text:
And BTW - in astro photography we are using very long exposures, like hours at the time. So the only way to keep sensor's noise down - is to attach to it's back powerful cooler that literally froze it to below zero temperatures. That's how they build those special cameras.
There for my professional advise for Nikon D800 fans - take your camera, yourself and your model in local meat reefer or travel above Polar Circle. Only then you can compare
your high-ISO shots to the Canon 5D Mark III taken, for example where I live. That is Phoenix, AZ.
Just updated: Canon EOS 5D Mark III preview with real world samples
We've updated our Canon EOS 5D Mark III preview with a selection of real world samples images and more detailed descriptions of the camera's behavior. We've shot a range of subjects under different lighting types and light levels to see how the latest 22MP performs. These shots were taken using a pre-production camera running final firmware, so may not be 100% representative of final image quality (though Canon allowing us to publish them suggests they're not far off). We're expecting a production-standard camera and will be adding studio test shots next week.
|Canon EOS 5D Mark III preview samples - posted 23 March 2012
Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.There are 30 'real-world' images in the preview samples gallery, and 24 still-life samples. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.
|Click here to read our 5D Mk III hands-on preview
I own it
I want it
I had it
Discuss in the forums
|Canon EOS 5D Mark III Black SLR Digital Camera Body Only
|Canon EOS 5D Mark III Black Digital SLR Camera Kit w/ 24-105mm IS Lens
And BTW - in astro photography we are using very long exposures, like hours at the time. So the only way to keep sensor's noise down - is to attach to it's back powerful cooler that literally froze it to below zero temperatures. That's how they build those special cameras.
Another great camera for the Canon fans, congrats.
I have Canon 7D for 2 years. Some of those pictures taken by Mark III are "soft" like pictures taken by 7D. I wouldn't be surprised if Mark III has the same problem like 7D (soft images + autofocus problem). I am not sure if Mark III is worth buying…
I had bad experience with the 1 series AF system. Canon tuned it for 3 times ... at the end ... I sold it. Switched to Nikon D700 thereafter. The MarkIII/1DX 61 points AF system is a new breed, we've no idea how reliable it would be ...
soft???? really?
The non-ACR version of the shot with the tree and blue+orange flowers is soft compared to the ACR-processed version (which is quite sharp indeed).
My guess is that the softer version is a RAW processed with Canon's DPP software, which has a known issue when converting RAW files to JPEGs - thedigitalpicture does a good job of documenting the issue, but basically the issue is that the image looks sharp in DPP quickview mode, but appears softer in the fancier rendering mode and the actual converted JPEG/TIFF file output.
Canon's working on a fix and it should be as simple as a DPP software update. There's no reason to believe that there's anything wrong with the camera itself or it's files - which is pretty clear to see when you pixel peep the low ISO ACR processed samples.
The OP's comment about the 7D is not consistent with my own experiences. My 7D's been just fine, AF work well and the output is sharp enough given the high pixel density of the sensor.
Mark III at this point have issue (possible human error when releasing firmware) with image being absolutely sharp in preview window but soft when you put it in edit window in DPP. You can read more about it at the-digital-picture dot com.
What really makes me laugh - is that Nikon D800 fans trying compare high-iso (25600) images to the Canon 5D mark III. I've spent years in digital astro photography (where we fight for every photon of light from millions light years away most of the times) and I know difference about signal/noise ratio when it comes to same size sensor with more pixels on it. It is proportionally higher. But they got to love those MEGA pixels :).
I own a 7D and have no problem. Try using a different lens as in most cases this is what is causing the "softness"
I would like to see how the Fujifilm X-pro1 compares with these. Not sure if I will upgrade my 7D considering the price. You can always win one for free:) They are having a 5D MkIII contest here: http://www.facebook.com/pictureline?v=app_150794994973742&rest=1
if anybody is interested. Who knows!
Awesome work DPReview, I have been a viewer for quite a while now but just made an account with you.
D800 is the best right now. Just look at the sensor ratings http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D800-Review/Sensor-performance
yeah at this point d800 is the best, but they havent done any testing on mark III, I would love to see the result...
Yes DXOmark also says the d800 rank 3rd as a camera for sports from all the cameras currently available...
I just tryed a 5d Mark III from a old friend from Canon with my EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS and I took all the pictures at ISO 12800 at the street at 9pm with very limited light situation. Amazing camera very clean pictures. Sorry I forgot to get the pictures in my card but I can tell you that I am placing my order for a Mark III tonight....
Yes it has the best DR at low ISO which is good for Nikon shooters ;) 5DIII is better than mkII but not as good as D800. The banding issue is still present.
I've thought about switching to Nikon, but will propably wait for Canon's rumoured high resolution camera.
Another thing is that Canon has an edge with the lenses IMO. The lineup is more complete and Nikon lacks some of the stuff like TS-E 17mm. I've checked many comparisons and charts, and it seems that many Nikon glass has higher CA and less corner sharpness. Telephoto zooms seem to better with Canon too.
Plus with adapthers its possible to use Nikkor etc. lenses on Canon body.
hm ... is something wrong with my obsolete canon 5d? It still gives me outstanding quality pictures - unless I don't see this huge gap between pictures quality of 5d-d800-5dmkIII - should I fix it or smth? :D...
one of a thousands ordinary pictures from 5d:
Don't you all just forget about a PHOTOGRAPHY? Or maybe the Photography doesn't matter these days? Really don't understand these new_gear-lovers-fights-and-whines ...
jard69: I think we all care about photography quite a lot, but this a forum about reviewing new cameras, you what else would you spect?
We are not going to complain about the figurines selected for the studio shots being ugly or not pleasently placed, we just want them to have challenging zones and well in focus to compare between models.
All the DSLRs ever made can give you marvellous shots, but in dificult situations, a newer one will perform better, may be you will be able to get focus where your actual one can't, or use a higer ISO so you can better stop motion of the subjects, and it all counts.
BitFarmer: I agree and I know the destination of this forum but I have premonition that people looking for gear which will think and do everything for them - and (what is most ridiculous) will praise their favorite camera to the skies for that 1% gain of functionality over the opposite :). Unfortunately I'm sure they will never find a camera that will make them happy - for short time - maybe ... but only that.
I think if I could take perfect pictures only ... it would be so boring.
@ jarq69. There is nothing called a perfect picture, cuz everybody has a different taste and perception. it maybe perfect to you but not necessarily perfect for everyone else. The need of having the best gear, there is in the market, does not necessarily improve your photography and neither it is a value that can be appreciated by everyone, but definitely gives you a self satisfaction, and raise your self esteem..:). Thats y companies keep on producing new stuff and expensive stuff, for these reasons. So if you are already satisfied with the gear you have then stay with it, and for those who yearn for more they can go and buy them, Personally, I dont see there is anything wrong with either decision..:)
the stupid ones are the one who claim that their equipment is the best and insist that everyone should listen to them and follow their footstep, ahahahahahaahhahahahaha
Where is my official review! I needs it!
Nikon v Canon... for all but the rare few, if your cam body is getting a little long in the tooth I suspect getting the latest DSLR body which your lens collection will be compatible with is likely not going to get in the way of the quality of your output. The brand zealots should be grateful the competition in DSLRs exists and remains strong.
nothing new pictures quality same????
How exactly can you draw that conclusion without access to many--dozens or even hundreds---of raw files?
All you can draw any conclusion about is jpeg engines and raw extraction to jpeg. Neither has much to do with general image quality.
If for some reason you can't or won't shoot raw, you need to share that information when making comments like the above.
The 5DMIII has many small, at first sight not so obvious differences, but they can make life easier for the photographer :)
- After capturing an image and preview on this display can already magnify pressing the loupe (at 5dMII was necessary to hide the preview, then reappear and then we went to enlarge)
- Loupe can be set to magnify about 100% (like Nikon) + many other options
- Can be set to shoot in different aspect ratios, as well as the Nikon D3 series. Moreover, there is such ratio 16:9 or 1:1 - a square. Raw will still be displayed 3:2, but if you are using software CPP, the settings are there as a cut.
- Switch on - off controller much more comfortable
- Both wheels are pleasant to the touch with a better run
- Extending the exposure compensation scale -3 - +3
I use Nikon and I have no reason to change, but I also like Canon and I like when cameras are by photographers constructed, not by accountants and marketers...
I heard the same thing about the 1D III vs 1D II. 1D III offered a large number of small and few not so small improvements that overall added to a much better package. I see the same thing with the 5D III. Pure IQ may not be much bette, but AF is and that will allow me to get a far higher keeper rate than 5D II ever could with action work at least. I reckon the IQ difference will be huge in servo mode. For the first time since EOS 3, we've seen a a lot of formerly only 1 series features come to an affordable prosumer model.
I believe the vast majority of posters here are not payed for their photography. A professional would think this 5d3 / d800 matter very objective: how much more money will I make using this new camera? Do some math and if it's worthwhile, buy it. If not (MOST LIKELY!!!), just move on until new gear is really needed.
thats exactly what I did when the mark II came out... Im still proud owner of the 5D. This time, I will be upgrading to the 5D3.
