Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds  (Read 14351 times)

idenford

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« on: May 08, 2008, 09:30:28 am »

After researching these two cameras for a major purchase, I am now hedging on the Mark lll 1Ds. $3000 price difference buys lots of glass.
Going to wait til June to do this but from what i can tell, the Nikon D3 is a far superior camera with it's iso capability and fps. The salesman at Vistek seems to thing that Canon got left behind on this one. He said they have the technology, just decided not to introduce it.
He also says many Canon wish they could make the switch.
I wonder what Canon's answer will be to the D3 and when.
Logged

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2008, 12:16:34 pm »

Quote
the Nikon D3 is a far superior camera with it's iso capability and fps

If you are happy with the 12 Mpix, then why would you spend $3000 on 9 more Mpix?

Quote
The salesman at Vistek seems to thing that Canon got left behind on this one

This is, IMO, plain nonsense. There is a tradeoff between higher ISO and smaller sensels (i.e. higher pixel count). Canon choose the higher pixel count with the 1DsMkIII. Nikon choose the better ISO capability with the D3.

Nikon is said to be coming out soon with a D3X, whatever that might be. If that will have a much higher pixel count than the D3, then that will show, if and how far Nikon (i.e. Sony) is ahead of Canon in the sensor technology.
Logged
Gabor

KeithR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 759
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2008, 02:51:35 pm »

Quote
Nikon is said to be coming out soon with a D3X, whatever that might be.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194390\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is an internet rumor. Nothing more, as Nikon as not made any announcement of any kind, concerning any new "Pro" level camera.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 02:52:06 pm by KeithR »
Logged
The destination is our goal but it’s the journey we experience

Tony Beach

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
    • http://imageevent.com/tonybeach/twelveimages
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2008, 03:36:31 pm »

Quote
I wonder what Canon's answer will be to the D3 and when.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194367\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

1D MkIII, it was out well before the D3.
Logged

Geoff Wittig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1023
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2008, 04:57:58 pm »

Quote
After researching these two cameras for a major purchase, I am now hedging on the Mark lll 1Ds. $3000 price difference buys lots of glass.
Going to wait til June to do this but from what i can tell, the Nikon D3 is a far superior camera with it's iso capability and fps. The salesman at Vistek seems to thing that Canon got left behind on this one. He said they have the technology, just decided not to introduce it.
He also says many Canon wish they could make the switch.
I wonder what Canon's answer will be to the D3 and when.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194367\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

How big a print do you need to make, and what kind of subject do you shoot? The extra resolution of the Eos-1Ds mk III will definitely permit a larger print than Nikon's D3, if you're talking about an image with lots of fine detail (i.e., "high frequency"). If it's a portrait or a graphic image that depends on color rather than fine detail, the very high quality of the D3's larger pixels will tolerate at least as much enlargement. The D3 is also in a league of its own at high ISO, another function of those big pixels.

The best analysis I have seen of the issues in play was at www.digilloyd.com, where the site's author explained the true limiting factors for image quality with such high resolution sensors. Of course, you need perfect technique with very careful focus, solid tripod, mirror lock up and excellent glass. But diffraction rears its ugly head, and the f-stop where it starts to limit sharpness depends on pixel size. As a result, the 1Ds III starts to hit diffraction limits by f:13, sometimes even by f:8, whereas the D3 can get away with smaller apertures (and therefore greater apparent depth of field). A notional Nikon D3X due to simple physics will run into exactly the same limits, and therefore is very unlikely to significantly exceed the image quality from the Eos-1Ds III, except perhaps for high ISO noise, though even there the smaller pixel pitch will be tough to overcome.

I shoot mostly landscapes, where superfine detail (like trees in a forest) are crucial to image quality, so the Eos-1Ds III is a good fit. (That and my closet full of Canon glass). But if you're shooting people, or sports, or wildlife...then the D3 looks great.
Logged

idenford

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2008, 05:17:44 pm »

Quote
How big a print do you need to make, and what kind of subject do you shoot? The extra resolution of the Eos-1Ds mk III will definitely permit a larger print than Nikon's D3, if you're talking about an image with lots of fine detail (i.e., "high frequency"). If it's a portrait or a graphic image that depends on color rather than fine detail, the very high quality of the D3's larger pixels will tolerate at least as much enlargement. The D3 is also in a league of its own at high ISO, another function of those big pixels.

