We can now directly compare 5d Mk 3 to D800.... Imaging Resource

[Tony Parenti]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Scaled ISO1600 D800 down to 5d Mk 3 and Mk 3 still cleaner and has more detail.. IMHO.

 

[SpartanWarrior]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Scaled ISO1600 D800 down to 5d Mk 3 and Mk 3 still cleaner and has more detail.. IMHO.

Yes thats what I am seeing also, 5D III much cleaner high ISO and more sharper.

--
http://www.pbase.com/spartanwarrior

 

[TOMSDPR]

If you should have favourized the D800 for resolution.
A lot of noise and smeared detail is also in this bag.

Is there still anyone around who thinks 22MP on FF is not enough?

 

[akin_t]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Scaled ISO1600 D800 down to 5d Mk 3 and Mk 3 still cleaner and has more detail.. IMHO.

But ... What am I going to complain about now?

 

[dholl]

The 5DIII looks over-sharpened, rendering the quality of the sharpness cheap-looking (Powershot-like).

The D800 looks more real, with plenty of room for careful pp-sharpening (see the photo of the 3 women in the middle of the test shot).

What is interesting is that the 5DIII has better contrast, while keeping good colour...while the D800 has a really off white-balance yet also appears to keep the colour (again, the 3 women picture being the 'real-world' colour reference).

This might suggest the D800 has issues maintaining accurate white-balance with natural colour-balancing.

Interesting...but I still much prefer DPR's studio-comparison tool, and hope they use only production models when the comparison is ready.

 

[Sideswiped]

Hopefully DPR follows suit and posts both raw and jpg.

 

[SpartanWarrior]

Don't worry the fanboys will be in here in a bit to prove us wrong lol.

If you should have favourized the D800 for resolution.
A lot of noise and smeared detail is also in this bag.

Is there still anyone around who thinks 22MP on FF is not enough?

--
http://www.pbase.com/spartanwarrior

 

[Jeff Palmucci]

Not a valid comparison. Canon was exposed for 1/200 of a second, Nikon at 1/320. I suspect Canon's ISO 1600 is not as sensitive as Nikons ISO 1600.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Scaled ISO1600 D800 down to 5d Mk 3 and Mk 3 still cleaner and has more detail.. IMHO.

 

[SpartanWarrior]

RAW are also at IR.

Hopefully DPR follows suit and posts both raw and jpg.

--
http://www.pbase.com/spartanwarrior

 

[Tony Parenti]

And here they come...

 

[Andre De Angelis]

Not a valid comparison. Canon was exposed for 1/200 of a second, Nikon at 1/320. I suspect Canon's ISO 1600 is not as sensitive as Nikons ISO 1600.

Don't confuse the Canon fanboys with facts.

 

[Great Bustard]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Scaled ISO1600 D800 down to 5d Mk 3 and Mk 3 still cleaner and has more detail.. IMHO.

Here's a 100% crop from the 5D3 at 1/200 ISO 1600:



and here's a 100% crop from the D800 at 1/320 ISO 1600 (2/3 of a stop less light!):



I imagine the difference would be more striking if both were taken with the same exposure and displayed at the same size, don't you think?

 

[ron purdy]

I honestly do not know how anyone can draw any useful conclusions by looking at photos from beta cameras of a mannequin and a POSTER!

Wait for some real tests before you get too worked up about this comparison.

(but I am sure that the resolution will be close enough that the real differences will be in the lenses, and your skillz!)

All I know is that I do not want to deal with D800 RAW files which are 30-70MB in size!

The Canon has RAW files around 21MB, which is much easier to deal with IMO.

--

ron purdy dot com

 

[LaszloBencze]

It seems that at 400 Nikon has the edge for resolution of detail. The difference is most visible in the circular scale on the right. However, the advantage is very slight and not likely to be of much importance on a real photo shoot.

A curious difference at 400 is very apparent in the circularly arrayed fabric samples on the left. The pale pink cloth with dendritic pattern is far more contrasty in the Canon image than in the Nikon. Which is closer to the truth? I have no idea. My preference is for the punchier Canon version. Also the bright magenta cloth adjacent is darker and contrastier in Canon's rendition. Odd that these colors should reveal a difference when the differences in the other hues are negligible.

At 6400 the advantage goes to Canon. The differences are most apparent in the shadow detail between the yarns samples and in the matte black coffee cup. Much more noise in the Nikon image which seems to be masking detail.

 

[Sideswiped]

Ahhh, found them in a different link. The comparison link makes no delineation between the two.

Link for those interested: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d800/nikon-d800A7.HTM

 

[marike6]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Scaled ISO1600 D800 down to 5d Mk 3 and Mk 3 still cleaner and has more detail.. IMHO.

Here's a 100% crop from the 5D3 at 1/200 ISO 1600:



and here's a 100% crop from the D800 at 1/320 ISO 1600 (2/3 of a stop less light!):



I imagine the difference would be more striking if both were taken with the same exposure and displayed at the same size, don't you think?

In this crop, the Nikon image looks more natural, less sharpened.

 

[altenae]

When looking at other parts of the pictures (not the circular scale) I see other things.

Both DSLR's are superb.
So no more canon-nikon hate
--
Enjoy Photography
http://www.wildlife-photos.net

 

[Tony Parenti]

I said scaled down to the same size as a Mk 3 image..... of course at 100% the D800 will resolve more

 

[Andre De Angelis]

Yes thats what I am seeing also, 5D III much cleaner high ISO and more sharper.

Cleaner yes, but at 22 MP the D800 is sharper.

 

[SpartanWarrior]

And I don't know how anyone can draw any conclusions on graph chart that they drew lol.

I honestly do not know how anyone can draw any useful conclusions by looking at photos of a mannequin and a POSTER!

Wait for some real tests before you get too worked up about this comparison.

--

ron purdy dot com

--
http://www.pbase.com/spartanwarrior