review is "Canon EOS 5D Mark III Review," then that's what I want, not some rivalry between two companies.
Please DP Review, focus on a single product (and it's predecessor if applicable) but not on some other companies' merchandises.

Dpreview reviewers are smart. If I ran a site like this I would give both cameras ( and you surely know which two cameras I mean !) exactly the same scores too.

And even then, so much bile is secreted constantly.

Can you possibly imagine what they would be accused of if they scored one higher than the other?

Bla Bla Bla. Canon 5D Mk3 or a Nikon D800, I would be happy either way. The Pentax K-5 rated higher than both of these cameras. Does that make the Pentax a better camera because it "rated" higher?
DPReview have provided us with more than enough information to make up our own minds.
PS if anyone buys either a 5D mk3 or Nikon D800 and then changes their mind, I'll take it off your hands for you. Thanks.

sadly I see nothing here that my Sony NEX-5N can't equal or better at 1/6th the price. IQ, high ISO, etc. Surely all that money should get you more than a few frills. I'm guessing that photographers who actually use their cameras to derive income and not purchase them as status symbols will likely stay with the previous model. Just 1 man's humble opinion, of course. Hopefully that's still allowed :) ?

I agree with the review , i own and used both cameras , the Canon 5d mark3 and the nikon d800 E.
I receive the Canon prior to the Nikon , and i was expected a lot from the Nikon .
But when i tested it and compared it with the canon , i was very disappointed , even if the pixel count is higher , the overall image is less sharp and needs a lot of sharpening to equal the ones of the Canon , this was a surprise which i did not expect . The colors of the Canon are a lot nicer and closer to reality , the ones of the nikon are faded and at my taste tinted slightly overexposed and not as good and deep as the Canon.
Even when i blow up the resolution of the Canon file to equal the nikon one ,
it still have an edge over the Nikon .
What i say will certainly surprise many people but this is what i think based on my own taste and experience with both cameras .

DPReview has changed now. I am very disappointed at the biased 5D3 review. DPR lost their credit at all. I start reading DPR since 2007 and it has been my favourite photog site until 2012. D800 win in too many ways:

- much higher pixel
- equal ISO performance (when resized)
- world leading DR
- 1.2 / 1.5 crop
- support DX lenses
- faster shutter lag (0.042 vs 0.059)
- -2 EV focus points (all points!)
- EV focus up to +19 (5D3 only up to +18)
- focus up to f/8 (11 points)
- better body built
- more shutter count life (200K vs 150k)
- metal shutter room (5D3 is plastic)
- internal flash
- support wireless flash
- higher flash sync (1/250 vs 1/200)
- focus assist light
- timelapse video
- auto ISO based on lens mm
- USB 3.0
- priced lower

The last honest version DPR wrote is the 50D. Perhaps it is telling too true, as I commercial site, DPR no longer wants to make Canon angry, so that produced such a disappointing 5D3 review.

No longer trust DPR any more. Good bye and missed Phil

The arguments here at DPR is GOOD...

Doesn't matter childish or not...it helps people to learn so much from the good, bad n ugly side of it.

The more variety of debates going on, the better it is...for DPR as a company and for others to learn how to behave better.

Just imagine one day, every single member decides to leave DPR for good bcoz it's too abrasive..i bet Richard Butler and all his colleagues will be weeping uncontrollably, coz they have to shutdown DPR, go unpaid and hence jobless. Of course, that isn't going to happen to em..so they r a very happy bunch of people bcoz all of us have decided to stay...noobs, trolls, beginners or experts...and we learn so much from everyone too..it's true!

Plus they (the staff) are trying to keep us here for good..u can c 4 urself wth their recent paid review job offer by them :-)

I really love DPR..its "Dynamic Range" of people's character and knowledge here is too wide to go unappreciated..just love it!

5D mark 3...Nikon D800...(^__^)

I have no dog in this fight, but it doesn't get any better than this. This is the ultimate for those needing affirmation.

A tie oh my

I am literally laughing my rear end off, reading some of these posts.

DPR, thanks for the entertainment. Hollywood couldn't have written a better script. What are the OCD types to do.