The best analysis I have seen of the issues in play was at www.digilloyd.com, where the site's author explained the true limiting factors for image quality with such high resolution sensors. Of course, you need perfect technique with very careful focus, solid tripod, mirror lock up and excellent glass. But diffraction rears its ugly head, and the f-stop where it starts to limit sharpness depends on pixel size. As a result, the 1Ds III starts to hit diffraction limits by f:13, sometimes even by f:8, whereas the D3 can get away with smaller apertures (and therefore greater apparent depth of field). A notional Nikon D3X due to simple physics will run into exactly the same limits, and therefore is very unlikely to significantly exceed the image quality from the Eos-1Ds III, except perhaps for high ISO noise, though even there the smaller pixel pitch will be tough to overcome.

I shoot mostly landscapes, where superfine detail (like trees in a forest) are crucial to image quality, so the Eos-1Ds III is a good fit. (That and my closet full of Canon glass). But if you're shooting people, or sports, or wildlife...then the D3 looks great.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194440\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I shoot more people than anything else, but isn't pixel counting a bit of nonsense when it comes to shots more than 12 mp. Really I can remember going into a shop 10 years ago and you were looking at 6 mp cameras as  top of the line.
Your reply is much appreciated and thoughtful.
There is no such thing as nonsense or silly questions. I think that Canon has no answer to the D3 at the moment. Value for money seems to be there with the D3.
Canon has always charged about $8000 for their top of the line.
But it seems to me that there is quite a difference in the iso issue between the  two.
Anyway there is no perfect answer, I think it is true, it all depends on what you shoot.
Logged

dseelig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2008, 05:43:38 pm »

WELL THE FUNNY THING ABOUT ALL THIS IS what are you shooting? If action get the canon. here is a new autofocus test. www.prophotohome.com/forum/pro-photo-reviews-articles/76674-canon-canon-1d-camera-canon-mkiii-camera-vs-nikon-nikon-d3-camera-sports-autofocus-showdown.html
Nikon has never had good autofocus and canon has finally with the new firmware gotten their act together. I all you shoot is landscapes with primes and do not need a 24 1.4 or 35 1.4 get the nikon. if you need a good 70-200 well nikons version is getting terrible reviews on the full frame camera. On the other hand I would love to have the zeiss lenses available for the canon on an eos mount.But they are not autofocus. So really it comes down to need. I make more money shooting profootball for a specific need camera so guess what I own the canon system. the 1.26 crop helps . I got 1ds mk111 for other work, and hopefully soon a 5d mk11 . PS I hated the d3 oof noise at 6400 and like the canon at 3200. So that advantage is nill. Also the canon has better dynamic range. Pick a camera for what you shoot.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 05:45:57 pm by dseelig »
Logged

Wolfman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 314
    • www.bernardwolf.com
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2008, 06:06:20 pm »

Quote
I shoot more people than anything else, but isn't pixel counting a bit of nonsense when it comes to shots more than 12 mp. Really I can remember going into a shop 10 years ago and you were looking at 6 mp cameras as  top of the line.
Your reply is much appreciated and thoughtful.
There is no such thing as nonsense or silly questions. I think that Canon has no answer to the D3 at the moment. Value for money seems to be there with the D3.
Canon has always charged about $8000 for their top of the line.
But it seems to me that there is quite a difference in the iso issue between the  two.
Anyway there is no perfect answer, I think it is true, it all depends on what you shoot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194446\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Like everybody has been saying, it depends on what you shoot. Do you shoot people in very low light? Then the Nikon sounds good. Do you make very large prints? Then the Canon.
What about the 5D as a happy medium? Decent at higher iso and decent resolution and the next version should be even better and maybe the answer to the Nikon D3.

