5D Mk. III vs Nikon D800 - resolution, ISO, rolling shutter and more

[Richard D. George]

The (just released) Philip Bloom comparison tests are well worth watching. A good point made in his video (shot with a Canon C300) is that the main problem with the 5D Mark III (softness) can easily be fixed in Premiere Pro, unlike the problems with video from the D4 and D800.

I now have a 5D Mark III on order, which will be used mostly for stills but also for video.

[Maurice Covington]

Richard,

Are the still from the Canon as sharp as the Nikon or do I need to hold on to my Nikon lenses? Also, what do I use to mount the Nikon lenses to the Canon Cameras?

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

Nikon lenses will mount on to any Canon EOS DSLR bodies using a simple adapter (with loss of AF of course).

To be honest, Maurice, I did not see anything in the Luke Neumann' Copelandia clip that couldn't have been filmed using either the Mark III, Mark II or D800...and I doubt if anybody would be able to spot a difference.

Regarding sharpness of "Stills from the Canon or Nikon" ... I have no doubts that you would not be able to tell the difference between either when matched with similar performance optics. After all, combined with correct technique, it is the lenses bayoneted onto the bodies that are the important factor in producing sharpness for stills images.

I have worked with Canon and Nikkor lenses for decades, and the top tier of both brands are equal in quality. I definitely would not 'jump ship' from either brand through any differences in sharpness.

The Nikon D800 is slightly better than the Canon 5D Mark III for stills images when making huge enlargements, but only in extreme cases. In most photography subjects at normal enlargements (calendars, double-page magazine reproduction, coffee-table size books etc), the Mark III and Mark II will produce images that match the D800.

On the video side of the equation, I too agree that the Mark III is a better body for some subjects, especially extreme low light, but the Nikon is slightly better for showing dynamic range and detail in the shadows. Both are slightly better that the older Mark II for video, but only in extreme cases.

[Richard D. George]

All my lenses are Canon, but Nikon lenses are very good. Some still photographers use the Nikon 14-24 zoom on Canon 5D bodies instead of the Canon 16-36 f/2.8L II. The focus ring direction is an issue for me. For solely nature still photography, the D800 or the D800E would be terrific, particularly if you did not own a lot of Canon lenses.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Tony Davies-Patrick

On the video side of the equation, I too agree that the Mark III is a better body for some subjects, especially extreme low light, but the Nikon is slightly better for showing dynamic range and detail in the shadows. Both are slightly better that the older Mark II for video, but only in extreme cases.

The 5D3 e.g. is pretty much moire & aliasing free compared to the 5D2 whereas the D800 is no better. The extra 2+ stops of noise free low light performance is another major advantage of the 5D3.

[Jon Fairhurst]

I've got the VAF-5D2 anti-aliasing filter, and it does the trick. I hear that there will be 7D and D800 versions as well.

That said, I'd prefer the 5D3. Mounting and removing the VAF is a real pain when going between photos and video. And it doesn't work well beyond about 28mm.

The audience will love the video images with the VAF. If you like wide lenses and photos and alias free video, the VAF can be a worthwhile pain.

With the 5D3, you get the results without the hassle.

[Jacques Mersereau]

For me the deal killer is the Canon's lack of clean 1080 output for external monitoring & recording.

[Richard D. George]

Jacques:

Each of us has to " pick our poison". To get the clean HDMI out, your poison will be the moire / alias issues that will be difficult to deal with in post, and the low -light performance of the D800.

The "poison" I pick is related to the 5D Mark III.

Neither approach is good or bad, just different.

Blessings on you.

[Jacques Mersereau]

True that Richard - really neither camera is heads above the other - and neither are what I want.
If the MKIII had clean HDSDI 1080P@24 out on it, I would buy one.
I would never want to trust the small built in LCD of any camera for movie making.
It is just too easy to miss something and come to find the footage is unacceptable later.

I plan on using whatever camera to shoot my own script, so if I went with the D800, I can plan and test to avoid the D800's moire and aliasing issues. I can light for it too. The D800 also does better with shadow detail from what I've seen, and that is a big plus for cine style shooting. But, I'll say it again, from every shoot I do, having the ability to monitor on an external monitor is crucial, not only for me, but for everyone else on the crew too.

I might be wrong, but I think this clean HDMI out issue could be fixed with new firmware.
I urge Canon to do so.

[Markus Nord]

Originally Posted by Jacques Mersereau

True that Richard - really neither camera is heads above the other - and neither are what I want.
If the MKIII had clean HDSDI 1080P@24 out on it, I would buy one.
I would never want to trust the small built in LCD of any camera for movie making.
It is just too easy to miss something and come to find the footage is unacceptable later.

