The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

from Nikon to 5DIII?

Professional

Active member
Hi Tareq,
you re maybe not rich but using a 1dsIII and a 1dx doesnt sound you are poor either? By the way I went to your 500px site - I like images.
Well, i saved for long time to afford those bodies and i never work as a professional, so i am wondering how you people can afford them then if you are not pro?

Thanks for looking at my gallery, i try to upload my best, but i feel ashamed or nothing compared to many many masterpiece artistic photos there that i don't want to post anymore there.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Well, i saved for long time to afford those bodies and i never work as a professional, so i am wondering how you people can afford them then if you are not pro?

Thanks for looking at my gallery, i try to upload my best, but i feel ashamed or nothing compared to many many masterpiece artistic photos there that i don't want to post anymore there.
Well-I run a business and there I have to base my decisions mostly on cost-value (besides some moral factors).
But doing photography as a hobby I do not have to base those gear-decisions on cost-value as long as I can afford it. I can even use and enjoy gear where my photography is maybe not good enough to give it justice.
I know many people who would never spend more than 500$ for a camera because it is oh that expensive but many of them buy a new I-phone every time a new version comes to the market.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
@ Tom

I will be really interested to read your conclusions about the 5DIII and lenses versus Nikon. As you own both sides this should be a great comparison.

Thanks in advance

Peter
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Hi Peter,
these were converted from raw in lightroom.
The jpgs did not look much different.

The colors of the portrait came out really nice (there was this warm late afternoon light).
Some of the plants I shot come out a little "artificial" though. I reduced saturation and changed the color of the sky to a bit less red and more cyan in the blue. See the following example:
 

Paratom

Well-known member
@ Tom

I will be really interested to read your conclusions about the 5DIII and lenses versus Nikon. As you own both sides this should be a great comparison.

Thanks in advance

Peter
I dont have a D800 only the d700 to compare. Maybe I can meet my brother for a "shootout" - he uses a D800.

If I compare the bodies between the d700 and the 5d3 there are 2 things I really like about the 5d3:
1) the viewfinder is (slightly) brighter and a more neutral color than the one of the d700
2) the silent mode of the 5d3

So far the AF of the 5d3 seems quite good and pretty accurate.
Also I seem to be lucky and both lenses (24-70ii and 50/1.2) seem to focus pretty accurate. The first images look sharp with good contrast and color to me.
But what can you say after 2 days using a camera. I will keep my Nikon for some weeks for sure until I am totally sure the 5d3 works for me.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
After shooting the Leica M and S, I'm surprised at your choices and what you decided on. However, I understand the need for quick AF and lower light abilities to capture those squirmy, kinetic kiddies ... priceless family memories that will increase in emotional value as they grow up. Oddly, I shoot non-stop kids and families in action professionally, and rarely use anything other than the S2. However, these situations are controlled timings, and I pick the time of day and where. So, it is not the same challenge.

I've flip-flopped between Canon and Nikon for decades of shoot weddings ... (weddings have similar AF and lower light demands to what you are after), and in reality the differences are usually subtile. In the end, my selection was neither Canon or Nikon ... choosing Sony for the Zeiss AF lenses that came closest to the Leica look and feel (closer, but not the same), and that all lenses are in-body stabilized ... including the Sony 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4, and incomparable Zeiss 135/1.8.

Here's a tip for working with slower focusing Canon lenses like the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 ... get a STE-2 for the hot-shoe. It projects a pretty crisp focusing aid that significantly increases the keeper ratio in lower light AF situations.

I had a chance to shoot with a friend's Canon 5D-MKIII while on a mini vacation just last week. The first thing I took note of was the different sound/feel to the shutter compared to previous 5D models. Better. The files were typical Canon look and feel to my eye (lenses probably) ... which is a subjective evaluation.

Best of luck with your final evaluation. All that matters is that you get the shots and preserve the childhood of your kids :thumbs:

-Marc
 

Paratom

Well-known member
After shooting the Leica M and S, I'm surprised at your choices and what you decided on. However, I understand the need for quick AF and lower light abilities to capture those squirmy, kinetic kiddies ... priceless family memories that will increase in emotional value as they grow up. Oddly, I shoot non-stop kids and families in action professionally, and rarely use anything other than the S2. However, these situations are controlled timings, and I pick the time of day and where. So, it is not the same challenge.

I've flip-flopped between Canon and Nikon for decades of shoot weddings ... (weddings have similar AF and lower light demands to what you are after), and in reality the differences are usually subtile. In the end, my selection was neither Canon or Nikon ... choosing Sony for the Zeiss AF lenses that came closest to the Leica look and feel (closer, but not the same), and that all lenses are in-body stabilized ... including the Sony 50/1.4, Zeiss 85/1.4, and incomparable Zeiss 135/1.8.

Here's a tip for working with slower focusing Canon lenses like the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 ... get a STE-2 for the hot-shoe. It projects a pretty crisp focusing aid that significantly increases the keeper ratio in lower light AF situations.

I had a chance to shoot with a friend's Canon 5D-MKIII while on a mini vacation just last week. The first thing I took note of was the different sound/feel to the shutter compared to previous 5D models. Better. The files were typical Canon look and feel to my eye (lenses probably) ... which is a subjective evaluation.

Best of luck with your final evaluation. All that matters is that you get the shots and preserve the childhood of your kids :thumbs:

-Marc
Thank Marc for the tip with the STE-2.

I agree the Sony files with Zeiss lenses to look very good. But I didnt want an EVF and I wanted a very good C-AF.
The A900 (good at low ISO, and while fast AF not enough points for AF-tracking) was too close to my S2. And the A99 has that EVF.
I got many good images of my kids with the S2...but found that as soon as I wanted to "catch" them during running, riding the bike etc. it gets hard to focus. Same in lower light when the ISO limit the use of the S2.(even thoug a friend of mine does all kinds of things with his S2)
And there are some occasions where a zoom comes in handy.
However each time I look at images from the S2 I tell myself that I need to use the S2 whenever there is enough light and whenever it is possible to use it.

In a couple of weeks I can tell more.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
After some time with the 5dIII I wanted to give some feedback here:
I am quite happy with it.
The AF and overall speed is a joy for me to use.
I really feel I can now shoot some things (kids in action) much more easily than before.
The lenses I have chosen so far (24-70II,50/1.2, 135/2.0 and 70-200/4.0IS and TC1.4III) perform quite well too and while I have not done much pixel peeping analysis stuff I could not detect any weak points.
My fav is the 50/1.2 which does not only allow nice rich colors with nice bokeh but also handles very very well size wise with the 5dIII.

The IQ I get with the 5dIII does not have that super dooper crisp and 3d look I get with the S2 but images are sharp and I like the tonality and overall look. I prefer the colors over those I got with my D700.

I find the price of the 5dIII on the high side, but so far for me it looks like a very flexible, fast, easy and nice to handle DSLR. Not the resolution of a d800, not the speed of a 1dx, but just the right compromise.
 

pophoto

New member
Paratom, I agree with what you said, it is a very good compromise, and in fact I feel very little is lost. About the pricing of cameras this year, everything has shifted up :(

All the f/1.2L primes are winners, and make the Canon system extra special, and would go on to stick my head out and say the new Sigma 35mm f1.4 A1 should be an addition to any system if the focal length is needed.
 
Last edited:

Mark K

New member
I bought D800 early this year and 5D3 last month. They are similar in some aspects but different in many others. For Nikon I have had those old lenses including 20/2.8D, 85/1.8, 1.4, old macro and newer Sigma 150 macro. D800 is faster than 5D, 5D 2 and the colours, viewed on LCD appeared not good. However, once you open images in LR, they look completely different. There are incredible potential in terms of dynamic range you can adjust.
5D3 is much faster in focusing. My primary aim is for backup camera for wildlife shooting for 1Dx. Canon makes a line of very good and lightweight telephoto lenses. However for general purpose I am not sure you should make the switch unless Canon offers cameras with better sensors. As for f1.2 lenses, I am not sure. From what I learned from internet, these two lenses are not good optically. Friends having 85/1.2 kept complaining about their focusing speed, huge body size and unreasonable heavy weight. I have 135 f2 and just love this. Nikon's speedlights are also much better than my Canon flashguns.
Too bad I have the ZA135/1.8, ZA85/1.4 and both of them are much much sharper than any of my Nikon/Canon primes.
 

Tim

Active member
After watching this video review - Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800 Comparison - YouTube

I have become convinced that both of these cameras seem almost equal in the imagery value they offer but just have differing sets of cons/pros. It would be so hard to chose one over the other but this review at least gives you some info to work with so you can work out what is important.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I bought D800 early this year and 5D3 last month. They are similar in some aspects but different in many others. For Nikon I have had those old lenses including 20/2.8D, 85/1.8, 1.4, old macro and newer Sigma 150 macro. D800 is faster than 5D, 5D 2 and the colours, viewed on LCD appeared not good. However, once you open images in LR, they look completely different. There are incredible potential in terms of dynamic range you can adjust.
5D3 is much faster in focusing. My primary aim is for backup camera for wildlife shooting for 1Dx. Canon makes a line of very good and lightweight telephoto lenses. However for general purpose I am not sure you should make the switch unless Canon offers cameras with better sensors. As for f1.2 lenses, I am not sure. From what I learned from internet, these two lenses are not good optically. Friends having 85/1.2 kept complaining about their focusing speed, huge body size and unreasonable heavy weight. I have 135 f2 and just love this. Nikon's speedlights are also much better than my Canon flashguns.
Too bad I have the ZA135/1.8, ZA85/1.4 and both of them are much much sharper than any of my Nikon/Canon primes.
I dont have the 85/1.2 but the 50/1.2 which seems like an excellent lens IMO.
 

Dan Ortego

New member
After watching this video review - Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800 Comparison - YouTube

I have become convinced that both of these cameras seem almost equal in the imagery value they offer but just have differing sets of cons/pros. It would be so hard to chose one over the other but this review at least gives you some info to work with so you can work out what is important.
Hmm, interesting comparison and even before he said which one he favored I was all in for the 5DIII. I'm not ready to switch from my A900 but when I do I'll likely lean towards the Canon. Just purchased a new tripod kit so that will take some time to pay down.
 
Last edited:
O

organicfood

Guest
I switched from Canon (5D Mk II, 1D Mk IV, 1Ds Mk III) to Hasselblad (H4D-40) and Nikon (D600). Could not be happier. All what was already said is true. Check out this thread: D600 & sensor dust where I posted some samples straight out of the cam.

In former days, I had the 50mm 1.2. The AF is NOT very fast working. It's a lot of glass, therefore you'll still have some lags.

S.
stanROX.com
iam agree with him,good.:clap:
 
R

rpitt

Guest
I did not "switch" from my Nikons (D4, 800E, 600) but also recently got a 5D3 and a few of their unique lenses (17 T/S, 50/1.2, 85/1.2, and 135/2 for example). I still enjoy shooting the Nikons more, mainly as I am more used to their operation. I don't look on this as a competiton but as an opportunity to fill some gaps in need.
Bob
 
Top