Agreed that few real professionals have time for this. But even for a true professional, I have a hard time seeing a client examining a file or a print and saying "That's a spectacular photo! It's too bad you didn't use a D800; I spotted that right away." Maybe it's different with video.
Can you take a multiple exposure shot (in camera) with the III? I hope they added this feature...
When talking about high ISO performance how about the loss in color saturation, contrast and detail? I read mainly about noise, does anyone has more (real, good, professional!) knowlegde about this point?
Then general rule is that dynamic range (aka DR) goes down as ISO goes up.
However better lenses can add to colour range and subtleties at all ISO settings. So the glass very much matters at say ISO10,000. (This lens point is something that appears to be lost on those who constantly cite the DXO sensor score.)
What annoys me is that people dont seem to stick to the blogs subject. This is about the 5D3, why are there more Nikon people posting on here than anything? There are plenty of honest debates about whether this is the camera for you but seriously this is ridiculous.
Testing out the 1dm3 against the new 5dm3 is also interesting, the focus is more accurate and quicker, holy crap! It really is nice.
On the note of the posting of the image samples. I posted samples on another site and people just wanted the moon. It really is ridiculous when you think about how much time this all takes to do all this so people can turn around and complain anyway. The image samples DPR show are for variables in architecture and nature to show you the characteristics of the camera not so you can sit in awe and get a new desktop image for your computer. lol
I do think people should be in the samples however. Thanks for the time you took to post those DPR.
The more you learn about people, the more you'll love your dog...
The more you learn about dogs, the more you'll love your cat...
~ I've studied and studied and double checked all the reports and specifications of both the Nikon D800 and the 5D Mk3 (also the number of L series lenses I have). I need my 5D to be the master of all trades. The Nikon D800 is, in reality, the master of a few trades. My 5D Mk3 plus 70-200 f2.8 L Mk2 will arrive by Thursday 29th March 2012. I am a very happy person!
Got mine 5D3 Thursday. Upgraded from 5D2. After weekend I can say I love it. Has it better quality at low ISO than 5d2 - No.
Has it better quality at ISO3200 and higher - Yes.
But there's more then this. AF is simply stunning. Add silent shooting, more than 3 frames in AEB, HDR, really good overall handling and many other features. Trumps 1DS3 and still at half of its initial price. I guess I sound like another happy Canon customer. But I truly am.
I don't consider Nikon (too many EF lenses since my first Canon EOS 300D). And for those Canon folks who are not sure if 5D3 is worth buying, I strongly suggest to find one in local store and simply try it.
Very well said. I find myself fighting this "need to get the latest" syndrome often.
Hehe...true! ^_^
Could you elaborate on how it trumps the 1Ds3? It sounds like IQ at higher ISO's and AF (with some bonuses like silent shooting, LCD elc). How's the weather-sealing for instance?
"Has it better quality at low ISO than 5d2 - No."
Do you mean it has worse quality at low ISO, or just similar?
n1zr: like I've told you somewhere else on this forum :-)
Mainly features. And again 1ds3 has better shutter (rated for more clicks), built in grip and no mode selector dial (guess those two features make it better weather resistant than 5D3).
In every other aspect 5D3 has improvements over 1DS3 - AF, HDR, multiple exposures, video, silent shutter (this single feature is awesome), faster fpm, more custom functions, better at higher ISO. I find it more all-around camera than 1DS3.
glonislaw: sorry, I meant hi ISO. I really doubt it has much of improvement (if any) at lower settings.
Unfortunately, in the US we not longer have "local stores" for high end DSLRs unless you live in NYC, LA, Chicago, ATL, or a handful of very big cities. Amazon and B&H online have eaten the rest of the brick and mortar retail world. In most areas, it will be very difficulty to find a new 5D3 to hold in your hand. That is why these reviews and comments are so critical to so many of us. Many thanks to all who take the time to give thoughtful descriptions and reviews.
I got mine from Adorama (here in the US). But you are right It's hard to find local photo stores. Last good store in my state (Penn Camera in DC & MD) have closed down few months ago.
Other option is to rent one (after they are more available) or buy one and then keep or return if you don't like it.
As a working photographer for many, many years, let me share this opinion re this discussion.
Is your camera good enough to do the job? If your client hands you green & white paper that you can put in the bank...then the answer is Yes.
When a student tells me at a class for oh, let's say understanding exposure, that they're getting a new super camera, I always like to ask: So you think your current camera is stalling your progress (I laugh inwardly) and a new, "better" camera is all you need to take it to the next level? Remember a better camera will probably show your weaknesses way better also.
Come on equipment junkies - do you really think you've outgrown your Mk2...let's get serious about photography and not just possessing a "bigger" camera than the next guy!
I shoot a lot of HDR, just to extend the brightness range a bit, not as a goofy effect. I even do this handheld. If you can explain to me how I can shoot more than 3 bracketed exposures on my mkII, without carrying around a Promote remote control with bunch of cables and a tripod, then maybe I made a mistake buying the III.
Agreed; most people do NOT need a new camera. But for anyone shooting fulltime, a substantially better autofocus, better focus in lowlight, a useful Auto-ISO, and silent shooting make it worth the cost. Anyone shooting photojournalistically now has a Canon that actually works FOR them instead of against them.
I do. I shoot 90% of my pictures in dim light. This camera will let me use my 70-200 2.8 and other lenses in situation that I currently can't. I will catch great pictures for my customers that can only be done with very fast primes.
I tested from a friend and its AF system is great for my line of work. I came to realize that I don't want this camera but I need it for what I do....
I'm hoping Canon will rethink their restrictions of 'single/same' ISO requirement for HDR/M.E. (multiple exposure) image combinations, and address this in firmware. Vast majority of those eager to utilize HDR/M.E. would know how to best handle optimal ISO selection when doing 'natural DR' that is beyond any dSLR/dcam system so far for 'single capture', so it makes sense for them to allow us the choice of combining multi-ISO images rather than just 'single/same' ISO. also, not restrict it to RAW only, but multi-ISO JPEGs for HDR/M.E. combinations. I scrutinized the 5DMkIII manual, and have no way of knowing if they dumbed down its HDR/M.E. feature from their 1Dx (given the 1Dx manual isn't yet out for comparison). Such restriction makes the 5DMkIII that much less attractive for me, as I enjoy creative capture 'in the field' and not 'photoshopped' in post offline with any pp software.
All the more so, given we have ExpSim LV to preview DR of any/all our HDR/M.E. capture esp in JPEG.
I think everyone is judging that the D800 is cleary better than Canon because of this dpreview samples and DXO Mark. They should take the very same pictures with both so we can compare. There is no picture in the MKIII samples that we can check the DR of this camera. The DXO Mark looks questionable to me. D800 2800 points in lowlight vs 1800 on 5DMKII?
The thing is it's not only taking like-for-like pictures; performance matters too. The D800 with it's high pixel count (and therefore higher demand on processor) has a lower continuous drive rate for example. Focussing will be a factor too. Perhaps a landscape photographer (an obvious target for this camera) won't require bang on AF as an action photographer might. My point is it's just not that simple to compare images as they are.
As i've been saying all along... DXO Mark's scores are extremely tendentious... Personally i don't go by their scoring methodology in any form whatsooever...
To be frank it isn't entirely necessary to have the same pictures captured from both camera's to formulate an objective assessment...
A low light score of 2853 is nothing short of ludicrous... because there is no way the D800 performs that well in ISO performance... there is severe colour desaturation... heavy handed NR and a dramatic loss in edge to edge definition & dynamic range which is apparent from the test images...
They're probably trying to factor in the frequency of SNR in their evaluation... the tiny pixel pitch on the D800 is definitely not doing their light manipulating algorithms anyfavours either... So how they achieve such a high score... well your guess is as good as mine...
Thou doth protest too much, methinks. ;-)
@ marike6 - :) :) :) :) :)
But seriously... my points pertaining to DXO Mark are made out of genuine concern... I am not disputing the fact that the D800 is shaping up to be a great camera... but at the same time you cannot undermine the vast technological improvements in the 5D III as some sort of "minor upgrade"...
Despite the fact that i may appear biased towards one brand... the reality of the situation is that i am impartial to a fault...
In the end i suppose both will be deemed outstanding camera's of this generation... it will all just come down to personal preference as to which system suits our needs better...
It really doesn't matter. If you have Canon lenses go for the Canon and if you have Nikon lenses go for the Nikon.
Minor improvements, major price increase. Keep your Mark II for now...
Minor ?
That depends doesn't it ?
Maybe some people need to have a good AF system where not only the center is working correctly.
Maybe some people need to have more FPS and less shutterlag
Maybe some people need dual cards
maybe some people need better high iso performance
And maybe let people decide by themselves if they want to keep the 5D mark II or buy the mark III
Maybe the IQ improvements are minor, but the 5D II was already good except for shadow DR. The rest of the changes for the 5D III are major. Maybe if you photograph lame snails, the 5D II AF was fine, but for those of us that like to use our cameras for a variety of landscape and action or lowlight work the 5D III is vast improvement.
Disagree. My first impression was this is a minor upgrade. Looking at the high ISO shots and considering the AF, HDR, etc. has me seriously considering getting one. The low noise in the high ISO shots, to me at least, blow away the competition.
Please tell us more about your experience on both cameras. What about the dynamic rage? There is no MKIII clouds picture sample. Are they at least comparable?
There are as many needs and tastes in photography as there are fingerprints. The best camera for any person can only be decided by the person buying the damn thing.
People need to stop needing others to approve of the decisions they make. The universal agreement ain't forthcoming and this is no reason to get angry or frustrated. You need to brave it out all on your own.
Chances are you buy the wrong camera anyway ;]
Exactly. The only people overtly worried about tiny details are the rich retirees who get conned into buying a 5D3 or D800 level camera as their very first DSLR.
Everyone else is upgrading from a previous camera and it's clear each of these are vast improvements on what they replaced.
I agree. I decided to go for D800, but I think D800 is much more challenging camera than 5D3. 5D3 is a better camera for jpeg shooters for sure.
So why wouldn't someone just buy an Olympus DSLR if that someone was only shooting jpegs? The Olympus bodies may be a bit old, but some of those lenses easily beat Nikon and Canon lenses. (In case you don't know: Olympus does really good direct to jpeg shooting--the files are bigger.)
Right, but at this Canon 5D III or Nikon D800 level it is usually possible to rent those cameras to try them before purchase--yes I know you have to live in, or near, a big city, but it is possible to use the cameras before deciding to purchase one.
(Yes, I also get that the 5D III and D800 have not shipped yet, however in the US the Nikon D4 is becoming available for rental.)
I'm not a conspiracy theorist but there has been a lot and I mean a lot of Canon haters hitting the web since the release of the MkIII. It's been mentioned in many places that there has been a drive to hammer the MkIII. I've had a full day with both and they are very impressive Cameras. Both have their strengths. The D800 is a top notch stills camera with restrictions to speed so out door actions shots are limited. Hand held shooting is average as focusing is good and fast but not in low light. The MkIII is great hand held and overall a very flexible camera. Crop detail V the D800 is different as you'd expect. In daylight the detail is so good on the D800 but it does loose it with noise in low light. The MkIII seems to be able to focus quicker and more accurately in darker situations but both seem to be be on par in brighter situations. MkIII AF menu is outstanding for Sport and Wildlife everything is covered. Get the camera for your shooting & just enjoy.
how comes that there are no humans photographed to see the skin tones..
Good point...
seems that people photos is not a reality for MKIII
Could be because jpegs don't do skin shots well.
i really wonder if anybody migrating from d700 to 5d3 :)
I'd think that most users of a decent FF camera would have spent a fair bit on glass to get the most out of it. Hard decision to jump and reinvest in lenses all over again.
I'm a pro with mk2 and all TS-E lenses with some primes, i'm using it on a tripod with mlu and cable release %95 of the time. for my type of job 800E and zeiss primes will better suit and i believe extra money i pay will pay itself back.
Swapping $15,000 worth of lenses? That is why the Canon vs Nikon discussion is meaningless.
I have a D700 (15.000 photos).
Good DR, AF, high ISO results.
Now I know D700.
I will use D700 until breaking-off.
Meanwhile I will buy other lenses.
MP Cevat, amen....unless people have $10,000 to blow or have cheap glass.
Hold your horses people! Why do you think every new buyer of these top end cameras has a bag full of lenses? MOST people who will buy either a D800 or a Mark III are new entrants into FF photography.
European and American zillionairs aside, China and India alone contain near 2.5 billion people with wealthier middle classes popping their pretty faces out to photograph the world.
The world is changing. In other words, lens, schmens!
@ Tape5
"MOST people who will buy either a D800 or a Mark III are new entrants into FF photography."
Is that a fact? If so, how do you know?
Perfect files but orrible pictures!!
Come on, if you had the camera for a day and had to produce 30 technically good enough (100% non-manipulated) pictures for comparison purposes, would you really have 30 gallery/competition quality pictures to show. We are pixel peeping here, not visiting an art gallery. These pictures do what they are meant to do.
Omit the 'but...' in your post. It's been said before and I'll repeat: these shots are so you can gain an understanding of colour, sharpness, DR, etc. You're not meant to be blown away by the tester's skills in artistic composition, dramatic storytelling or whatever inspiration it is that you seek. I could show you a some amazing shots taken with a disposable if that's what you're looking for.
no petka, these reviews highlight the biggest shortcoming of dpreview which is that the photographs for all their reviews are universally bad. IMO, they should invest some money in some studio equipment and consider taking some photo courses to understand how real photographers will use the cameras. Taking snapshots like an iphone camera user would does not do justice to a $3500 camera
The real life samples of D800 and 5D MkIII show mostly one thing: Nikon's out of camera jpegs are much better than Canon's, and even usable without having to tweak the raw file. Shooting Canon means one has to use raw, or one might as well get a cheaper camera and get the same image quality.
Why is it only Nikon and Olympus who know how to make good jpegs in-camera? It is quite clever, though, as it makes their cameras look better in online comparison tests where for some bizarre reasons most reviewers tend to shoot jpegs and compare them rather than properly processed raw files.
Comparing two cameras objectively is extremely difficult, as so many things are in play. Not only the sensor capabilities, but also the lens and JPEG conversion settings. At least, if comparing in-camera produced standard JPEGs with auto WB, we see what the manufacturer thinks is a good picture. Taking RAW files and then tweaking them would tell more about the person doing the conversion than what the camera is capable of.
At this level of (equal) picture quality I would base my decision on the quality of lenses, ergonomics, AF speed, high ISO capability and price. Not sample files form internet sites, how ever impartial they try to be.
No doubt there is a difference between the Nikon and Canon jpegs- but what you refer to as "better" I'd also describe as "unfaithful." The photographer should be choosing when to boost the blues and greens in the landscapes.
Human aspects of photography are often not talked about. Among these is how a person relates emotionally and physically to a camera they are holding in their hands.
If you love your Canon or Nikon or any other brand, that counts. It is important and should be a factor in my view to choose a brand against another. Don't let anyone make you feel bad about your choices because we ALL know that the current offerings are way more than sufficient for a person to produce good photographs. Especially at this price range.
Some of my all time favorite photos in my childhood were taken with my dad's Lubitel. What I never forget, is how he genuinely loved his camera and how he always smiled when he looked down into its viewfinder.
I agree; maybe its petty, but as an enthusist Canon user for over 25 years, I don't even like the look of the red Nikon swoosh. I am most inclined to wait for the most personally compatible Canon model. After over a decade, I still really really love my first long L lens, the 300 F4 IS. The bokeh just blows me away. I really don't underestand the typical conversation here regarding whether to change brands. It would be like changing families.
72-79 Canon, 80-81 Nikon, 82-91 Olympus, 92-01 Minolta and Contax, 02-12 Canon, Nikon again in a few weeks. They are just tools, after all.
In the old times the change form Canon to Nikon was a much bigger thing, as the focus rings turned the opposite ways, and it took about 3 months of daily use to burn the new habits to your cortex. Now they are practically the same.
Getting attached to a tool is pathological...
I worked in pro labs and as a pro photographer since the mid 80's but am now a happy amateur. I shot MF and 5x4 with some 35mm work. I had a full Nikon kit and changed to Canon as autofocus came in (Canon was better!!)
My point! My 40D is due for replacement, I have always been impressed with the 5D and miss my MF quality so the answer was to wait for 5DIII.
BUT!! Nikon have presented a camera that gets very close to MF quality. I can shoot 15MP DX for my family/travel snaps and when the situation allows, grab a tripod and get a 36MP shot with incredible detail and tonality, I can imagine I'm using my Mamiya 67 again.
Would I upgrade if I owned a 5DII? probably not. But coming from my film centric background, my 40D is a great 35mm camera, the 5DIII offers a subatantial upgrade in image quality but the Nikon 800 offers so much more at a cheaper price.
Looks like time to jump ship again.
A used 5DII would be the perfect compromise considering used prices at the moment, or even a new one!...I used to shoot with RZ67 & am very happy with the quality I'm getting form my mkII.
I've found the lenses make a much bigger difference these days once you're up to 21mp FF sensors. I no longer own any L zooms because they lose some resolution against good primes (admitedly it's hardly noticable, but I can see it!).
I'd have to sell my TS-E 24 L II lens to fund an upgrade, which would most likely result in lower resolution from the whole system using a lesser lens.
The Nikon does look more enticing, especially mated with a Schneider T/S or Zeiss prime.
Hmm, lets see what the D800E looks like when it arrives...
@Niegel: In one lens rating table Nikons were at the top of the heap, Zeiss primes even lower than Nikon zooms...
I am getting 14-24, 24-70. 70-200 and 200-400 zooms for my D4 & D800, and I am not worried at all about the resolution available.
@Nigel Wilkins
Yep, even the price of a brand new Mk2 is really low, much lower than the D700. If it weren't for my investment in the Nikon system I'd be looking seriously at one of these as the Mk3 seems pricey.
