-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
5D Mk III vs Nikon D810 Worth Switching/Acquiring or Waiting?
- Thread starter riknash
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 5d nikon d810
- Status
It will be very useful for those who can get the most out of it. I assume you made the switch from 5D Mk III to D810 or simply added to the collection of gear?
Mikael Risedal
Senior Member
added 810 to my working tools, still waiting for a high resolution Canon, have no problem so ever to use different brands , on the contrary, I think it can give creativity, even so the iPhone
AllOtherNamesTaken
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,563
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 2,053
See here re: explanation and actual quote regarding the Facebook comment:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54156828
They used to use the 5DM3 professionally....CLEARLY they do not believe it's only good for Facebook. His comments were directed toward the extra time required to PP a Canon file to make up for the various sensor shortcomings. Anyone who thinks that they actually mean that the 5DM3 is only good for FB is desperately grasping at ways to discredit the video that shows, in real world professional situations, that their beloved camera is not so good at some things, for example an AF stress test (close distances are much harder on AF).
Last edited:
I definitely won't toss my 5D Mark III, but I will take the D810 as the perfect opportunity to acquire a Nikon body and start building up a Nikon lens collection. There are some strong Nikon lenses that surpass their Canon counterparts, just as there are Canon lenses that surpass their Nikon counterparts. As a dual system user, with Canon and Nikon equipment, I'd always be able to choose the best tool for the job. That said, I'll wait for the 5D Mark IV to pursue this. If the 5DIV has higher resolution and greater DR than the D810 (not likely, in my opinion - but who knows), I'll probably just get that instead. Since I doubt Canon will be able to leapfrog Sony's sensor, I'll likely get a D810. But I'd never sell my Canon stuff. I like the rendering of my f/1.2 primes, and don't want to give that up. Canon would likely then be used for certain types of portraits and Nikon for landscapes and architecture.
Last edited:
Ditto but with another option to get an A7R to complement my 5D3 and still can share the same set of EF lenses. It's even better for me with small/light body as I don't want to lug two DSLRs in a trip as usually I always carried two cameras in a trip to mount different FL lenses and backup each other. In my last trip in evening I exclusively used A7R on tripod, much easier to lug around and setup, and EVF is just so much easier in MF (that I only use MF on tripod). There is no much difference in daylight between 5D3 and A7R except latter has higher resolution but that is not my main concern. But in evening I can see A7R with Sony sensor clearly enjoys advantages - much cleaner dark areas after lifting, more vibrant colors and cleaner in long exposure.
Bamboojled
Leading Member
- Messages
- 553
- Reaction score
- 564
Keith Z Leonard
Veteran Member
I think Peter's point here is that he still uses his 5d3 and uses the a7r for things where he and some other pixel peepers feel the 5d3 falls short, like high contrast landscape scenes, etc. For fast AF/tracking, burst rate, etc...it's not like his 5d3 has exploded into smouldering bits of uselessness. Which I believe fits your last statement.
This is exactly where I am. My 5DII still works fine but the camera already paid off big time, so a new camera (toy) is possible. The 5DIII is certainly a fine camera but the improvement in IQ is not that relevant compared to the 5DII. Canon missed the product that makes me update my current gear. If Canon won't give me a hint that I can expect a high res, high DR camera any time soon, I certainly will add a Nikon to my gear. Money I spend for Nikon won't go to Canon obviously.
The 5DIII looked like a very mature and sound camera too me. It's only the old fashioned sensor that didn't appeal enough. The D800 with its focus issues and really loud shutter and shutter vibration seemd not that mature. But now this changed. (Some people state that the D810 isn't selling that well. This might be that many who wanted high res and high DR already switched to a D800/E and/ or that manywait to see if there are any issues. After the Nikon AF and spots desaster I would wait (if I didn't give Canon still a bit of time to come up with an offer I like. The Nikon D810 still has one really important disadvantage - it doesn't take Canon lenses ,-)
Mythought too. But my impression is that the A7r is not a mature product yet. Mainly the shutter vibration and the compressed raws are deal breakers for me. The A7r needsan update as the D800 got one with the D810 to sort out drawbacks. Maybe a A9 with even higher res might be an option some day ... Canon: Time is runing. You're customer spend their money somewhere else ...
