Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk
Thread started 24 Nov 2013 (Sunday) 13:56
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Canon 5D III vs. Nikon D800E Test

 
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
gabebalazs's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
Toledo, OH
Dec 02, 2013 14:04 |  #361

Experts may be able to tell subtle differences but the vast majority of people are not looking for and probably won't notice differences in DR in photos (talking about differences in DR between photos taken by a 5DIII/6D and a Nikon D600/800). Those people will be impressed by composition, colors, the content (they like their engagement photos, events, babies etc.) way before noticing (if at all) if and/or how the shadows have been lifted and at what cost :)

I'm not taking anyone's side here, just stating my experience with clients, friends, family etc. It's happened quite a few times that I am excited about a new feature or a new camera and trying to explain/demonstrate the improvements to my friends, family, and some cases to clients. The overwhelming reaction is something like this: "I believe you Gabe, but I don't see the difference". :)

This is similar to my music career and guitars. I've had about 70 (!) guitars in my life. Finally, a few years ago I settled on a Suhr S-1 Pro. However, trying to describe the nuances and very fine differences in tone, playability etc. between various guitars is really tough unless I talk to a pro guitarist. To 98% of people my USA Strat and the Suhr sounds just the same :) And it's also true that my particular style and sound come through almost all guitars that I get my hands on (that's also a feedback I heard from people who heard me play live or on CDs).

So while I absolutely agree that a large DR is a good thing, no doubt, I'm just saying that not all people are geeks like us and to most this remains invisible (and very low on their priority list of what makes a photograph a great one.)

Just my 2 cents...


5DIV | 5DIII | 80D | A7RII | Canon 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 24-105 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/4L IS | 135 f/2L | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 STM | 18-135 IS STM | SONY FE 28-70 OSS | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Tamron 150-600 | Ʃ 35 1.4 ART | Rokinon 14 2.8 | Sigma 1.4x | Metabones IV | 2x Canon 600EX-RT
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
jocau
Goldmember
jocau's Avatar
Joined Mar 2012
Belgium
Dec 02, 2013 14:09 as a reply to post 16495751 |  #362

Well, English isn't my native language either (Dutch is), but maybe that's the reason why I 'get the picture' (wordplay intended by the way). :D


550D | EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 IS | EF 50mm F/1.8 II | EF 70-200mm F/4L IS | Speedlite 580EX II | LumoPro LP180 | Gitzo GT3541XLS | Arca-Swiss Monoball Z1 SP | ONA Bowery (black, non-leather) (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sega62
Senior Member
sega62's Avatar
755 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Dec 02, 2013 14:10 |  #363

gabebalazs wrote in post #16495756external link
Experts may be able to tell subtle differences but the vast majority of people are not looking for and probably won't notice differences in DR in photos (talking about differences in DR between photos taken by a 5DIII/6D and a Nikon D600/800). Those people will be impressed by composition, colors, the content (they like their engagement photos, events, babies etc.) way before noticing (if at all) how the shadows have been lifted and at what cost :)

I'm not taking anyone's side here, just stating my experience with clients, friends, family etc. It's happened quite a few times that I am excited about a new feature or a new camera and trying to explain/demonstrate the improvements to my friends, family, and some cases to clients. The overwhelming reaction is something like this: "I believe you Gabe, but I don't see the difference". :)

This is similar to my music career and guitars. I've had about 70 (!) guitars in my life. Finally, a few years ago I settled on a Suhr S-1 Pro. However, trying to describe the nuances and very fine differences in tone, playability etc. between various guitars is really tough unless I talk to a pro guitarist. To 98% of people my USA Strat and the Suhr sounds just the same :) And it's also true that my particular style and sound come through almost all guitars that I get my hands on (that's also a feedback I heard from people who heard me play live or on CDs).

So while I absolutely agree that a large DR is a good thing, no doubt, I'm just saying that not all people are geeks like us and to most this remains invisible (and very low on their priority list of what makes a photograph a great one.)

Just my 2 cents...

Yep I dig it, i'm a musician too, no one can tell anything, UNLESS they have some kind of knowledge.
Yep, that's life!




LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
gabebalazs's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
Toledo, OH
Dec 02, 2013 14:12 |  #364

sega62 wrote in post #16495781external link
Yep I dig it, i'm a musician too, no one can tell anything, UNLESS they have some kind of knowledge.
Yep, that's life!