@Petka - I've not looked at Nikon in any great depth so that good to hear. I would only need a couple of good primes. TBH, I tend to buy & try lenses before deciding...it's the only reliable way to be sure, otherwise, I'd have missed my magnificent, tiny Voigtlander 20mm.
@Damo83 - The MkII is still an awesome camera. Maybe buy one used with a lens, try it, then either sell it on or keep it.
Normally I'll be the itching to upgrade & right now, I have the spare cash to do it. I'm not going to though, because for my style of photography, the only real advantage would be the lock button in the mode dial!!
@Nigel: I am waiting for a converter for Fuji XF and Leica C mount, for Voigtlander 15 mm lens, which is my all time favorite super WA. Small, cheap, sharp, no flare.
(Just got the X Pro1 with 18 and 35 mm lenses)
If you want great AF I would not recommend a 5DII.
Does anyone knows what the dynamic range of this camera is?
I'd like to see more shots at 1600 and 3200 - here they were not at all, and it is interesting to the rest. It's is vital. (25,000 it is not necessary for the most part). This as a publicity stunt - You need 3200? Just forget about it - get 10000!!!))))- attract high ISO of the camera as an attribute of a new opportunity. but it is not. where the shots of which can be compared - everything is relative
I understand a website redesign is a big deal, but for Pete's sake, the iPad has been around for about two years now and there are plenty of photographers who use the iPad on a regular basis. Don't you think it is time to lose the flash part and move to html 5 so I can see those images on my iPad???
shouldnt you be complaining to apple, and not DPR, Flash has been around for more than 10 years.
Flash will no longer be updated for mobile devices, and that includes all the other ones too, not just Apple who used to be a bit backward in this regard, so the point is valid. HTML5 is the future, Flash is the past.
I'm not sure that calling Apple backward in regards the lack of Flash support is altogether accurate.
They made a conscious decision not to allow flash. As opposed not to implement it (I understand that Adobe wanted to implement Flash and Apple wouldn't let them distribute it).
They were ahead of the game in not supporting Flash. It was Apple's decision that if not drove the decision to kill Flash, certainly hastened Flash's death.
To be honest I don't really agree with the Apple decision (simply because I think the user should make the choice as to what is acceptable compromise on their device, especially with such a widely used technology, Nicortinix's complaint bears this out, IMO) , but I think it is disingenuous to say they were behind the 8 ball on that one.
nicotinix - Maybe you should dump the ipad for an open system that supports all standards, not just the ones that make money for apple
Oddly enough, you're not the first person to make this point. We're working on it...
It's the same as the 5D Mark II, just with a lot of firmware tweaks and a far more complex AF system, for an extra $1,000 ~ $1,500 over the 5D Mark II.
great samples from an overpriced camera. (and please, stop the "you would have paid twice this price 5 years ago" nonsense.)
Those D800 samples, to my eye, seems really great ( colors, resolution, DR ). I have a 5DMKIII on pre-order, shipping on April 2nd and I have no EF lenses. There is some review sites that are bashing at the new 5D, even in video mode ( eoshd.com ). The MKIII samples seems duller and a bit softer ( Is it the lens? ), and I am afraid of cancelling the pre-order and not getting either camera when I arrive in USA on May 1st. Do you guys think they will have both cameras in stock a month from now?
The companies seem to be pumping them out as fast as they can. There seems to be discussion over how they allocated initial shipments - as in numbers of units to various size sellers. There seem to have been some found at individual stores of some large chains (maybe each store got a couple? of one of them?) but if this is the case, those may soon be sought out and snapped up. I don't think I'd cancel a pre-order until I had one in hand.
Otherwise, all you can do is track your orders and follow forum discussions.
D800 would be hard to find, IMO.
why did you get a 5D3 if you need it asap and dont have any EF lenses?
heh heh...nice and fun comment Zerg..cheers! ^_^
Ya, anyone knows when the next 5d will be coming out? Will it be next year or later?
Also, when is canon going to implement their back lighted FF and apsc sensor? Is there anyone who knows?
OK, my quick conclusion after these... "RL" samples, round one (.jpg): good. Not "stellar" (=wow, nice & clean after 25600!), but good. I will wait for round two (RAW) before consulting my bank account. Now, I suggest that all the people that are dissapointed first hand just "jump" to Nikon. 2 immediate effects: a) they all will be very happy (probably with the D800 that alone does magnificent pictures, no photographer needed) and b) this will make Canon angry because the sudden decrease of "premium" customer base so 5D IV will be even better, with 100 Mp FF and ISO 409600. And alone it will do magnificent pictures. No photographer needed. Anymore. P.S.: now seriously, for A2 (not bigger, that will be D800 "domain") prints this first "result" it's a hell of a job, a new photo approach at high ISO is possible now. I wish I had this in my "old" 5D II. Cheers!
@Mr. Hertz: Congrats, but A2 is where I will park it. Indeed, the "viewing technique" will smash many of the differences, I agree. Pixel peepers (or people with extreme myopia) that look to the A2+ with a magnifying glass will notice these. It's like looking to an Aivazovsky or David paintings (or any paintings...) from 20 cm. So you're right. :)
"5D IV will be even better, with 100 Mp FF and ISO 409600. And alone it will do magnificent pictures. No photographer needed."
I guess you are not a photographer then.
i wish dpreview would hire a photographer
Dpreview, I like your photos. Thanks for doing this work for us.
As usual, the photos are horrendous!
bob, if you like the photos maybe you should stick to an iphone camera!
Veni, vidi, evomuit
I work in a camera store, and I'm a current user of the 5D MkII. I've been really happy with it, but the one thing that has been a challenge is the AF speed.
I bought the camera with the f4 24-105mm lens, and then tried the 24-70 f2.8. I noticed a marked difference in AF speed so I moved up to the faster lens. I always had some regrets though, because my walkaround lens was signficantly heavier to carry.
I've had my hands on the 5D MkIII and I notice my one annoyance has disappeared. The camera is smokin' fast, and I can still get lots of speed using the lighter and slower lens. In fact, this camera is so fast that I can't see a significant difference from one lens to the other.
I was looking forward to this camera mainly because I wanted to see a significant move up to a faster AF system, similar to the 7D. I got what I wanted.
This is not just a change for video shooters - it is definitely an improvement for still shooters.
JPG vs. RAW....
how many of the RAW shooter had a darkroom back in the film days?
honest question... im curious.
I shoot almost exclusively raw and still have my darkroom setup. I haven't printed in ages, but I still process the occasional roll of TMAX 100.
You neglected film scanning.
Also there's a big difference between having a black and white darkroom--which many did because you could easily make one out of a bathroom or basement corner--and having a darkroom capable of doing colour work. (My understanding of the color film development and printing process is limited but I believe one has to pay a great deal more attention to chemical purity and temperature than with black and white.)
Just try telling someone using a Sigma digital camera that jpeg is good enough.
Then of course to add to the confusion: A Nikon D700 will shoot into tiff. (D4, D3, D3s too, as I imagine the D800.)
I had a darkroom, and used most of the tricks to make good prints (push, pull, fogging, dodging, burning etc). Some of those techniques are now used in RAW processing, and as a professional I need them, because so much more can be squeezed out of a RAW file than form a in-camera JPEG. It also makes shooting faster and safer, as small exposure mistakes can be corrected in post. Just the ability to adjust white balance at the office is priceless.
I did. I love RAW processing.
No, back in the film days people who were serious about photography didn't necessarily have a darkroom--though many did--but many times they most certainly paid for a lot of work by someone else in the darkroom.
Then there's the whole notion of a shared community darkroom at school or photo club, both still exist, in 2012.
Look 10 years ago when I first got my Canon G2, I didn't realize it could shoot in raw, and I was struggling to learn the gear and just plain Photoshop Elements (PSE did not extract raw then, raw extraction was done with Canon software). So I shot in jpeg for a few months, and got some wonderful pictures, however I was lucky that I didn't need to tweak color or white balance. Shooting in raw saves you from a wasted shot because adjusting the white balance or exposure of a jpeg can easily ruin the picture.
I used to process my own slide/transparency film & scan it.
I shoot RAW exclusively now & use manual exposure & focus 95 percent of the time.
I shoot RAW.
I didn't have a darkroom.
I couldn't afford a dark room (space, bits and bobs, training).
I can afford RAW.
Things change, get more accessible, more affordable.
Now amateurs can do things they wanted to, but couldn't and get stuff they want, that they couldn't afford before.
I even have autofocus on my camera now.
Didn't dream of that back in the late 80s.
In fact I could only dream of an SLR back then (till the Berlin wall came down and Zenit's became available).
So now professional level processing is available to the heaving masses, along with autofocus, wireless flash, studio strobes, high quality Japanese DSLRs etc.
SUMO. (and I mean that in the nicest possible way).
This will reveal my age .. darkroom – yes - Omega LPL 670 Enlarger. Developer – Fixer – Water-bath. Yes; only RAW. Don't even know how JPG is setup on my camera bodies – don't care. Never want to go back to the smell of fixer in a dark room. But I got to say the anticipation and passion of creating a breathtaking print after proper in-camera composition is truly missed. So many with today's technology do the "spray and pray" and I just cannot get into that mode of photography….