Hans Kruse
Senior Member
I'm just curious, how does the use of different cameras give creativity for you?
A7R uses CDAF (no MFA needed) in focus that actually has higher focus accuracy than PDAF-based DSLRs. No mention I use MF exclusively on tripod and even frequently in hand-held. MF is much easier and more precisely with EVF. In general MF > CDAF > PDAF in focus accuracy.
I use A7R only in landscape, studio and portrait where don't need high speed and AI-servo performance. Sure D810/D800 and 5D3 are much more versatile.
My A7R only complements 5D3 that I still use mainly in daylight walk-around and point and shoot. Looking for replacing it with future 6D II or A7 II (likely with A6000 alike hybrid AF and take 12 fps burst) from perspective of light/small package in traveling.
Certainly but resolution actually is not my #1 concern. Its weigh/size is a big deal especially with native FE lenses, significantly smaller/lighter. Then DR, more precisely low read-noise is a big deal in evening photos. Personally I also found A7R is much easier to use on tripod - much smaller foot print so more space on lite traveler tripod, EC, ISO, M-mode, infrared control under any mode (no need to switch to infra remote mode as on 5D3) are easier, metering is more accurate as in full-time LV mode, EVF in precise manual focus (1x/7x/14x toggle directly in EVF/LCD by just pressing a button, 5D3 implementation in this area is cumbersome) and easier to lug around.
Sure I still use DSLRs in my action and wildlife photosFor fast AF/tracking, burst rate, etc...it's not like his 5d3 has exploded into smouldering bits of uselessness. Which I believe fits your last statement.
I don't believe one camera for all and I carried multiple cameras (usually two and sometime 3 as in Africa safari trip) in trips anyway.--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
Last edited:
With all due respect I really think you just want to buy a new camera and are looking for justification from others.
Not with photography, but with creative writing.
These two "issues" are exaggerated by some. Lossy compression RAW is not even an issue as said by A7R owners and reviews (such as DPR A7R review). I am sure someone can fault it in extreme condition such as with very high F number in evening photos and check sky in pixel peeping but then why someone would need to shoot at F13 especially F16 or above in evening?
In comparison shutter shock is a real issue and I also experienced. As many have found it mainly affect with a tele-lens at 100mm or longer in a specific shutter range (1/60 or 1/30 to 1/160). I get around the issue by taking photos with 70-200L mounted @200mm for example either at 1/250 or above in daylight or well below 1/30 on tripod. 55mm FE, 35mm FE as well as 24-70L/2.8 II or WA/UWA lenses in general have no shutter shock issue regardless shutter speed such as I have some full-size photos now with the newly acquired FE 55 at 1/60 sec or FE 35 at 1/40 sec (or at any shutter speed in the affected range) without noticeable blurry even viewed at full size. It's really not an issue in my usages.
But kudos to Sony which has lots of innovation with some amazing cameras these days. Such as relative new A77 II already set bar very high while 7D II and D9300 (new name for rumor D400) are still nowhere.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
Last edited:
Keith Z Leonard
Veteran Member
Thanks for the tutorial on information that I already know, but I would argue that you cannot separate the accuracy and speed elements usefully. Will the A7R return a higher number of in focus shots at 6fps? Here I'm asking because I honestly don't know, but I suspect not. If not the 5D3 is more accurate when used at speed, which is the situation you'd want it to be, as if you can take your time the A7R can produce better images.
Do you use it in studio situations? I've not seen any of your studio work, I would be interested in seeing your lighting setups and shots.
Right, exactly my point, different tools for different uses. I will say that you clearly have different priorities in life as you buy several thousand dollar cameras with great regularity for a guy who isn't a pro. It's really cool that A7R is in a smaller package, for travel that can be great, but of course the lenses comprise the "bulk" (see what I did there?) of the travel inconvenience. A couple of the smaller primes though and I'm sure it makes a nice kit.