You got it :)


5DIV | 5DIII | 80D | A7RII | Canon 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 24-105 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/4L IS | 135 f/2L | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 STM | 18-135 IS STM | SONY FE 28-70 OSS | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Tamron 150-600 | Ʃ 35 1.4 ART | Rokinon 14 2.8 | Sigma 1.4x | Metabones IV | 2x Canon 600EX-RT
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,329 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
Dec 02, 2013 14:15 |  #365

gabebalazs wrote in post #16495756external link
Experts may be able to tell subtle differences but the vast majority of people are not looking for and probably won't notice differences in DR in photos (talking about differences in DR between photos taken by a 5DIII/6D and a Nikon D600/800). Those people will be impressed by composition, colors, the content (they like their engagement photos, events, babies etc.) way before noticing (if at all) if and/or how the shadows have been lifted and at what cost :)

I'm not taking anyone's side here, just stating my experience with clients, friends, family etc. It's happened quite a few times that I am excited about a new feature or a new camera and trying to explain/demonstrate the improvements to my friends, family, and some cases to clients. The overwhelming reaction is something like this: "I believe you Gabe, but I don't see the difference". :)

This is similar to my music career and guitars. I've had about 70 (!) guitars in my life. Finally, a few years ago I settled on a Suhr S-1 Pro. However, trying to describe the nuances and very fine differences in tone, playability etc. between various guitars is really tough unless I talk to a pro guitarist. To 98% of people my USA Strat and the Suhr sounds just the same :) And it's also true that my particular style and sound come through almost all guitars that I get my hands on (that's also a feedback I heard from people who heard me play live or on CDs).

So while I absolutely agree that a large DR is a good thing, no doubt, I'm just saying that not all people are geeks like us and to most this remains invisible (and very low on their priority list of what makes a photograph a great one.)

Just my 2 cents...

Well I shoot landscapes and battle dynamic range every time. Has not a thing to do with Geeks, but more so not having a blown out pure white sky or a totally featureless shadow area in your photo. I use GND filters and merging multiple exposure shots all the time to tame the dynamic range of the photo. Comments like yours just shows me you don't really understand the limitations of today's equipment, or you never shoot under conditions which require these techniques to achieve a great photo...or you just don't care. In either case...you are totally wrong when it comes to dynamic range.




LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
David Arbogast's Avatar
10,431 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Aug 2010
West Point, Georgia
Dec 02, 2013 14:16 |  #366

gabebalazs wrote in post #16495756external link
Experts may be able to tell subtle differences but the vast majority of people are not looking for and probably won't notice differences in DR in photos (talking about differences in DR between photos taken by a 5DIII/6D and a Nikon D600/800). Those people will be impressed by composition, colors, the content (they like their engagement photos, events, babies etc.) way before noticing (if at all) if and/or how the shadows have been lifted and at what cost :)

I'm not taking anyone's side here, just stating my experience with clients, friends, family etc. It's happened quite a few times that I am excited about a new feature or a new camera and trying to explain/demonstrate the improvements to my friends, family, and some cases to clients. The overwhelming reaction is something like this: "I believe you Gabe, but I don't see the difference". :)

This is similar to my music career and guitars. I've had about 70 (!) guitars in my life. Finally, a few years ago I settled on a Suhr S-1 Pro. However, trying to describe the nuances and very fine differences in tone, playability etc. between various guitars is really tough unless I talk to a pro guitarist. To 98% of people my USA Strat and the Suhr sounds just the same :) And it's also true that my particular style and sound come through almost all guitars that I get my hands on (that's also a feedback I heard from people who heard me play live or on CDs).

So while I absolutely agree that a large DR is a good thing, no doubt, I'm just saying that not all people are geeks like us and to most this remains invisible (and very low on their priority list of what makes a photograph a great one.)

Just my 2 cents...

Well said Gabe. In your own work, you display an impressive mastery over your equipment and you regularly produce images of an excellence that seems to belie the limitations of your gear. So, your thoughts, in this topic, carry sufficient weight to satisfy me. :)

BTW: you know you hit a home run with a post when multiple people quote you.


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12, Loxia 21, Loxia 35, FE 35 1.4, FE 55, Batis 85, Batis 135

LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,329 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
Dec 02, 2013 14:17 |  #367

sega62 wrote in post #16495781external link
Yep I dig it, i'm a musician too, no one can tell anything, UNLESS they have some kind of knowledge.
Yep, that's life!

Afraid not. Put up two pictures side by side, both of the Grand Canyon at sunset. One has the dynamic range to allow the shadows to show some feature...the other ( Canon shot ) does not and the shadows are just dark muddy areas. Which do you think your uneducated audience will like better? Which would you like better?




LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
gabebalazs's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
Toledo, OH
Dec 02, 2013 14:32 |  #368

Hogloff wrote in post #16495793external link
Well I shoot landscapes and battle dynamic range every time. Has not a thing to do with Geeks, but more so not having a blown out pure white sky or a totally featureless shadow area in your photo. I use GND filters and merging multiple exposure shots all the time to tame the dynamic range of the photo. Comments like yours just shows me you don't really understand the limitations of today's equipment, or you never shoot under conditions which require these techniques to achieve a great photo...or you just don't care. In either case...you are totally wrong when it comes to dynamic range.

Thanks for the compliments.
This forum always provides such great entertainment :) I stated my experience, sorry to be so ignorant, I think I'll just give this whole photography thing up ;)

Oh and Ansel Adams is rolling in his grave.


