I agree on the DxO issue. That said, for me, I have been metering at -1/3 to -1/2 with the D800. I find that gives me 1.33 to 1.75 stops of highlight headroom. As the total DR is larger than the old 5D2 or 5D3, you can still maintain the entire Scene Brightness Range better.
Very trueAll this is pretty moot if you expose the image properly
I normally rate my portrait films 1 to 1.5 stops over and meter for the low midtones. That huge latitude is very nice! And the nice thing about portraits is that when you over rate film, grain decreases, and acutance lowers....which is really pleasing on skin.
The size of that "window" (highlights) is up to the photographer. What you are saying is that you overexpose with the D800E. Just dial in EV=-2/3 or so, and you will be fine.
Comparing 100% of 22mp to 100% of 36mp?
They do, once you understand what they mean.
FlyboySA is wrong : no need to underexpose to match the Canon but also no need to expose to the right to protect the shadows either.
DPR measures 5D3 and D700 both have 13 stops DR. DXO measures D700 is slightly better in low ISO while 5D3 is better in high ISO. Anyway just not to overplay a small difference of DR that you will not see unless you resort to deep shadow extreme pulling that is full of controversial and not a good technique everyone should use.
I agree 5Dc at half price is a decent deal that generates as good as IQ of D700 if not better till ISO 800 and D700 is only slightly better in high ISO. Lenses are very important and Canon has better choices and often cheaper.
I've settled on mainly using primes for weddings as well. The 50 sees the most use.
--
Some high ISO comparisons between the 5DMKII & the D700 from Image Review even with a longer exposure the 5DMKII shows far more noise & loss of detail & look how faded the colors get as the ISO climbs.
That is thru you hands as known F&F twist
Here is what I see in IR sample at ISO 6400 in a part that shows more meaningful textual details rather that magic "Nikon-made" fabric, LOL
--
I know that what's mean, so D800 is not 35% of resolution more over 5D2/5D3 either
In real world photos, No. D700 is only slightly better than 5D2 in shadow noise but not significantly and I have no problems to pull shadow if necessary. From overwhelming owners of both from what I read, 21mp 5D2 has significant IQ advantage over 12mp D700 when both print to 36x24" or view at 3000 or 4000-pixel wide. 5D2 beats D700 in fine details in big margin while withstand D700 even at pixel level (100% size) in high ISO.
--
Correct. I never said otherwise. Then again, weren't we talking about the D*700*?I know that what's mean, so D800 is not 35% of resolution more over 5D2/5D3 either
Not a statement that can be made unilaterally that either camera has a significant IQ advantage over the other. It depends so much on subject matter and lighting. Even 5MP is enough for a 24" x 36" head-and-shoulders beauty portrait viewed at typical distances because the subject matter doesn't require (or benefit, in most cases) from high resolution. Likewise, more pixels are generally always better for landscapes and cityscapes with lots of fine detail. On the other hand, if the lighting is contrasty enough, being able to significantly open shadows without compromising the integrity of the image might weigh the IQ evaluation in favor of the camera with greater dynamic range, whether or not it has more pixels.
Hard to judge the degree to which 5DII images tolerate shadow lifting without seeing the originals. Terms like "moderate" are as subjective as the extent to which an individual expects to be able to lift shadows.
--
To other readers as we heard many myth of D800 36mp. Actually it’s more significant between D700 and 5D2 (43%) than between 5D3 and D800 (35%). In addition 12mp is too little and D800 is a bit of too much while 21-24mp is more ideal to many if not most from the perspective of printing size (upto 30x20” that I only print) and view size (upto 30” monitor). Not everyone needs to print to billboard size or uses 40-60” monitor.Correct. I never said otherwise. Then again, weren't we talking about the D*700*?I know that what I mean, so D800 is not 35% of resolution more over 5D2/5D3 either
According to DXO, 21mp 5D2 has significant resolution advantage over 12mp D700 (63 vs 47 lp/mm) both based on similar old 50/1.4 lens that DPR uses for lab test for many years.
For OP’s subjects – landscape, portrait and architect, 5D2 wins hands down. D700 advantages are in fast moving subject (tracking), burst rate, very dim light AF.