I believe in one camera for all, I have that faith I suppose (since you say believe) because I believe that any of my cameras CAN be used to photograph a landscape or a person. I believe that I only require 1 set of 10,000$ equipment to take pictures, obviously you feel otherwise, nothing wrong with that.Sure I still use DSLRs in my action and wildlife photosFor fast AF/tracking, burst rate, etc...it's not like his 5d3 has exploded into smouldering bits of uselessness. Which I believe fits your last statement.
Mikael Risedal
Senior Member
As I said A7R is not designed for high-speed purpose and I even don't attempt to use it in such scenarios anyway. But ML has made a big progress and I believe A6000 alike AF at least will be implemented in next version of A7 II or even in A7r II.
Check above Gary Fong's A6000 review. Its AF is pretty impressive especially in that scene he took photos on his kid whose face in shadow in a room with bright windows background with impressive face-recognition and eye-tracking capability where DSLRs could fail badly.
Yes I have a simple home studio (3-light) and use for family photos that I don't post photos to public. You can refer to this Steve Huff review of A7/R and he has many studio photos. I actually found A7R skin tone is pretty good especially with a tip from someone's customized LR5 profile.
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/11/29/the-sony-a7-and-a7r-camera-review-by-steve-huff/
Different persons have different priority and needs. To me small/light body and lenses are becoming a big and big deal as I really want to enjoy more fun in traveling but still retain photography quality. I'm in mid-age and in good shape not even old or weak at all. A7R with native FE lenses such as FE 24-70 OSS is significantly smaller/lighter than DSLR counterpart such as FE 35 vs 35L or 35/2.0 IS, FE 55 vs Sigma 50 Art (in similar optical performance), FE 24-70 vs 24-70L/4.0 IS, wait and see forthcoming FE 16-35 vs 16-35/4.0 IS. You might not have such impression on internet photos but you will certainly feel it when you lug around entire day, big difference.
Well I believe in other way. I mounted different FL lenses on different cameras. Many times swapping lenses is not even practical such as in Africa safari on truck. You will miss lots of shooting opportunity. Otherwise bridge camera such as FZ1000 should be even ideal with one for all. Two cameras also backup each other as they could fail in trips although chance is not big such as my 24-105L failed in 2nd day of Italy trip but thx I also carried 17-40L (and 60D with Sigma 17-50/2. 8 OS) otherwise it could be a big issue then.I believe in one camera for all, I have that faith I suppose (since you say believe) because I believe that any of my cameras CAN be used to photograph a landscape or a person. I believe that I only require 1 set of 10,000$ equipment to take pictures, obviously you feel otherwise, nothing wrong with that.Sure I still use DSLRs in my action and wildlife photosFor fast AF/tracking, burst rate, etc...it's not like his 5d3 has exploded into smouldering bits of uselessness. Which I believe fits your last statement.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
Last edited:
Keith Z Leonard
Veteran Member
Yeah, that was my feeling too, which is why I think my argument holds water, that the AF is more accurate in those situations just by the sheer speed of it all.
I'll check it out.
Fair enough, what are you using for lights? I use YN622c triggers and flashes in mostly Cheetah stand modifiers, works surprisingly well for a small/portable and fairly inexpensive setup. If I ever dedicate the room for a more permanent setup I'll probably go with Einsteins.
I get the small body/lenses argument, makes a lot of sense for travel. When the performance (speed) gets high enough that will be a compelling package to me, more the size of my older film SLRs.
Yes, you clearly do, but I would argue that just because I took a landscape with my TERRIBLE 5Dmk3 that it's still a landscape that will look good at 30x20.
I think if I were to go to Africa I'd be renting some stuff, that's a pretty specialized scenario unless you are arguing that you go to Africa with great regularity. It's much the same argument for wedding photographers having more than one body, makes sense and if you shoot a bunch of weddings you should own the gear. If you shoot a wedding only very occasionally you can get away with borrowing a friend's 2nd body or renting stuff.Lens redundancy is a different issue though, I typically carry a standard zoom and prime, but when you get into the super tele's it's a big tougher to take 2, ya know?
- Status
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum