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

[Barry Gribble]

Hey guys,

A good friend of mine put together this side-by-side comparison that's pretty cool:

The F%^&ing Nikon D800 vs. Canon 5D mkIII Shootout - YouTube

The 5DIII kills on low light performance... wow.

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

A nice comparision video and the light-hearted stuff helps maintain interest (although I agree with Rich that it could have been cut after 4:10).

The simulated high ISO levels are not really a true indication of performance, and both cameras are unusable at those extreme 'pushed' ISO levels anyway, but it does show what we've seen in earlier tests, that the Canon is far better in very low light conditions. In normal light both are equal in most respects, and although the Nikon is sharper, with a little extra sharpening in post, the Canon is similar.

Even though editing software provides a better platform and superior results for boosting sharpness levels in the 5D mk3 video, an added problem in that last regard is extra time needed on your workload, especially when it comes to the need to sharpen hundreds, or even thousands, of seprate video clips in post.

[Chris Hurd]

Loved the final "green screen" shot.

Definitely more entertaining than the typical side-by-side. Thanks for posting,

[Barry Gribble]

Glad you like it. The final green screen shot was done with the Nikon D800, BTW.

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

Yes, I agree, that the green shot at the very end was one of the best parts!

[Kevin Good]

Well of course it was, the Canon was already smashed at that point. :)

[Michael Walter]

How was that last shot accomplished? Was it rotoscoped?

[Kevin Good]

I think this explains it? :)

[John Kim]

Kevin:

As a second cam in your tool box... Would you get another Nikon D800 or Canon 5d Mark 3?

[Kevin Good]

That's a good question. I think they're very similar-- insanely so. And while the Canon looked much better than the dog^%$# of the Nikon at 12K ISO, I wouldn't really consider either "usable" in that range. It is still clearly better in the extreme low light in video though.

I am very very happy with the D800's stills performance. I think the files are robust and clean and fantastic. I just haven't had as much of a chance to scrutinize the stills against the 5D.

I guess I'm happy with my purchase, and not jumping ship, and if I got another body I'd get another of the same cause sharing batteries, lenses, etc is just too convenient. And if I had bought a 5D3 I'd probably be happy too. Neither one "wins" emphatically enough across the board to make me want to switch.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Kevin Good

I think this explains it

Alas, the simplest solutions are always the best...

[John Kim]

Originally Posted by Kevin Good

That's a good question. I think they're very similar-- insanely so. And while the Canon looked much better than the dog^%$# of the Nikon at 12K ISO, I wouldn't really consider either "usable" in that range. It is still clearly better in the extreme low light in video though.

I am very very happy with the D800's stills performance. I think the files are robust and clean and fantastic. I just haven't had as much of a chance to scrutinize the stills against the 5D.

I guess I'm happy with my purchase, and not jumping ship, and if I got another body I'd get another of the same cause sharing batteries, lenses, etc is just too convenient. And if I had bought a 5D3 I'd probably be happy too. Neither one "wins" emphatically enough across the board to make me want to switch.

Cool. That's good to hear.

I do some wildlife videography... since the D800 has a 2.7 crop option that's an appealing feature to me. I currently own 5D mark 3 and Mark 2... Considering selling the mark 2 and get a D800.

You do have a good point in sharing batteries and lenses.

Here's another review of the D800 and Mark 3... but more on their photography features.

Canon 5D MK III vs Nikon D800 with Nathan Elson - YouTube

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

Thank you for pointing us to the link, John.

The Nathan Elson video review is one of the best comparisons (from a stills image viewpoint) between the Mark 3 & D800 that I've so far seen. For many people, the stills image side of both cameras is not so important as the video mode, but for me, who uses both 50/50 on a professional level, the stills photography aspects of each camera is just as important as the video.

Just a note on the extra video at the end of the review by Jorden: I'm not sure I quite agree with what was said about the D4 in crop mode and that wide angle lenses are 'less' sharp in the centre of frame...

[John Kim]

Sure thing. I don't agree with the last video review either.

After seeing a few video reviews, they are both excellent cameras.

It just comes down to how you use them... as it was always. :)

But it's always fun to geek out on the specs and pixels.

Here's an amazing short film done with 5D3

W A L K - W I T H - M E on Vimeo

[Tony Davies-Patrick]

The Walk With Me short film was OK with a nice 'feel' to it, especially the emotional close ups of the bonds between human and dog at the end.

David filmed the entire sequence with the lens wide open and I felt that the focus plane used was ultra thin throughout when it needn't have been in some scenes. What spoiled the film for me was the fact that the focus wasn't spot on in a lot of the tight shots.