I plan on using whatever camera to shoot my own script, so if I went with the D800, I can plan and test to avoid the D800's moire and aliasing issues. I can light for it too. The D800 also does better with shadow detail from what I've seen, and that is a big plus for cine style shooting. But, I'll say it again, from every shoot I do, having the ability to monitor on an external monitor is crucial, not only for me, but for everyone else on the crew too.

I might be wrong, but I think this clean HDMI out issue could be fixed with new firmware.
I urge Canon to do so.

On Canon you can get a info away from the screen except the red dot during recording, so it is no problem what so ever to monitor you recording on a external screen (and it stay in HD during recording if you didn't know that). But for external recording, you get the red dot, that can be fix in firmware (1Dc got clean out). But maybe Canon don't want to give is that...

[Maurice Covington]

I actually believe that there are significant differences between the D800 and the 5D Mark III after watching Phillip Bloom's comparison between the two. The D800 has some serious fall off in terms of image quality in comparison to the 5D Mark III. Its not even close. The Nikon actually is a much cleaner image quality when shooting out doors. I just think that one's choice of camera will depend on what you're shooting and what type of lighting you have. The Moire from the D800 is not as bad as other cameras but this is subjective. If I had my choice of one overall camera, it would undoubtedly be the Canon but, if money was no object, I would pass on the Canon and purchase the D4 for any low light shots (the low light capabilities of this camera are in matched) and the D800 for everything else. I'm not as professional as most on this site but is bet after testing the cameras, some of you guys would agree. By the way having clean HD out on the D800 is great but the cost of the equipment to recieve this data is a hughe expense. I guess you cant put a price on quality and with that being said, it sos the two Nikons for me.

[Jacques Mersereau]

Originally Posted by Markus Nord

On Canon you can get a info away from the screen except the red dot during recording, so it is no problem what so ever to monitor you recording on a external screen (and it stay in HD during recording if you didn't know that). But for external recording, you get the red dot, that can be fix in firmware (1Dc got clean out). But maybe Canon don't want to give is that...

So the 5KMKIII outputs a full quality 1080P (Psf?) @ 24 digital stream with the only 'on screen junk' being a red dot?
And somewhere there is a (hack?) firmware update that removes it without any other issues?

Can it also record to the flash card AND HDMI output at full res?

Please let me know as this is new and valuable info if true.

Thanks!

[Markus Nord]

Originally Posted by Jacques Mersereau

So the 5KMKIII outputs a full quality 1080P (Psf?) @ 24 digital stream with the only 'on screen junk' being a red dot?
And somewhere there is a (hack?) firmware update that removes it without any other issues?

Can it also record to the flash card AND HDMI output at full res?

Please let me know as this is new and valuable info if true.

Thanks!

Well, I didn't say that it is an update firmware out that fix the red dot on the 5DIII, but the 1Dc will have clean HD out. So Canon can give us that too for 5DIII... And what I know 7D, 1DIV and 5DIII will stay in HD during recording.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

A much better test here

Canon 5D Mark II vs. Mark III vs. Nikon D800 - Candlelight Revisited on Vimeo

I applaud the tester who went back and did some comparison between the two in low light. The biggest gripe was that the Iso setting between the cameras are completely different. At same ISO the Nikon is clearly at least 2/3 stop brighter (I the latest test I would say 1 stop) than the Canon 5d. So you have to compare Nikon ISO 1600 to Canon 2500 to 3200. The second thing is dynamic range, you can clearly see much more in the shadows than the Canon which crushes the shadows and thus hides more of the noise.

The last thing is detail. The D800 has much better resolution than the 5d3 which look out of focus when you put it side by side. So if you trade off a little of this rez with noise reduction like he did in the last part with neat image you get much closer to the 5d3. Some would say that the ISO 5000 d800 test at 200% is still brighter (I think he should have use a 3200 to 4000 ISO sample) and more resolute that the 5d3 at 6400 (In the 200% test).

So in the end they are much closer than what you would think because many so called test as above just assume things like the ISO rating are the same from each manufacturer while they are so far from it. So now the d800 is getting the reputation that it is not a great low light camera because Canon as overestimated its ISO by nearly a good stop and use much more aggressive in camera NR.

[Jean Daniel Villiers]

Another thing to consider is the mosaic filter being design for D800. You can see a first preview that seem quite encouraging here http://fennworld.blogspot.co.uk/. If it is as good as it seems, with an external recorder the D800 would become a very very good video camera.