Not true. Actually close-up portrait is the subject will show fine details (not just pure resolution) clearly such as between 12mp 5D and 18mp 60D/7D. People’s skin is such special material to show fine details, lol.
Not always true you forgot to mention on the same crop format. Otherwise you will have to agree 20mp Sony DSC-RX100 will have better IQ than 12mp D700. Even on the same format it’s only true if others are the same that cannot be guaranteed when pumping more pixels into the sensor. Otherwise why Canon cannot release a 100mp FF now as it already claimed developed 120mp APS-H sensor (1.3x crop)? Due to limit space in estates, I only need to print upto 30x20” and view at 3000-4000 pixels wide, then extra high MP in a camera is not much an advantage to me but more likely a disadvantage – file management, slow data processing, relative slow performance (burst rate and buffer).
Theoretically true. However I have yet to see a decent photo after 4-5 stop extreme shadow pulling from any Nikon cameras. Extreme shadow pulling is a bad technique that doesn’t replace traditional methods such as using GND and flash. It’s not free without a penalty – ISO 1600/3200 equivalent noises even without banding after deep shadow pulling, no mention surreal HDR-like looking that not in most photog’s taste. I don’t see 99% of photog doing that including Nikon shooters. Usually those extremely contrasty photos are crappy and I will not shoot and certainly will throw away. I only need to pull 1-2 stops moderately then the 2-stop extra shadow pulling advantage of Sony senor is not a huge deal but I agree photos from Nikon cameras still look slight better even without extreme pulling in shadow but only visible when viewed at 100% size.
Just using two samples
And I thought we were debating your claim that the 5DMKII matches the D700 for noise on a pixel level.That is thru you hands as known F&F twist
Bear in mind that we are comparing at 100% cropped size. How about if we downsampling 5D2 to the same 12mp of D700 resolution, or be fair, upsampling D700 to the same 21mp of 5D2 resolution? Is that D800 fanboys always claiming that comparing at 36mp size?
Here is my processed IR 5D2 RAW at 100% size at ISO 3200. Due to the size limit in DPR posting, I have to cut into three pieces. I encourage you do the same and then let's compare again. Remember compare both at the same 12mp and then again at the same 21mp
Here are both cameras at ISO 100 so we can compare what they should look like to the ISO 6400 versions.
If that is the case on pixel level, that means that the 5D2 is well ahead on image level. I am not saying that this is necessarily true but DPR have always been confused how to evaluate IQ for sensors of different resolutions (see the 50D review and the 5D3 one).
And I thought we were debating your claim that the 5DMKII matches the D700 for noise on a pixel level.That is thru you hands as known F&F twist
Bear in mind that we are comparing at 100% cropped size. How about if we downsampling 5D2 to the same 12mp of D700 resolution, or be fair, upsampling D700 to the same 21mp of 5D2 resolution? Is that D800 fanboys always claiming that comparing at 36mp size?
Here is my processed IR 5D2 RAW at 100% size at ISO 3200. Due to the size limit in DPR posting, I have to cut into three pieces. I encourage you do the same and then let's compare again. Remember compare both at the same 12mp and then again at the same 21mp
Here are both cameras at ISO 100 so we can compare what they should look like to the ISO 6400 versions.
Exactly DPR said with words slightly that is also what I mean basically matches, I never said identical. It's an amazing that 21mp 5D2 can basically match 12mp at per-pixel basis in high ISO. When downsamping 5D2 files to the same 12mp, 5D2 will be as good as D700 but holding more details. Try to upsampling D700 to 21mp and compare?
The blues & reds get washed out at the higher ISO's the D700 retains the color information far better.
I don't see blues in ISO 6400 comparison picture. But I do see Nikon known orange cast on the bottle. Imagine if it's a person's face that the reason we heard many complaints of Nikon orange/yellow skin tone. Nikon's red is somewhat orange-red. Nikon green is somewhat yellow-green (check the green leafs on the bottle). Talking of blue, Nikon is known has bleeding blue such as in many unnatural over-saturated blue sky in photos from Nikon cameras.
Not much closer but 5D2 is noticeable better, virtually the same noise level but holding more details.
