5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I am so frustrated with Canon. I waited and waited for the 5d Mk III and I just can't pull the trigger to buy it. I wanted a landscape camera and the D800 surpasses the 5d in that regard. I could live with the Canon if it were priced the same as the Nikon, but it's not, and that really irks me.

For once, the fact that Nikon is way ahead in sensors is not a ploy by Canon marketing, but rather Nikon using Sony's advanced sensors. Even if the 5d3 would have a reasonable price that wouldn't change. If you want (and/or *need* - do you?) high dr and mp for landscape now, switch to Nikon, no one will say it isn't a sound decision. Or wait until Canon catches up, maybe in early 2013 with a high mp body - but that is likely to be way more expensive than the d800.

Although the D4 uses none of those patents and also has a lot better dynamic range (if not to Exmor levels at low ISO, although actually better than Exmor at very high ISO). Someone was saying something about Canon wanted to get another round of profit out of their current old fab, but who knows if that is really true or what they could have done otherwise anyway, maybe Nikon has some sneaky magic sauce in their production.

 

[nonac]

"Or wait until Canon catches up, maybe in early 2013 with a high mp body - but that is likely to be way more expensive than the d800.
[/quote]

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive? They are going to have to start matching price points or they will find themselves in real trouble. I think their prices have already started to go out of control and above the competition in many areas. I for one am not paying extra money for the name "Canon," especially if another company can give me something at or better for less.

 

[Marsu42]

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive?

Well, Canon has this 5d3 thing at $3500 with a polished 5d2 sensor and 22mp. And they have a big money 18mp pro 1dx they will release eventually for serious sports photography and so on.

If you were Canon, what would you do once you got around developing an ok 30mp+ sensor - put it into a $5000 body, sell it to people who are willing to pay this for at least a year and then trickle it down - or put it into a $2500 body right away cannibalizing the whole premium product line? Yeah, right.

 

[nonac]

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive?

Well, Canon has this 5d3 thing at $3500 with a polished 5d2 sensor and 22mp. And they have a big money 18mp pro 1dx they will release eventually for serious sports photography and so on.

If you were Canon, what would you do once you got around developing an ok 30mp+ sensor - put it into a $5000 body, sell it to people who are willing to pay this for at least a year and then trickle it down - or put it into a $2500 body right away cannibalizing the whole premium product line? Yeah, right.

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

 

[Marsu42]

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

Yes and no - Nikon will still sell lots of d800, but they'll do that anyway. But Canon will grab and hold photogs who want a second high mp body next to their 1dx, 5d3/5d2, or want a first body which has some "pro" features the d800 lacks like higher fps.

 

[D_Rochat]

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

I know where I live that as soon as the stores get a shipment of 5D Mark III's in, they fly off the shelf. They seem to be doing fine selling it at the current price. I would assume that a big body with high mp would sell just fine at $5000.

 

[wickidwombat]

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

I know where I live that as soon as the stores get a shipment of 5D Mark III's in, they fly off the shelf. They seem to be doing fine selling it at the current price.

its only the vocal minority making lots of noise about the 5Dmk3 price
IMO its a high calibre PRO body and is priced accordingly

 

[TTMartin]

The 5D MkIII is demonstrated as being clearly better than the D800 in the role depicted in this video:
Canon 5D Mark III vs. Nikon D800 Part 2 with Mike Drew
http://youtu.be/4W9EeDCaVFM

 

[wickidwombat]

that sigma lens looks so kick arse

 

[Bruce Photography]

As far as that Video goes, I believe that guy was a JPG only shooter. He never did any postprocessing and they judged mostly from the back of the 3.2 inch screen. Fine for him. I make large print landscapes. I have both cameras and I'm not waiting for Canon to catch up. I am waiting on my D800E order so I can complete my testing with I now do with both cameras (Canon 5D3 and Nikon D800). I shot with the Canon today using my 500 F4 at the ocean and the shots look ok but hard to crop now that I'm spoiled by my D800. When Canon decides to make a high MP camera to compete with Nikon, I'm sure I'll buy another Canon to hook onto all my Canon glass but until then I'm waiting on Nikon for lenses and the D800E. Meanwhile I'm shooting first with Nikon and then with Canon for lenses that I don't have in my Nikon bag. Gee I even have a 14-24 right now!

 

[takoman46]

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive?

