Did Nikon screw up?

Started May 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP jacobwhite Forum Member • Posts: 50
Re: No, you did :-)

SubPrime wrote:

Grevture wrote:

No it is not. The 5D Mark III has a more complex and more configurable AF, but in terms of speed, precision and overall usability they are very similar.

True. I actually find the 5D3 AF controls to be annoying to get to.  They are much easier to access on the D800.

Quality really sucks, doesn't it?

You don't need 36 mpx all of the time and there are times when such huge files are a hindrance.

Exactly - for image quality I use medium format. 35mm for me is about robustness and speed mainly (yes I do still need very good image quality - I don't think we are questioning that the d600 or 800 or 5d have bad image quality; but in the context of what I use a 35 mm for, 36 MP is "taking the p" and reduces workflow considerably and adds to more storage needs. It's bad enough that I am using MF for high quality - I don't need my 35 mm system to have almost the same size

Dead wrong. They have different default colors in jpegs, but other then that ...

Not quite.  The raw file's colors are also different when processed.   You can however, get around it with using profiles.  Capture One allowed you to apply a Canon 5D3 profile to a D800 file.  I do this all the time.

That's interesting! I might try this... usually I use Capture One for my Mamiya .. but will get my Nikon on it...

Wrong. They are rather similar, except the 5D get more color noise and banding if you try pulling up shadows or increasing exposure during post processing.

and slower.

They are similar but the 5D3 has a slight edge in the higher ISO range (over 8000).  Having said that, the difference is small especially when downsizing the files and let's face it, no one is going to do massive prints from an ISO 12,800 file.

Hmm - high resolution always comes with drawbacks ... "Errors" are seen a lot quicker when you shoot in 36 MP. And since I want to use it for action type shots I prefer to have something more in the range of 18-24mp

Yeah, 4/5 images/second as compared to 6 images/second. Huge, huge difference ...

It is, but more importantly, the buffer on the D800locks up completely when it's full, so your camera is out of action for quite a while while it empties.

Yes and although this isn't my main concern - it all goes back to Nikon putting in a 36 MP sensor - which is exactly what I don't need - for exactly these type of side issues...

In any case, there is no way the D800 is less a camera than the D700.

OK I was exaggerating - but if you consider that you rather have a allrounder - the D800 does look a bit out of place. Yes, to some IQ is really important - but as I use MF for landscapes and studio - I really don't need it. On the other hand the high res slows things down, makes the workflow slower, more cumbersome and takes up too much space... in that sense the D700 suits my needs better than the D800, except - it has no video, and its getting old, and yes I find IQ is a bit dated ...

 jacobwhite's gear list:jacobwhite's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow