• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Review: Hilarious reasons to ignore the D7800 and get a 5DIII

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Well, if you shoot video under light starved conditions, for sure you'll want a 5DIII. What's amazing to me is that the actual quality of the images are inferior to what a still picture with the same camera would be.

Read this for a good laugh and some insight. :)

Asher
 
Well, if you shoot video under light starved conditions, for sure you'll want a 5DIII. What's amazing to me is that the actual quality of the images are inferior to what a still picture with the same camera would be.

Read this for a good laugh and some insight. :)

Hi Asher,

That's a funny review. It seems to demonstrate what the penalty is of the fast downsampling. I'm not too sure about the compression settings they used, but I assume they did aim for high quality.

Cheers,
Bart
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Asher,

That's a funny review. It seems to demonstrate what the penalty is of the fast downsampling. I'm not too sure about the compression settings they used, but I assume they did aim for high quality.

Cheers,
Bart

Bart,

I think they are serious about their work but try to be amusing. There's a need to look closely at practical aspects of 36 MP and of increased DR in real work. I'd like to know whether the D800 would be far better than the 5DIII in the studio, as there, one could use low ISO and have the dual advantages of more detail and better roll off of shadows and highlights, at least theoretically. I'm still looking for definitive reviews on this and the obvious need to compare with the Pentax MF DSLR which, although $9000 has bigger pixels and potentially therefore more robust files if all the transformations are as good as the Nikon.

Asher
 
Here's another one.
http://nofilmschool.com/2012/04/markii-vs-markiii-vs-d800-candlelight/


They say, although the 5dIII has better performance in low light(video), the files the d800 produce have more flexibility via It's 8 bit 4:2:2 format.

Also that the d800 is significantly brighter at low iso and still brighter at higher iso levels.
"The D800 is a camera that should be left at 640-1000 (which is comparable to 1250 and 2000 on Canon) for the most part and lighting used to compensate.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Here's another one.
http://nofilmschool.com/2012/04/markii-vs-markiii-vs-d800-candlelight/


They say, although the 5dIII has better performance in low light(video), the files the d800 produce have more flexibility via It's 8 bit 4:2:2 format.

Also that the d800 is significantly brighter at low iso and still brighter at higher iso levels.
"The D800 is a camera that should be left at 640-1000 (which is comparable to 1250 and 2000 on Canon) for the most part and lighting used to compensate.

My impression is that for studio work and landscape with detail rich scenes the D800 with the few more pixels and substantial 2 stops of dynamic range is a good choice. couple that with the 14-24 nikon G Zoom lens, there's an unbeatable combination.

For poor light conditions, the Canon focus seems to do especially well but the D800 has an advantage in the dark of being able to use a focus assist beam. The 5DIII gets that with addition of any of the Canon flashes.

If one is shooting video, one can't easily mix the two cameras as the colors are different. The Canon seems to give a redder richer appearance. What surprises me is that both the Nikon and the Canon individual video frames are very poor quality compared to the stills obtained from downsizing a still image to the size of the video frame.

I wonder how the frames compare to video from a video camera like the new BlackMagic camera using Eos lenses for under $3000?

Asher
 
Top