Well, Canon has this 5d3 thing at $3500 with a polished 5d2 sensor and 22mp. And they have a big money 18mp pro 1dx they will release eventually for serious sports photography and so on.

If you were Canon, what would you do once you got around developing an ok 30mp+ sensor - put it into a $5000 body, sell it to people who are willing to pay this for at least a year and then trickle it down - or put it into a $2500 body right away cannibalizing the whole premium product line? Yeah, right.

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

Although many enthusiasts might buy a big megapixel D800 for $2000 less than the rumored 1D formed big megapixel Canon; I don't think Canon would then care about the market split. I have a couple friends who shoot medium format and neither of them would trade their hasselblads for a D800. To them, the D800 is a gimmick and not up to par with their demands. Have you considered that a $5000+ big megapixel Canon DSLR might be aimed at medium format professionals and not enthusiasts that want to make like they have a medium format camera? If the big megapixel Canon body merges the advantages the top of the line DSLRs and meets the requirements of medium format users, wouldn't medium format professionals then have the option of using a very versatile high resolution system? A D800 can't deliver that.

 

[RLPhoto]

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive?

Well, Canon has this 5d3 thing at $3500 with a polished 5d2 sensor and 22mp. And they have a big money 18mp pro 1dx they will release eventually for serious sports photography and so on.

If you were Canon, what would you do once you got around developing an ok 30mp+ sensor - put it into a $5000 body, sell it to people who are willing to pay this for at least a year and then trickle it down - or put it into a $2500 body right away cannibalizing the whole premium product line? Yeah, right.

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

Although many enthusiasts might buy a big megapixel D800 for $2000 less than the rumored 1D formed big megapixel Canon; I don't think Canon would then care about the market split. I have a couple friends who shoot medium format and neither of them would trade their hasselblads for a D800. To them, the D800 is a gimmick and not up to par with their demands. Have you considered that a $5000+ big megapixel Canon DSLR might be aimed at medium format professionals and not enthusiasts that want to make like they have a medium format camera? If the big megapixel Canon body merges the advantages the top of the line DSLRs and meets the requirements of medium format users, wouldn't medium format professionals then have the option of using a very versatile high resolution system? A D800 can't deliver that.

Whats truly disappointing is that an old 4x5 view camera can out-resolve about any SLR camera. Its alot cheaper than a d800 too.

Sensor size is king, no serious medium format shooter will replace their 60Mp hasselblads for a D800. If anything, a better reason to invest more in the system to show the real difference's in medium format. Soon, 200MP medium format will be the norm.

 

[Albi86]

As far as that Video goes, I believe that guy was a JPG only shooter. He never did any postprocessing and they judged mostly from the back of the 3.2 inch screen. Fine for him.

Get used to it, this sort of poorly made propaganda is becoming very popular lately.

 

[briansquibb]

Sensor size is king, no serious medium format shooter will replace their 60Mp hasselblads for a D800. If anything, a better reason to invest more in the system to show the real difference's in medium format. Soon, 200MP medium format will be the norm.

Stunning if they can also keep the noise down and the DR up at the same time.

I would hazard a guess they wont be used as sports cameras

 

[rpt]

Sensor size is king, no serious medium format shooter will replace their 60Mp hasselblads for a D800. If anything, a better reason to invest more in the system to show the real difference's in medium format. Soon, 200MP medium format will be the norm.

Stunning if they can also keep the noise down and the DR up at the same time.

I would hazard a guess they wont be used as sports cameras

At 10 seconds a frame they would make great sports cams - for chess... That's a sport too!

 

[tron]

At 10 seconds a frame they would make great sports cams - for chess... That's a sport too!

;D

 

[TTMartin]

As far as that Video goes, I believe that guy was a JPG only shooter. He never did any postprocessing and they judged mostly from the back of the 3.2 inch screen. Fine for him.

Get used to it, this sort of poorly made propaganda is becoming very popular lately.

That's funny, because if you watch all three videos, in part one it's obvious they are Nikon fans, and you can see how uncomfortable he gets in part 2 when the limitations of the D800 start to show, then when they move to part 3 which addresses video, again the 5D MkIII outshines the D800. But, at this point they seem to have a new found respect of the Canon 5D MkIII. Their final review seems fair and balanced at the end of part 3 (and not a Fox News kind of fair and balanced).