5D3 or D800?
I use both Canon And Nikon systems. I agree with Ken Rockwell, if you don't need 36 MP, the 5D3 is the better choice, primarily because it has a much better u/i. For me its the biggest no-brainer in the history of mankind.

I don't think I will look back on this choice when I'm on my deathbed and wish I had chosen differently. Ha ha.

Thanks dpr for yet another great review

hi all
i cant believe dpreview give the bad screen of d800 same rating of the 5d3....and more d800 win the movie review hahahhahaha ( Noise , moiré , recording time , Audio Control, headphone jack ,ALL-I Intra frame recording mode , aliasing higher bitrate...advantage of the 5d 3
JPEGs files at high iso (12800) lose 10% of sharpness but reduce 70% of noise...
jpeg in 5d 3 at 12800 is better than d4 and less noise
the build quality is better ,weather sealing 2 time better
autofocus and handling ,
the only advantage of the d800 over 5d3 is the sharpness and the clean HDMI output and Dynamic range
sorry dpreview but your credibility is gone from 4 last years d700 get credit score over 5d mak ii in your website...why ?
the reason is the good movie or the good resolution in d700 ...maybe for LiveView .... sheersssssssssssssssssssssssss

Memo to Canon: 617 comments and counting. Dear (Canon) engineers, (Canon) marketing people etc, read all the pros and cons people post here after the score DPR has given, judge for yourselves and take note, so that the next "5D" can reach a score of 99% in the DPR (thus giving a difficult time to the guys in the yellow camp). It's possible, but only if you convince (Canon)Senior Management until 2050 to give up 1.5% profitability for this line of products. Good luck with that and cheers! :)

Having owned / used 30D, 50D and 7D (which I still use / backup camera) all I can say the 5D MarkIII (my first Full Frame) is truly amazing!
D800/E is probably also an amazing camera (but I've invested a lot in CANON lenses).

5D MarkIII and 70-200 IS USM 2.8 II: match made in heaven!

If you're the lucky owner of a 5D MarkIII or D800/E: Count your blessings ! ENJOY ! Take PICS ! It's a TOOL !

Surely the 5D MkII is a Great photography tool.

That said, I am a bit surprised that this camera get the same final overall score compared to the Nikon D800 which has a more advanced sensor (higher res and lower shadow noise), pop-up flash and focus illuminator for a better price (and similar or slightly better video mode).

With some careful processing and downsampling (after slight NR) the D800 image to 22Mp (then slight sharpening), the Nikon surely has an advantage in image quality (tested this with several images).

The only things that I see where the 5D MkII is better are handling (e.g. control dial, custom settings) and fps..

I've been a professional photographer for 35 years, but have now retired from commercial work. When looking to buy a camera I would only look at image quality versus cost. The Mark II set a very high standard for quality and was about $2700 for the body if I remember correctly. So far I have never looked at one of the images from my 5D Mark II and felt any need for increased resolution or any other improvement.

Regarding the fancy metering, what are you doing other than averaging the light in the scene and then choosing an exposure value that will either blow the highlights or block up the shadows? I remember the old days when the film came with a little paper that said "open shade - 125th @ f8" - and by god it worked.

It's aggravating that Canon has jacked up the price of the 5D by almost a thousand dollars. Unless this model has a far superior sensor, which is likely not the case, just buy yourself a Mark II while you still can.

Why would dpreview be biased?? What reasons would they have? To avoid a storm of comments and e-mails if they rate Canon less? I'd call the present situation a storm of comments (500+ is less than 24h). And what do politics have to do with camera reviews? I see absolutely no connection to political correctness whatsoever!

It seems like many of the commenters here believes "more MP=better camera=higher rating" and that it's unthinkable that someone would prefer less MP. In the review of D800, it is stated that in ordet to get 36MP of details:

"Flawless technique, fast shutter speeds and top-shelf equipment (particularly lenses and a tripod) along with a low ISO are requirements not options".

If it demands so much to get 36MP of detail, together with the huge files and massive computer power needed to edit them, I don't see how higher resolution unquestionably equals better sensor.

I've always thought, not seriously though, that dpreview is biased against Nikon.