Dunno why buy I got quite uncomfortable when I saw comments like:
"video qualities of the 5D3 alone worth $3500"
"clean ISO 12800 video alone worth $3500"
I mainly do still, and I got a feeling that the $3500 is mostly for video features..and I really wanted to like to 5D3
do you have the same feeling?
I TOTALLY AGREE with you. I long for a camera aimed photographers (vs videographers). Why merge high quality photography with high quality videography? I think most people either specialise in one or the other. It's only journalist who really find this hybrid system usefull. But what about the rest of us? I feel it is a huge RIP OFF being forced to pay so much extra for features I'm not going to use.
ISO 12800 certainly looks cleaner than the mkii. If you need that for your stills, then it's useful. If you don't, there's still no reason not to like all the other improvements. I shoot Nikon and I can still appreciate what Canon have brought to the table here. The AF alone would be worth the upgrade!
that´s like people complaining their mercedes has more then one seat but they always drive alone.....
it´s just a shortsighted argumentation... try to get the whole picture.
and if you really think the improvements are only for video, well you can always buy the 5D MK2 when you don´t see the benefit for still images.
i sure see the improvements in the 5D MK3.
the truth is if you shoot Raw there may be not much improvements over 5D2
try to use your brain.. and you will understand the analogy.
you can cry like a child and look like a clown all day.... it will not change the facts.
the fact is VIDEO is here to stay. all your whining will not change that.
you should use urs first..I was not complaining about having video in DSLR
The real question is, for the extra money, how much of it goes the video, how much real improvement is for stills? don't get too excited, I am not going to join your "video or not" war
well you EDITED your posting and removed your comment about my mercedes analogy. and that was what i was refering to...
You folks do not seem to understand that the video capabilities of modern digital cameras are practically free. The only extra parts are the cheap ADC for sound and some connectors for HDMI. Everything else is just software. So why no offer it, you are not really paying for it any more than you are for the hundreds of customizable tweaks you never adjust in your camera, but do not complain that there are adjustments which you do not know exist and which you can not tweak because you do not understand what they do. Video is just one more little cheap extra.
If Canon had to develop a second camera body just for stills, it would cost them more money to design, manufacture, distribute and market a separate camera for what is increasingly becoming a niche market (just as video was niche in the days of the 5D MkI). Because of this, there's no guarantee that a video-less MkIII would be appreciably cheaper than the current MkIII.
Actually you don't pay extra money, because any camera offering "LifeView" has all what is needed to record video. The rest is basically more a software- than a hardeware problem. So, if you already have everyting needed for video recording, it would be a great waste of options, not to implant video.
First of all I know that the 5D3 is a great improvement on the 5D2. Infact I own the 5D2 and I've already ordered the 5D3. At least I'm glad to LEARN that I'm not paying that much extra for something I do not need. I always thought that a substantial part of my investment went into its video capabilities.
@ Petka who wrote:
"you are not really paying for it any more than you are for the hundreds of customizable tweaks you never adjust in your camera, but do not complain that there are adjustments which you do not know exist and which you can not tweak because you do not understand what they do"
Who are you to say what I know and don't know, and what I adjust and don't adjust? Just because I do only stills it doesn't mean I point and shoot does it? It doesn't make me less of a photographer than you.
At least everyone agrees that the 5D3 is primarily a Photographers Camera; the video option is " a little cheap extra."
@ Gothmoth
as regards to your Mercedes analogy ....
If you consider the 5D3 to be a high end camera, I wouldn't compare it to any normal Mercedes... I would compare it to a Formula 1 Car ... And those only carry ONE seat!.
Moreover I would say that a spare seat in a car means More Room in the car, and that would translate to additional Memory; The video function would more be like a high end car stereo: an important accessory but not THE most important one.
@Gozitan: sorry to have offended you. What I meant is that these cameras are chock full of custom adjustment possibilities with literally hundreds of choices and billions of permutations. I have shot professionally with Canon DSLR from EOS-1D first version, and I have never cared to go through all the possible options and tested how they actually affect the picture. With the later models there are even more options. If you actually go through everything, testing and understanding them all, more power to you. My meaning was that it is just as pointless to complain about the (practically free) video capability as it would be to complain about those myriad (practically free) tweaking options, which I think are even less used than the video.
As all the $200 point-and-shoots also have HD video, my quess is that the video capabilities of these cameras cost about $30 extra... It really is just a pipeline form live view to memory card, implemented in software.
@Henry - while I agree that video in DSLRs is inevitable for all the reasons you state (I even find it desirable)....
isn't the Cinema EOS a split in the line?
There are no final specifications for Cinema EOS available yet, but if it has 4K capability and pro quality audio and interface to XLR connectors etc, it needs a lot more processing power and extra parts. That translates to extra costs, even if the camera is otherwise a normal D1X. For a stills shooter, even occasionally needing video, that would be an overkill. We normal people have no use for 4K video yet.
I used to think posting comments on web sites was a great idea. Unfortunately, too many people think posting comments is their opportunity to bash a competing brand or another person's opinion.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If it's your opinion, that's fine, but don't bash someone for their opinion. If I want to switch to another brand, that's my right and really on one's elses business and vice versa.
I own an EOS 20D that has served me well. I'm now considering upgrading to a new DSLR and am seriously considering going with Nikon. In comparing the 5D MK III to the D800, the D800 offers me more of what I want since I focus on landscapes and resolution when printing on my ipf6300 is an important factor.
Most current DSLRs are a big leap forward from the 20D and I'm ultimately going to go with the one that fulfills my requirements, not make a decision because someone on a forum said choosing one brand/camera over another was the right or wrong choice - that's my opinion.
HERESY! The trolls will never have it!
Sanity and sound judgement prevails! Very well said Sunny!
It's inevitable everybody is switching to nikon!
pacogwapo, I guess I am no one since I am not switching. Sunny look at a used 1 Ds Mk iii if you primarily do landscape work. It's a stunning camera esp if you own good Canon glass.
There it is, the RAW versus JPEG discussion! Amazing to read that so many shoot JPEG, it's like throwing away half your money after you just got paid! (i.e. shooting jpeg's only)
PS: try getting these flower shots in difficult lighting in jepg, it's almost impossible: check out rubens.photography.com (recently made button). Makes your eyes tear these beautiful colors and recoveries of all those highlights.
Maybe they hate it but don't they love a better picture?
I think that's more than throwing away half the monies.
Henry M. Hertz:
What that also means is that these jpeg shooters, who'd worked with film, were never very interested in developing and printing in a darkroom. You know playing with the enlarger for hours. (The same basically applies to film scanning--they clearly had no interest in the subtleties--and there are a lot-- of that process either.)
Henry M. Hertz:
Different tools, but pretty much the same thing. My father born in the early 1920s was perfectly happy working with computers, he didn't live into the massive digital photo era, but I see no reason why he'd have any difficulty with a raw extraction.
Interesting that there is so much fuss about PC editing being a pain. The darkroom was much harder to work in and a greater danger to our lungs. Truth is, a good photographer shouldn't have to do a lot of editing to create a great image if he(she) knows how to use the camera properly and understands exposure control. However, the other side of the truth is that some of the greatest landscape photographers spent more time in the darkroom than than they did on shooting the images which made them famous. So the question remains do we edit in the darkroom or Photoshop. Ansel Adams could have saved a lot of time if he could have used PS, and I bet he would have loved it.
MSTR Photography:
You've confused editing with color work. Great color is not simply there in the shot particularly if it's a jpeg.
The world has been changed.
Now, we cannot rely too much on the camera, the power of a camera is very limited, which must be combined with the latest technology in computing to create great results.
Henry M. Hertz:
No, it just sounds like you're father doesn't have a particular interest in what computer programs can do, which is unlike my father.
Pretty sure my father would not chose to learn Japanese.
If you want to get very good results you have to shoot in raw format. If you edit and change a jpeg-foto, you lost some information of the file. You lose also quality of pixels.
But if you edit and change the raw-file, it is as you are shooting a second time that picture.
The raw-file "is" the sensor itself.
It is true that some photographers hate the computer. But the raw-format is the "camera obscura" of digital photography.
This is digital photography. Light and pixels.
Who does not understand that, did not understand what it means digital photography.
im curious adler1970 and the other guys..... did you tell everyone back in the film days they had to have their own darkroom?
i bet not!
if you have shoot at that time at all.... :)
I have spent a lot of time in the darkroom and in front of PS. And I don't regret that investment, since it has allowed me a better perspective on the things I need to do in the field so that I can spend less time in the darkroom (digital or otherwise).
You can be a working professional and not use photoshop today, just as you could be a working professional and not know how to work an enlarger back in the day. The brutal truth is: you don't need to be good or technically knowledgeable to be a professional. Just good enough and a good salesperson.
You can make good work in jpeg, just like a painter can make good work in pencil. What we don't know or the tools we don't have can and does hinder us all. But it doesn't stop us. (for better or worse!)
The truths about the benefits of one tool or another remain true, but they aren't deterministic.