Canon 5D MK III vs Nikon D800 with Nathan Elson - Part 1 of 3
http://youtu.be/omTo7UxbJX8

Canon 5D Mark III vs. Nikon D800 with Mike Drew - Part 2 of 3
http://youtu.be/4W9EeDCaVFM

Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800 with Chad Tweten - Part 3 of 3
http://youtu.be/opyNMck9Jhk

 

[Marsu42]

Get used to it, this sort of poorly made propaganda is becoming very popular lately.

Could I also get into the business of spreading poorly made propaganda if Canon gives me a free 5d3+600rt flash ... even the idea makes me like the 5d3 a lot more! Or the d800, if Nikon takes my offer.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

"Or wait until Canon catches up, maybe in early 2013 with a high mp body - but that is likely to be way more expensive than the d800.

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive? They are going to have to start matching price points or they will find themselves in real trouble. I think their prices have already started to go out of control and above the competition in many areas. I for one am not paying extra money for the name "Canon," especially if another company can give me something at or better for less.
[/quote]

I am so getting sick of the price complaints on the 5d3 vs the d800 and how canon better match the price. Whenever I see that kind of post I check amazons top slr sellers list, both the d800 and the 5d3 have been in the top 10 for some time now, currently the mk3 is at 8th and the d800 at 9th. Tell me this, if the mk3 is selling that well at the current price, why would canon mgmt decide to lower it? I could see them doing that if the cam was a complete flop, but it isn't. The low light capabilities are quite awesome and if your shooting weddings and events, the extra $500 over the d800 would be easily made up for in sales, and new clients. Not knocking the d800 by any means - but, even if I was invested in nikon glass, while the d800 would take stellar shots at a wedding, the file size would be a deal breaker for me. No SRAW or MRAW option is a big deal. Add up the necessary investment in CF cards (at full size you get about 200 images on a 16 gig card, if you shoot weddings that's a big deal. Generally i flip between SRAW and LRAW at weddings, I use SRAW for candids, and reception and LRAW for the bulk of the ceremony and formals (and other key moments that you want the extra data). If you factor on a full day wedding you may shoot 1600-2000 images, so that would take at least 8 16 gig cards, where on the mkiii you could easily get away with using 3 16 gig cards. Lets assume you already have 3 cards, so thats 5 more cards you have to buy - at $50-150 per card, thats $250-750 you have to invest in memory. The only other options are to shoot less cause your worried about memory (your bride will not like that at all, I can see that now, why are you just standing there???? Oh because I am only shooting really important things to save memory...yeah, that will work!!!), or you bring your laptops to the wedding and set up constand memory dump times, or your wasting time going through images and deleting on camera, or your shooting in crop mode, or lastly, you bring another body with you to do the grunt work. Either way, the d800 isn't the optimal camera for wedding work, and there are lots of wedding and event shooters out there and yeah I am guessing that is the base for sales on the mkiii. If you shoot in studio often, or landcape/art, or do commercial work - the d800 is is the best option for you. But with that said, its the studio/commercial folk that can most easily justify the expense, unless your selling your landscape work at $2-4000 a pop (and if you are, you are probably in MF territory anyway!).....

Either way, sick of all the ohhh the price this the price that on this camera. If you can't see the value/return on the investment, then you probably shouldn't be considering any camera above $2000....just my 2 cents

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

And why should Canon's version be so much more expensive?

Well, Canon has this 5d3 thing at $3500 with a polished 5d2 sensor and 22mp. And they have a big money 18mp pro 1dx they will release eventually for serious sports photography and so on.

If you were Canon, what would you do once you got around developing an ok 30mp+ sensor - put it into a $5000 body, sell it to people who are willing to pay this for at least a year and then trickle it down - or put it into a $2500 body right away cannibalizing the whole premium product line? Yeah, right.

If they put it in a $5,000 body they will watch more and more D800's fly off the shelf and more Canon products sitting on the shelf. They are pricing themselves out of the midrange segment.

I agree to a certain extent and am wondering what canon is going to do with the 70d, 7d and supposed entry level FF ---all of those should fit that midrange price point. Also, if they make a 30mp beast, it can easily differentiate from the others no matter the price point - files sizes and overall capabilities will remain the trump card for that...see the above reply - if you shoot weddings the d800 really isn't the best fit - I am guessing that if canon does do a 30mp+ beast, it will also be slanted towards landscapers/commercial/studio users. Large files, big resolution, less fps, less ISO range.

And again, refer to above post, the mk3 is doing quite well in sales actually!