canmiya

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
    • beyond stills
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2008, 06:21:38 pm »

Quote
After researching these two cameras for a major purchase, I am now hedging on the Mark lll 1Ds. $3000 price difference buys lots of glass.
Going to wait til June to do this but from what i can tell, the Nikon D3 is a far superior camera with it's iso capability and fps. The salesman at Vistek seems to thing that Canon got left behind on this one. He said they have the technology, just decided not to introduce it.
He also says many Canon wish they could make the switch.
I wonder what Canon's answer will be to the D3 and when.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194367\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i wouldn't say canon got left behind: canon and nikon have taken a different approach in segmenting their markets.  the 1ds3 was never intended as the high iso leader or speed demon of the canon line: as a people and fashion shooter, a mfdb owner, a 1ds3 and 5d owner, i have generally shot at the lowest/lower iso's and can't even tell you when i last had the need to shoot above iso 400 with the canons- but that's me ...contrary to what the salesperson told you, there is a reason that expansion of iso to 6400, which  is a feature on the earlier introduced 1d3, is not a feature on the 1ds3, other than canon just didn't include it.  if you need or want high iso performance and/or highest frame rate per second, the 1ds3 is not the camera for you.  then you should be looking at the d3 and the 1d3.

i don't want to take anything away from the d3, because it is an extraordinary camera, and one of  the best all around camera available, but one might  also argue on the basis of image quality, that one could buy a lot of lenses with the nearly $3000 difference between the d3 and canon's 5d if one determines that 12mps is enough.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2008, 07:06:02 pm »

Quote
Nikon has never had good autofocus and canon has finally with the new firmware gotten their act together.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Allow me to react, the AF of the D3 is nothing short of outstanding. I have read these results and they just don't match what I have seen with my own D3. You will find long threads in both the Canon and Nikon forums of DPreview on this, and the clear concensus is that this test should not be considered as a realistic representation of what these 2 cameras can do.

Quote
Also the canon has better dynamic range. Pick a camera for what you shoot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not sure where you got that from. The D3's shadow noise level is extremely impressive, and the smoothness of the highlight rollout put it in the same league as my Mamiya ZD.

DR can be measured a number of ways, but what really matters is the ability to lift the shadows without generating too much noise. In my experience with tens of thousands of outdoor available light shots, the D3 truly excells at that.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 08:23:10 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

jeffok

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 108
    • http://www.insightscapes.com
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2008, 09:20:12 pm »

Quote
After researching these two cameras for a major purchase, I am now hedging on the Mark lll 1Ds. $3000 price difference buys lots of glass.
Going to wait til June to do this but from what i can tell, the Nikon D3 is a far superior camera with it's iso capability and fps. The salesman at Vistek seems to thing that Canon got left behind on this one. He said they have the technology, just decided not to introduce it.
He also says many Canon wish they could make the switch.
I wonder what Canon's answer will be to the D3 and when.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194367\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You're comparing the wrong Canon with the D3. The more appropriate comparison is with the 1D Mark III. As others have said, depends on what you need the camera for. If for sports and action primarily, the Nikon and the Canon are both comparable. For studio and landscape where you need to be able to make large prints and capture fine detail, the D3 hardly measures up to the 1Ds III.
Logged

idenford

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #11 on: May 09, 2008, 09:37:29 am »

From Digilloyd's blog .

".having been shooting the 21MP Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III for the past 3 weeks while the D3 was away, I had gotten used to the dullness of the 1DsM3 images (well, not really). Examining the D3 images this evening, I was once again struck by the dramatic difference in the vibrancy in both color and tone. Viewing D3 images is like viewing the original, looking at the 1DsM3 images is like looking at a copy. At least that’s the way it feels to me, though I admit to the idea that different raw-file conversion could narrow the gap. But I don’t think it would close it".
Logged

Andy M

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
    • http://
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #12 on: May 09, 2008, 09:51:01 am »

Quote
From Digilloyd's blog .

"...though I admit to the idea that different raw-file conversion could narrow the gap. But I don’t think it would close it".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194575\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So he's shooting direct to JPEG? Is he Rockwell in disguise?  

