Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII  (Read 22376 times)

EricV

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2012, 11:38:36 AM »

D800E does not handle overexposure well, its strength is in the shadows.
ZD's strength is in highlights, it handles even 2EV overexposure but shadows are not to be lifted much.
On that basis, I would give the Nikon +2 points, +1 for exposing correctly, +1 for large dynamic range.
And I would give the Mamiya -2 points, -1 for underexposing, -1 for lower dynamic range.
Joking aside, exposure is more or less irrelevant, since you are not forced to accept the meter recommendation.
Logged

SpiritShooter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2012, 09:52:21 PM »

Tried 5DIII and D800. My impression:
1. With 400mm~600mm, Gee, 5DIII is like a machine gun, super fast and super accurate.
2. On the other extremes, 17mm or 24mm, T&S. 5DIII rules again. It's unique.
3. In the middle, 50mm/1.2, 5DIII performs better than D800 but with standard zooms, 24-70 and 70-200, it's the other way.
   But in this range, M9 stands out. M9 does not go beyond 135mm, but it makes 130mm ~ 200mm irrelevant.

My impressions: It's M9 for 24~135mm, and beyond these range, it'd be 5DIII. D800 is a very good body, but need lenses to match it.  


I own a Nikon D800 with 24/1.4G, PC-E 24, 50/1.4G, 85/1.4G 105 f/2.8G VR and 70-200 2.8G VR lenses,  I also own a Leica M9 with Summicron 35, 50 & 75 mm 6bit coded lenses. I have had the D800 since April and have done a myriad of shooting. In my experience, there is just no way that anyone can tell me the M9 has better IQ or exceeds the D800/E.

Many of the supposed comparisons that I see on the web compare cameras with lenses that are not top notch glass. This colors the results and makes them fairly insignificant.
Anyway, just my experience....

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9758
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2012, 01:08:28 AM »

In my experience, there is just no way that anyone can tell me the M9 has better IQ or exceeds the D800/E.

But you'll have to agree that the Leica logo of the D800 sucks.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2012, 01:18:50 AM »

One big reason is that I just know that I will get a better result from the bigger camera and the slower way of working.

This whole thing about the "slower way of working" is not logical at all.

You can take just as much time and care with a smaller camera.
Just because the limitations of MFD force you to go slower does not mean you can't take your time and shoot
with the same approach with a 35mm DSLR.

I shoot high end celebrity portraits with all formats and there are times when I will shoot with a 35mm DSLR
and take only 5 to 10 shots in the whole session as if I was shooting 8x10 film. I'll even put the 35mm DSLR camera
on a heavy duty column stand.

On this shoot with Larry King I took 12 shots.

Logged

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #24 on: July 16, 2012, 01:24:01 AM »

Many of the supposed comparisons that I see on the web compare cameras with lenses that are not top notch glass. This colors the results and makes them fairly insignificant.
Anyway, just my experience....

Very true.

I've seen comparisons with a 24-70 on the 35mm DSLR and prime on the MFD.... rather silly
Logged

DaveCurtis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 495
    • http://www.magiclight.co.nz
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2012, 04:26:57 AM »


Fwiw, I tried the much-vaunted Zeiss 21 f2.8 and found it to be crap. Er, um, I mean a non flat-field lens. Bitingly sharp in the centre, it was mushy on the edges at f8, at a middle-distance, focussed by liveview.  No excuse for that. Interestingly, the 16-35 VR matched it in the centre at f8 and kicked its ass on the edges. 

- N.

Nick, did you hit it with a hammer first  :D

My 21ZE is the best lens I have ever used in this focal range. It also has a flatish field. Ive shot the odd brick wall with no problem other than a bit of moustache distortion. The  MTF also supports this.
Maybe your copy was a dud!
This first copy of the 21ZE that I purchased was soft on the left side. The second copy is tack sharp into the corners.
Logged

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2012, 05:17:49 AM »

For me, the D800E caused me to sell not only my 645D but my M9 as well (though not the lenses).  At working apertures, the better Nikkor primes on the 800E match the "M" glass , except with twice the pixels, more accurate focus and usable high ISO.  Besides, you can buy a 24 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 50 f1.4 and 85 f1.8 for the new price of a single Leica lens.  That's gotta count at some point. Size is the Nikkors' only shortcoming.

Fwiw, I tried the much-vaunted Zeiss 21 f2.8 and found it to be crap. Er, um, I mean a non flat-field lens. Bitingly sharp in the centre, it was mushy on the edges at f8, at a middle-distance, focussed by liveview.  No excuse for that. Interestingly, the 16-35 VR matched it in the centre at f8 and kicked its ass on the edges. 

- N.

Zeiss 21mm vs Nikon 16-35. Not even close.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=689&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=708&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4
Logged

indusphoto

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 130
    • 500px
Re: 22MP MFDB vs. D800 or 5DIII
« Reply #27 on: September 15, 2012, 12:14:23 AM »

Zeiss 21mm vs Nikon 16-35. Not even close.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=689&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=708&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4

You selected 16mm comparison to 21mm. I dont know if your point was that Zeiss can not do 16mm (so it is not close) or if 16mm on Nikon lens is not close to Zeiss 21mm. If you compare Nikon lens at 20mm to Zeiss, they are actually close.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=689&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=3&LensComp=708&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up