Personally I feel all this talk of dark rooms and film is irrelevant. Today, with digital photography, You will never get the best out of your camera without doing some post processing. PP work is the second half of creating the photograph. That is just the way it is now.
Sure maybe not if you are just taking snaps of your cat. However if you are seriously trying to make a photograph, letting your camera choose the saturation,contrast, sharpening, wb, ect gives up as much control over the final photograph, perhaps even more, as shooting on auto mode.
Plus with a jepg not only are you throwing away half of the image data your camera can capture but, every change you make, every time you re-save the file, you are degrading it. It was never meant to be an archival image format.
No, back in the film days people who were serious about photography didn't necessarily have a darkroom--though many did--but many times they most certainly paid for a lot of work by someone else in the darkroom.
Then there's the whole notion of a shared community darkroom at school or photoclub, both still exist, in 2012.
Look 10 years ago when I first got my Canon G2, I didn't realize it could shoot in raw, and I was struggling to learn the gear and just plain Photoshop Elements. So I shot in jpeg for a few months, and got some wonderful pictures, however I was lucky that I didn't need to tweak color or white balance. Shooting in raw saves you from a wasted shot because adjusting the white balance or exposure of a jpeg can easily ruin the picture.
LOL Henry,
If you're going to take the time to convert your files to some other format you might as well just shoot in raw.
The fact that some people may incorrectly do the post processing doesn't mean you don't need post processing to get the most out of your camera.
I really don't understand why some photographers are so adverse to pp. Never before has the photographer had such a huge creative latitude when makeing photograph. It's like they have forgotten that some amount of post work has always been part of serious photography.
One thing I didn't realize until I got the III is that the built-in HDR feature is limited to jpg. And even with jpgs, it takes quite awhile to process the finished image. But at least, if you want to do it the right way you can now bracket 7 RAW exposures.
Awesome colors ... the color rendition of this camera is so alive without being overly saturated. Good camera Canon, or maybe Technicolor.
finally ISO 16,000 - 25,600 look very usable with plenty of details
i hope all mfr's continue to push for improvements because 51200 - 102400 (and 204800) need to improve a lot more before it is usable for those of us shooting in natural ambient lit EV -5 to -6 or darker (to allow for shorter shutter speeds and narrower apertures (not 'wide open')) combined with zero flash fill.
right now, the only closest alternative with acceptable resolution is the 1Dx, which is a dual-grip body only, that is priced beyond my reach.
Looking on the last pictures and comparing the one with NR and without NR, result give different white balance, which one with NR ON, give warmer color. Is that common?
Wow...the JPG loss of fine detail is frighteningly stark compared to the RAW conversions (see the forest/tree scenes). This is a strictly RAW only camera...at least coupled with the 24-105.
Raw is kind of important for colour and noise control too.
RAW is only useful if one struggles with exposures or ISO sensitivity selection by shooting the old TTL method and badly needs pp, nobody has shown RAW really with better details where it counts, and that is when the lighting gets quite dim.
the 5DMkIII allows one to venture into low luminance scenarios where others cannot keep up.
if you shoot in good light, no need for high ISOs even at the tightest acceptable apertures and shortest shutter speeds.
at least its in-camera JPEGs are unrivaled if one avoids the 'beginner-default' settings, and speed-ISO-apertures are optimally chosen (w/ ExpSim LV), they will be publish-worthy straight out of the camera in the field.
i think vast majority of those shooting for clients wanting 'publish-now' deadlines will predominantly be delivering JPEGs right after they shoot rather than wait for offline pp w/ a computer. that's why Canon designed even custom RAW-to-JPEG conversion in-camera, so 'final JPEG interpretations' can be set for publishing.
I know only one photographer who shoots jpg... and He uses an Olympus system, they have great jpg engine and not too much reserve in RAW file... unlike for example Canon, these jpg images are so badly sharpened and noise-filtered like they are taken with a powershoot camera...
sdyue, are u in the publishing industry and fully understand the process flow of the industry?
You missed noise and color--and the color thing applies to well exposed pictures shot a lowish ISOs.
@ sdyue Of course RAW has better detail and it has better DR. And if you shoot mixed or difficult artificial lighting, RAW allows you to adjust WB after the fact, instead of being at the mercy of the cameras AWB or having to shoot a grey card to create a Custom WB. I couldn't imagine any photographer who cares about their images, or is on a paying job shooting JPEG.
Amen about publishing! If you are anywhere near publishing, you NEED raw! Especially if you're going to both web and press. sRGB and CMYK both clip hugely in different places. If you go straight to one, you're hosed for color gamut on the other. Adobe 1998 helps, but in the end, that clips the gamut too, just less. Raw allows you to go to any color space and have the most accurate conversions.
I know this--I worked shooting/color correcting textiles for a while. It's either raw, or spend ten times as long masking curves layers to make the image look like the real thing. Or just shoot raw and be done with all of it in an instant.
What you don't know, doesn't make you right.
Of course, wedding photogs don't generally care about any of this if they nail exposure. But there is more to photography than wedding photogs (there just happen to be a lot of them!)
@sdyue "RAW is only useful if one struggles with exposures or ISO sensitivity selection by shooting the old TTL method and badly needs pp"
A remarkably uninformed statement. I´d recommend you pick up some literature on the subject or talk to a real photographer.
from sample photos, My opinion at this point is :
high ISO performance is on the canon's side, but details is on D800 by far.
I am a long time Canon user, but I can say this time NIKON really did a good job, for the first time I am tempted to jump ship .
I can't say which one better for me, until I try both camera myself then I will make my decision . Looking forward for In Depth Review of both camera as well.
I am sure I am not the only one tempted to jump ship for many reasons.
unless Canon come up with something similar with D800 or even better .:)
Canon .... you can !
My god another jumper.....
Do you REALLY REALLY think anyone is interested to know about your jumpig ship !!!
Do you ???
Look at your beautiful images !!!!
Made by Canon and don't expect it will be better because the number of DXO benchmarks tells you so
Dear Josan:
1.please give me all the reasons why you would want to jump.
2. where do you get the proof that your reasons are valid?
3. how much money will you spend to jump?
4. is it worth spending so much for maybe a few stronger point one camera has over the other?
3. look at your list, then take a look in the mirror and say: "I was dazzeled by only the number of pixels in the D800, I'm a (naive) victim of their smart marketing. But thanks to Rubenski I've come to my senses. Thank you Rubenski!
My pleasure Josan, you're more than welcome!
BTW: The only thing Nikon is better at is marketing, nothing else.
Yes, josan, Nikon is doing a better job. Today, Nikon is doing a better job than Canon. Of course the 5D Mark3 is a good Camera. But this 5D mark-3 is only the same old 5Dmark2, with a new autofocus.
That's all. Pure marketing. Practically, nothing has changed.
No sane man pays 3400 euros for a normal autofocus.
Yes, Today, Nikon is doing a better job: between the Nikon d700 and Nikon D800 there is a real change.
But between the Canon 5D mark2 and the Canon 5D mark3 there is NOT a real change!
This 5D mark3 is for COLLECTORS, is a Souvenir for bored people. Not for photographers who were waiting for a real upgrade.
Wow , first I would say thank you to all of you that have replied on my comment .
Honestly , I am not a pro photographer , I am an Airline Pilot that love photography, I started taking photo since 1978 , I often go to many places, taking photos as hobby , that is why I am relying on good equipments, good weather seal , strong build and most important better details for my Area photography. I often do a lot of cropping on my photos to make it look better, example for bird's feather details, trees etc, I have a very high speed computer so big file size is not really a problem . all these points are in the D800 side , that is why I am tempted to jump ship .
I never thought anyone will take any notice of me jumping ship as I am not a Pro Photographer. I hope Canon will come up with something similar or even better, I have many L lenses and happy with it . but Nikon also have many great lenses .
can someone convince me its better to stay with Canon ?, I would love to !
If josan wants to switch to Nikon, why do people get so upset? Do they own stock in Canon? If there is superior camera available at these prices it would be foolish not to jump on it.
Unfortunately many people on this site have a good portion of their self esteem wrapped up in their camera brand being the best. That is why so many take this silly Canon vs Nikon debate way to seriously.
Convince you? How about convincing yourself? If you're a pilot it makes your comment even more strange Make the list as I mentioned above and think with your head and if you've to crop so much you use the wrong lenses. You can't get good pictures with a D800 shooting a bird you can only see if cropped tightly, forget it.
Hi josan, photography should be the aim, and having fun while making photographs... So do as it pleases you, consider the camera and the lenses just as tools and every tool has iets pros and cons. When you go to an exhibition, photographic of course, you do not go to D5 or D800's exhibition, but to a photographers, and he/she can have made them with any camera, brand, kind... Most important for choosing a camera: how do you feel about it... Good luck with whatever choice you make.
The Nikon sounds perfect for your needs, and jumping ship (airplane?!) isn't such a big deal when you've got the likes of Ebay around to get rid of the old.
However, if you do a lot of cropping, maybe a new telephoto lens is in fact what you should be investing in..
Thanks all for your nice and supporting comments , appreciated very much .
Photography equipments is a never ending Journey , there always be new technology, better specs and equipments.