NEXT!!
Logged

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2008, 10:25:38 am »

I have a 1DS mk3 and have seen files from the D3. While at very very high iso the D3 has an edge, when its images are viewed at 100% on a monitor, the 1Ds mk3 performs quite good up to and including iso 1600. Since it has more detail and more pixels even if at 100% on a computer there seems to be a tad more noise when images are printed the quality is superb. There is just more data to work with.
Logged

bob mccarthy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 372
    • http://
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2008, 02:11:11 pm »

Quote
So he's shooting direct to JPEG? Is he Rockwell in disguise?   

NEXT!!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194581\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

...though I admit to the idea that different [span style=\'font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\']raw-file[/span] conversion could narrow the gap
Logged

canmiya

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
    • beyond stills
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2008, 02:41:05 pm »

Quote
From Digilloyd's blog .

".having been shooting the 21MP Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III for the past 3 weeks while the D3 was away, I had gotten used to the dullness of the 1DsM3 images (well, not really). Examining the D3 images this evening, I was once again struck by the dramatic difference in the vibrancy in both color and tone. Viewing D3 images is like viewing the original, looking at the 1DsM3 images is like looking at a copy. At least that’s the way it feels to me, though I admit to the idea that different raw-file conversion could narrow the gap. But I don’t think it would close it".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194575\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i'm not sure what this is suppose to mean, given the fact that i have no idea as to how each camera has been set up...i personally have never found my 1ds3 images dull, relative to the 5d or even my digital back images. but tastes in color and tone are more perceptual, as oppose to being absolute.  since all the manufacturers have their own color processing engines, defaults and options, it is perfectly conceivable that someone might prefer one manufacturer's over another, in this case nikon's over canon,...but that might not be the case for others.

 
the best thing for you to do is to test the cameras you are interested in yourself and make a decision based on your tastes and needs, rather than salesmen, blogger opinions, and even the opinions of fellow forum participants.
both canon and nikon make  products which are capable of taking great pictures in skilled hands or subpar ones in less than skilled  hands.
Logged

idenford

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2008, 05:15:40 pm »

Quote
i'm not sure what this is suppose to mean, given the fact that i have no idea as to how each camera has been set up...i personally have never found my 1ds3 images dull, relative to the 5d or even my digital back images. but tastes in color and tone are more perceptual, as oppose to being absolute.  since all the manufacturers have their own color processing engines, defaults and options, it is perfectly conceivable that someone might prefer one manufacturer's over another, in this case nikon's over canon,...but that might not be the case for others.

 
the best thing for you to do is to test the cameras you are interested in yourself and make a decision based on your tastes and needs, rather than salesmen, blogger opinions, and even the opinions of fellow forum participants.
both canon and nikon make  products which are capable of taking great pictures in skilled hands or subpar ones in less than skilled  hands.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194671\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks, I've decided on the D3, end of post I guess
Logged

Andy M

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
    • http://
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #17 on: May 09, 2008, 05:27:11 pm »

I've owned both cameras, and kept the 1Ds. Hope this helps
Logged

idenford

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 128
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #18 on: May 09, 2008, 06:52:23 pm »

Quote
I've owned both cameras, and kept the 1Ds. Hope this helps
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194712\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've decided on the D3, thanks for the post
Logged

The View

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
Nikon D3 versus Canon Mark lll 1ds
« Reply #19 on: May 09, 2008, 11:21:39 pm »

Quote
the best thing for you to do is to test the cameras you are interested in yourself and make a decision based on your tastes and needs,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=194671\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Good idea. How'd you do it? Rent the cameras?

There's one drawback, and it was mentioned by someone in another thread, when I suggested the same thing:

if you rent a new camera, you won't really get the maximum out of it - no experience with that new camera. Such a test could fall on its nose.

Just that you understand where I'm going: this is not to contradict you, but raising a problem that is part of an actually good idea.
Logged
The View of deserts, forests, mountains. Not the TV show that I have never watched.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up