5DIV | 5DIII | 80D | A7RII | Canon 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 24-105 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/4L IS | 135 f/2L | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 STM | 18-135 IS STM | SONY FE 28-70 OSS | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Tamron 150-600 | Ʃ 35 1.4 ART | Rokinon 14 2.8 | Sigma 1.4x | Metabones IV | 2x Canon 600EX-RT
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
gabebalazs's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
Toledo, OH
Dec 02, 2013 14:34 |  #369

David Arbogast wrote in post #16495799external link
Well said Gabe. In your own work, you display an impressive mastery over your equipment and you regularly produce images of an excellence that seems to belie the limitations of your gear. So, your thoughts, in this topic, carry sufficient weight to satisfy me. :)

BTW: you know you hit a home run with a post when multiple people quote you.

Well, thanks but based on some people quoting me apparently I don't know sh*t about photography. ;)


5DIV | 5DIII | 80D | A7RII | Canon 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 24-105 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/4L IS | 135 f/2L | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 STM | 18-135 IS STM | SONY FE 28-70 OSS | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Tamron 150-600 | Ʃ 35 1.4 ART | Rokinon 14 2.8 | Sigma 1.4x | Metabones IV | 2x Canon 600EX-RT
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
David Arbogast's Avatar
10,431 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Aug 2010
West Point, Georgia
Dec 02, 2013 14:36 |  #370

gabebalazs wrote in post #16495855external link
Well, thanks but based on some people quoting me apparently I don't know sh*t about photography. ;)

I don't think anyone is saying or suggesting that. At least I hope not. :)


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12, Loxia 21, Loxia 35, FE 35 1.4, FE 55, Batis 85, Batis 135

LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,329 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
Dec 02, 2013 14:41 |  #371

gabebalazs wrote in post #16495855external link
Well, thanks but based on some people quoting me apparently I don't know sh*t about photography. ;)

I never said that at all...just your nonchalant approach to dynamic range or the lack of just indicates you don't understand the troubles some go through to manage the dynamic range. Your attitude to belittle the topic because it does not affect your style of photography shows more of a disrespect to other photographers that do tackle dynamic range on a regular basis.




LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
gabebalazs's Avatar
Joined Nov 2008
Toledo, OH
Dec 02, 2013 14:43 |  #372

Hogloff wrote in post #16495879external link
I never said that at all...just your nonchalant approach to dynamic range or the lack of just indicates you don't understand the troubles some go through to manage the dynamic range. Your attitude to belittle the topic because it does not affect your style of photography shows more of a disrespect to other photographers that do tackle dynamic range on a regular basis.

Go back and read my original post, then decide if I was disrespectful.
I didn't say anything bad about DR did I? I just stated my opinion and shared my experience and feedback I get from people regarding something that most people don't necessarily notice. I also posted an analogy, I wonder if you could tell me the fine tonal differences that my Suhr guitar produces compared to a Strat. So should I be offended if you can't hear it? :)
Just relax, I think you're overreacting a bit. But I apologize if I hurt your feelings. :confused:


5DIV | 5DIII | 80D | A7RII | Canon 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 24-105 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/4L IS | 135 f/2L | 85 1.8 | 50 1.8 STM | 18-135 IS STM | SONY FE 28-70 OSS | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Tamron 150-600 | Ʃ 35 1.4 ART | Rokinon 14 2.8 | Sigma 1.4x | Metabones IV | 2x Canon 600EX-RT
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
davidc502's Avatar
3,455 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Dec 2010
Tennessee
Dec 02, 2013 14:54 |  #373

Hogloff wrote in post #16495801external link
Afraid not. Put up two pictures side by side, both of the Grand Canyon at sunset. One has the dynamic range to allow the shadows to show some feature...the other ( Canon shot ) does not and the shadows are just dark muddy areas. Which do you think your uneducated audience will like better? Which would you like better?

Queston:

1. What professional is going to take photo's with two systems (side by side) and ask customers to decide between the two? Talk about trying to confuse people.

2. If you did ask your customers to choose between the higher dynamic range of the Nikon compared to Canon, do you think they could tell you which one they thought was better and why? (untrained eye). The answer may surprise you. I know which photo most pro's would choose, but costomers are different.

3. Of course everyone would like for customers to have the very latest and greatest in technology, and we want to present ourselves as being the best. Owning the D800 and having the skill needed to run it would certainly be positive step forward to that goal. However, not everyone has the money or means to own "the very best" or at least the very best in a certain criteria (like DR). Does that mean customer A is being short sticked because photos are being generated from lesser equipment? Absolutely NOT. If the customer is very satisfied with your work (regardless of the equipment), then you have completed the job.

My 2¢


_
My Gear is ---> Here

LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonVsNikon
Senior Member
255 posts
Joined Jan 2013
Dec 02, 2013 14:55 |  #374
banned

I think we can all agree that "more" dynamic range is better.

I hope no one is arguing that point




LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
jdizzle's Avatar
69,419 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Harvesting Nano crystals
Dec 02, 2013 15:05 |  #375

gabebalazs wrote in post #16495850external link
Thanks for the compliments.
This forum always provides such great entertainment :) I stated my experience, sorry to be so ignorant, I think I'll just give this whole photography thing up ;)

Oh and Ansel Adams is rolling in his grave.

If he was alive today, he would be using digital medium format.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

42,263 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 5D III vs. Nikon D800E Test
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00519 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is jessica.kirsh
909 guests, 474 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017