Nikon and Canon are both making great cameras , we can't go wrong, I will pick one that suit my style and what I need .
At this time Maybe Nikon D800 is suit me better, but I got too many L glasses sitting in the cupboard, its gonna cost a lot of money to get all new Nikon Lenses. Hard decision indeed.!
in the mean time I will go out, enjoy life, taking pictures with My 1DsMk3 and 7D while I still have them with me.
Cheers ....
do not understand how people spend so much money for this Updats
You don't have to understand
Some guys drive a BMW while others drive a cheap Suzuki.
That simple.
You either buy the 5D Mark III or you don't.
folks who change cameras a lot (not myself) do so often via selling their older model which makes getting the 'next iteration update' much cheaper than buying 'just new' with no older model sold.
so, in effect, those who update most frequently are typical trade-up types, not buying 'extra' cameras on top of what they already have. those who do buy additional cameras without any sale of older models obviously are the minority, and have a lot more money.
Some people like to play cameras as toys, so they need new cameras from time to time to stimulate their desire.
Some people use cameras for photographic purpose, then it is a tool and no need to change from time to time.
Others show only reductions, which really defeat the point of having more Mp.
I prefer to scrutinize fine detail retention vs noise/NR to see how much creative croppability is possible:
5DMkIII vs D800 (Imaging-Resources: modified 'upscaled')
Example is given @ ISO 6400
(at much higher ISOs, it only gets worse for both cameras):
For Tell the truth: 'hope it can focus?' My God, you're pathetic! Top rated cameras in the USA are MKII and 7D. Million more users, much closer to the truth, check B&H reviews. Now I understand the meaning of the word fanboy even better.
- Very – I couldn't get by without one.9.5%
- Somewhat – It's nice to have but not a deal-breaker.31.0%
- Neither important or unimportant – I can take it or leave it.31.6%
- Not important at all – in fact I dislike touchscreens on cameras.27.8%
Follow us


text:
Navy Yard shooting: Man helps visually-impaired co-worker escape
Next video starts in : 7 Play
Navy Yard shooting: Man helps visually-impaired co-worker escape
Cruz on California: 'We Are All In'
2:27Now watching Up next
Navy Yard shooting: Man helps visually-impaired co-worker escape
When a gunman opened fire at the Washington Navy Yard, workers were thrown into a state of panic. Jeff Pegues reports on an act of kindness that may have saved his co-worker's life.
1:52Now watching Up next
Cruz on California: 'We Are All In'
Speaking at the California Republican Party convention Saturday, Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz said his campaign is 'all in' on its bet that California voters will propel him to the nomination. (April 30)
1:03Now watching Up next
AP Top Stories Saturday April 30p
Here are the top stories for Saturday, April 30th: Protesters storm Iraq's parliament building; Seven are killed in a building collapse in Kenya; Deadly flooding hits east Texas; Kenyan authorities burn a massive cache of ivory.
1:04Now watching Up next
Raw: Deadly Flooding in East Texas
Authorities say a 64-year-old woman and four grandchildren have been killed after a creek flooded its banks in Palestine, Texas. (April 30)
0:44Now watching Up next
Raw: Deadly Car Bombing in Baghdad
The Islamic State group has claimed responsibility for a car-bombing in southeastern Baghdad that killed more than 20 people and wounded more than 40 others. (April 30)
0:49Now watching Up next
Raw: Iraqi Protesters Storm Parliament
Iraqi forces are tightening security in Baghdad after anti-government protesters breached the Green Zone and stormed parliament. (April 30)
Nile Rogers Thinks Bono Is "incredible"
Musician Nile Rogers could barely contain his excitement on the red carpet for his "We are Family" foundation event honoring Bono, saying he thought the U2 frontman is "amazing" and "incredible." (April 30)
2:09Now watching Up next
Wainwright Tackles Shakespeare, Again
Singer Rufus Wainwright talks about the thrill of releasing a new album and how he thinks his latest record, 'Take All My Loves: 9 Shakespeare Sonnets,' should be enjoyed. (April 30)
2:11Now watching Up next
Preparing to Battle Allergy Season
ABC News' Dr. Jennifer Ashton reports the latest news on ways to relieve allergies.
6:27Now watching Up next
Ron Miscavige Says Scientology Tore His Family Apart: Part 2
After leaving and criticizing the Church, Ron and other former Scientologists say their family members won't speak to them.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Caught up in semantics
Reading some of the responses to the affordable housing issue has been frustrating in that the comments are just arguing semantics. Housing is housing, be it an actual house or rental unit. The point is Brandon needs more places in the affordable range instead of the McMansions that the local developer (yes singular) seems to focus on. So let's not get hung up on whether it is a house or rental unit — the word to focus on is affordable! And let's give "all" developers a chance to build.
Please subscribe to view full article.
Already subscribed? Login to view full article.
Not yet a subscriber? Click here to sign up


text:
OWINGS MILLS, Md. (AP) -- Baltimore Ravens rookie cornerback Asa Jackson has been suspended for four games for violating the NFL's policy on performance enhancing substances.
Jackson has played the past three weeks on special teams after being inactive for Baltimore's first 10 games. He has one tackle.
Jackson, a fifth-round pick out of Cal Poly, will be suspended without pay. If the Ravens make the playoffs, he will be eligible to return to the active roster the day after the team's first playoff game.
His suspension opens a roster spot. The vacancy could be filled by linebacker Ray Lewis, who is eligible to return this week from injured reserve -- designated to return. Lewis has been sidelined since Oct. 14 with a torn right triceps.
KKTV firmly believes in freedom of speech for all and we are happy to provide this forum for the community to share opinions and facts. We ask that commenters keep it clean, keep it truthful, stay on topic and be responsible. Comments left here do not necessarily represent the viewpoint of KKTV 11 News.
If you believe that any of the comments on our site are inappropriate or offensive, please tell us by clicking "Report Abuse" and answering the questions that follow. We will review any reported comments promptly.powered by Disqus
Click Here to access the online Public Inspection File
Viewers with disabilities can get assistance accessing this station's FCC Public Inspection File by contacting the station with the information listed below. Questions or concerns relating to the accessibility of the FCC's online public file system should be directed to the FCC at 888-225-5322, 888-835-5322 (TTY), or firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
Pageant Dresses
You Are Always A Winner In Beautiful Pageant Dresses
No matter the age of the entrant, pageant dresses are one of kind show stoppers! From the smallest princess entered in her first pageant, to the seeker of the most exclusive adult pageant title, pageant dresses are the gowns that may be all it takes to bring home the crown. Every design works to enhance your best feature, provide the accents that set your pageant dresses apart from the competition, and make any turn on the runway, picture perfect.
Tiny Pageant Princesses Pageant Dresses
In little formals, your tiny princess will reign over the stage in pageant dresses designed to make her shine in the eyes of any judge. Pretty details like beaded lace and sequined bodices catch the lights as she twirls in front of the audience in her colorful pageant dresses designed for the miniature queens of the runway. Twinkling and dazzling like the bright shining star you know she is, the full skirts layered with pickups bright with sequins, bows and flowing ribbons will cast her in the best light every time.
Junior Miss Pageant Dresses
Top fashion designers love the ability to create fashionable pageant dresses fit for the youth and beauty of teenage girls and young women. With cutting edge design details, fashionable style cuts, and brilliant embellishments, their designs grace the stages and runways of Americas top competitions. Designers like Alyce, Jovani, and many others. Among them are the Parisian Pageant Dresses by the design House of Tony Bowls.
Ladies Pageant Dresses
For the more mature soon to be pageant queen, finding pageant dresses that give you the perfect movement, and glamorous silhouette needed to take home the crown is also an easy task, when your pageant dresses are chosen from the Couture Collections of top designers. every design element has been chosen to make these beautiful pageant dresses with winning potential in mind.
Correct Sizing of Pageant Dresses Is Important
As with all other formal gowns, pageant dresses should always be tried on wearing the shoes that are going to be worn with the dress. While alterations are always possible, choosing pageant dresses that are the correct length for you is very important; you do not want to stumble across the stage, even a small misstep could prove hazardous to your score.
Most of the dresses in this collection are designer dresses! The qualities of designs are unquestionable! Make yourself standout with elegant designer pageant dresses. You have a wide range of splurging colors, designs and styles to choose from. Each dress is unique and exquisitely designed for every pageant enthusiast out there. Our elegant pageant dresses also make a good canvass to have your own fashion accent complemented. Grace the runway with your own style. Modify your dress with head turning accessories! This elegant pageant dresses collection will continue to be updated every other time to ensure the trendy quality of each dress. Choose from different cuts and designs like embellishments, sequins, laces, glittery fabrics and a lot more. There are also elegant pageant dresses with styles like strapless, high low and more elegant styles to choose from.
These dresses can also be worn on other occasions aside from pageants. Pull it out from your closet and wear it on formal gatherings, business events and even red carpet moments! Feel free to look astonishing with elegant pageant dresses! We hope the best for your pageant events and may you be able to take home the crown by wearing any of the dresses in this collection.