Both are fine cameras. That said, I feel this time Nikon hit a home run and this should be reflected in the scores. I shoot with Canon myself, but find the Nikon better and incredible value.

Of course you can make fine pics with both. But why review any cameras at all anymore if that is the sole criterion. The sensor in Nikon is leaps and bounds better. And no, I do not mean the pixel count.

Following on my previous comments. Both cameras are incredible tools and both will provide the user with capability probably beyond their abilities.

The issue here really is not that one is better than the other but the apparent effort by DPR to be politically correct and fudge the rating in Canon's favor.

These reviews are in my view the best to be found and professes to be points based and not reviewer or sponsor biased. What the readership wants to see is fairness and impartiality in the rating system which in this instance does not seem to be the case.

Explain the details of the scoring so everyone can see how the two cameras compared. Surely in the interest of impartiality and the credibility of DPR this should be totally transparent.

Hollywood uses 5D3 for video(avengers). D800 is for the in coming freshman in majoring in videography. For stills photography they are tie.

If you believe Canon missed the boat on the price, have a look at Ebay.

The D800 is selling for $3500.

The 5dIII is selling for $3500.

A product is worth what it will sell for. Nikon should have charged $3500...

They are selling the D800 at a bargain to sway customers back who left for the 5dII. The only problem for Nikon is the reputation of the 5dII in the video world.

It also doesn't help them that "The Avengers" filmmakers used Canon DSLRs in production, and the movie has grossed $1B.

Bang for a buck?
$2500 - "where to sign?"
$3000 - "I have to think about it really hard"
$3500 - "Forget about it!"

Of course it's an amateurish point of view, but I will wait for Mk III bodies to be readily available for purchase on popular websites and see how Mk II price will hold. Even now Mk II looks pretty much appealing for $1300 less, and it theoretically still should go down unless the old stock disappears.

But the bottom line for me - if I weren't invested so heavily in Canon, I would go for D800.

I have found DPR to be up to now reasonably impartial but this review is unfortunately biased towards the 5DIII. Every other review I have read on the web very strongly emphasizes the D800's groundbreaking technology over the 5DIII. Looking at DXO's sensor data the D800 gains the highest score of any and significantly outperforms the 5DIII.

Both are really great cameras with great image quality, however in a side by side comparison the D800 should come out ahead of the 5DIII, if only for dynamic range and video connectivity and value, everything else being equal.

dprview still hasn't explained why if you add up the bars in the conclusion page, the D800 gets a higher bar score, yet the 5DmkIII misteriously gets an equal total score. what criteria is giving more bars more weight?

they got some explaining to do because the graph doesn't match the score.

I think the review was not biased. You have to have in mind that they actually used both cameras for many days. I would say biased if not having the camera or having it for little time, but they had it for a good amount of days and used it indoors, outdoors, in-lab, etc. That's why I don't believe it was biased. Anyway, I read the review again and the conclusion again and again, and then added the Nikon D800 for bar comparisons and both the text and the score are true to the reality, and show clearly were the D800 advantages are. I myself, if were an established and experienced filmmaker, I would still more likely to stick to the 5D Mk III (it's not about the camera itself only, but the history in filmmaking behind it), but if not or had photography at the same level as or higher than "movieing", would to the D800.

Good to note, though, that even for filmmakers looking for a FF camera upgrade that is already "fitted in" in the pro video industry, the D800 can definitely be a watershed

Just one more thing. Dpreview is first a camera gear website . That being as it is here you will find in the gear oriented discussions in the forum first and photography related discussions second . Please for all those who complain that dpreview give equipment to much importance remember this when you enter here . If you want those discussions related to photography they have the proper forums for these type of discussions.

Do not understand the fighting here! For any interested buyers it is the most comfortable situation ever: you can choose between Canon and Nikon without any bigger drawbacks in IQ...
- take a D800, if MPs is important for you and ISO 1600 is enough
- get a MK3, if ISO 3200 is useful for you and if you hate transfering 36 MP files
- get a D4 or 1Dx, if you want more speed, a more constant high dynamic range using higher ISOs and a adult building