text:
NHL Detroit Red Wings Starter Mat - 19" x 30"
Item #: 373072 | Model #: 10270 |(1) |
- $ 13 66 13.66
Non-members pay 10% surchargeJoin now!
- Shipping
- Enter ZIP Code for shipping options
- Estimated arrival
Delivery estimates, taxes, and fees are based on ZIP Code. Club Pickup orders are based on your club's current price and item availability on the day of payment.
About this item
The ultimate fan's accessory!
Decorate your home or office with a licensed area rugs and convey the pride you feel for your favorite team. 100% nylon carpet and non-skid recycled vinyl backing. Officially licensed and chromojet printed in true team colors.
Assembled Country
Component Country


text: In soothing colors and soft organic cotton, this animal-themed bedding makes a sweet statement in a nursery. The quilt's appliquéd animals have a lightly sketched look for an artful, elegant feel. Decorative embroidery, including satin stitches and running stitches, add texture. The matching bumper and sheet set have hand-drawn appeal in a soft color palette.


text:
Kenwood kMix 2-Slice Toaster, Stainless Steel
Product information
Make a statement in your kitchen with the Kenwood kMix 2-slice toaster in a stand out stainless steel finish. An attractive addition to any worktop.
Dispel any notions of toasting abilities cast aside in favour of appearance; the great features and usability of the Kenwood kMix combine to give you perfect toast every time.
A useful feature - especially on a busy morning - is the frozen bread function, which ensures there is no need to defrost bread in the microwave before toasting. Variable browning control allows you to get just the right amount of crispiness.
The rubber controls are soft to the touch, and a bun rack gives you the freedom to toast larger items, such as teacakes and bagels. Finally, the toast rack is ideal for keeping your toast warm and ready to eat.
- Variable browning control
- Toast rack
- Black finish
- Frozen bread function
- Bun rack
- Brand
- Dimensions
- H16.5 x W22 x D15cm
- Eligible for International Delivery
- Model name / number
- Power
- Settings
- Variable
Click & collect
- Click & collect from John Lewis and Waitrose shops Thursday from 2pm
- Collect + from a local shop from Thursday, postcode exclusions apply
- £3.50
UK delivery
- Standard delivery within 5 working days
- £3.50
- Named or Saturday UK delivery
- £6.95
- Named day UK delivery pre-10.30am
- £9.95
International delivery not available
We want you to be happy with your purchase. If you're not, depending on the type of product, you can make free returns in the UK via John Lewis shops, Royal Mail, Collect+, or MyHermes. If you need to arrange collection of large or heavy items, call us on 03456 049 049. For international returns queries, call us on +44 1698 545 454. Find out more about returns.
You'll find returns information on your delivery note. Unless faulty, we'd like you to make your return within 90 days of purchase. Exceptions apply to certain products - find out more about our refund policy.


text:
heXen:Edge of Chaos will be a new and free game, based on the original Hexen game which was developed by id Software and Raven Software. Edge of Chaos is being developed by a team of fans who have always loved the original Hexen since it came out. In fact, most of us spent countless hours with the entire series. When id Software released Doom3, we immediately saw immense potential in the engine itself; the 'Hell' maps gave us the inspiration to make a hack-and-slash game based, primarily, on the original Hexen.
sweet Jesus that is awesome. The light on the floor coming outta the windows.. the textures, shadows.. 10/10
Caffeine Freak Level Design Work


text: Gently Loved. The vachetta leather has a dark patina along with several wear marks and scratches. The piping is worn and the plastic wheels, feet, and extendable handle are noticeably scuffed. The lining is moderately stained. The lozenge is monogrammed with the initials PRW. SPECIAL FEATURES: Noiseless wheels and self-locking handle, adjustable to two positions.


text:
Knee Pads & Mats
1 Item(s)
Soft Knees Knee Pads: Black No Strap Cushioning Work Knee Pads 1010
$16.00 1 Review 8
The number of Rewards Points earned by Rewards Program members when purchasing this product.
Rewards Points can be used to redeem gift codes that are used as currency on a future order.
1 Item(s)
I called your customer service about an order for work boots for my son, as a Christmas gift. I informed them it was a gift. She assured me that she would get my order to me before Christmas. Once she got the package in-route, she emailed me, to inform me of such. And, I did recieve the package before Christmas. It's a pleasure to do business with companies who have caring employees. I look forward to continued business with WPS in the future. Thank you."
Thomas L. from Pell City, AL


text:
This concert performance documents the first Celtic Woman concert filmed in the United States. The infectious energy of their loyal American fans are captured in Believe, a free-flowing cinematic experience that makes viewers feel as if they are front and center, in the middle of the magic.
Vocalists Chloë Agnew, Lisa Kelly, Lisa Lambe and Celtic violinist Máiréad Nesbitt, perform classic Irish songs ("The Water Is Wide," "Green Grow the Rushes," "A Woman's Heart," "The Parting Glass"), timeless pop anthems ("Bridge Over Troubled Water," "Tears in Heaven"), and inspirational songs ("You'll Never Walk Alone," "Smile" and "Ave Maria") with their signature Celtic Woman twist, under the musical direction of Emmy-nominated music producer David Downes.
Since Celtic Woman's March 2005 American debut on public television, the unique all-female ensemble has emerged as a spectacular commercial success and a genuine cultural phenomenon. Their evocative, uplifting music has crossed over national and cultural borders to touch the hearts of a devoted fan base that spans the globe.
Visit the Celtic Woman website


text:
Crooked River
Executive Summary
The Crooked River is a sixth order river located east of Kansas City, Missouri. The Crooked River originates north of Lawson, Missouri and flows southeastward for about 70 miles where it empties into the Missouri River south of Hardin, Missouri. The watershed drains 335 square miles. The Crooked River basin lies near the transition area between the glaciated plains and the Osage plains. The average annual discharge for the Crooked River measured at Richmond, Missouri (48% of the basin) is 99 cubic feet per second. There are 59 third order and larger streams within the basin. Major tributaries of the Crooked River are East Fork Crooked River and West Fork Crooked River. Drainages in the lower two-thirds of the basin are turbid and silt laden. Drainages in the upper third of the basin are rocky and clear.
The basin is rural with Richmond (population 5,738; 1990 U.S. Census) being the largest city in the watershed. Population in the basin is growing as Kansas City suburbs expand eastward. Land use in the basin is dominated by agriculture. Only one percent (2,182 acres) of the watershed is in public ownership.
Water quality is affected by soil erosion, sediment deposition, turbidity, nutrients, and periodic low dissolved oxygen concentrations. The majority of livestock have access to streams in the basin potentially increasing bank erosion and nutrient levels. Coal was mined from the 1870's to the 1950's. Most of the basin is underlain by the Lexington coal field and may be mined again in the future. These non-point sources of pollution are the major threat to the diversity and abundance of aquatic fauna. Less channelization has occurred in the basin, when compared with other basins in Northwest Missouri. Point source pollution concerns come from wastewater treatment facilities located near the communities of Lawson, Richmond and Polo. Increasing numbers of confined animal feeding operations are a new threat to basin streams.
Forty species of fish have been collected in the basin from 1941 to 1998. Topeka shiners, a federally listed endangered species, were collected in 1965, but not in 1995 or 1998 samples and are assumed to have been extirpated from the Crooked River basin. In recent surveys, wide ranging, tolerant species were the most commonly sampled fish, with minnows from the Cyprinidae family the most prevalent. Statewide creel surveys from 1969 indicated that common carp, bullhead and channel catfish are the most frequently harvested fish. Recent angler and creel surveys for the Crooked River basin are lacking.
Private ownership accounts for 99% of basin lands, making private landowners the critical link in improving stream habitat and water quality. The main objective is to increase public awareness and responsibility in improving the stream resources within the basin. This would allow the goals in this plan to be met. The main goals are: Improve water quality and quantity, improve riparian and aquatic habitats, maintain diverse and abundant populations of native aquatic organisms, meet angler demand for quality fishing, increase public appreciation for stream resources and increase recreational use.
I wish to thank several individuals who provided assistance on this document. Thanks to Harold Kerns for his guidance and knowledge of area resources and the basin planning process. Vince Travnichek provided valuable assistance in sampling, proof reading, and advice during the basin planning process. Debbie Banks helped with sampling and worked diligently on stream gradients, channelization, and other map related information in the basin. Dave Seibel was a great help in sampling and filming the basin. Scott Ryan helped in locating sampling sites, familiarization with basin streams, and sampling in the basin. The personnel of the Ray County Natural Resources Conservation Service were most helpful and courteous in providing information pertaining to the Crooked River basin. Marilyn Taylor of the St. Joseph Museum was helpful in documenting historical information. Mike George provided useful background information on native inhabitants that were in the area before and during settlement. Thanks also to Missouri Department of Conservation personnel and other contributors too numerous to mention.
Prepared by
Rick Horton, Fisheries Biologist
Harold Kerns, Northwest Fisheries Regional Supervisor
For additional information contact:
Northwest Regional Fisheries staff, 701 NE College Drive, St. Joseph, Missouri 64507