Canon 5D III vs. Nikon D800E Test

pwm2 wrote in post #16494959
I'm pretty sure they have done something long before now. But if we assume 3-4 years lead time from decision to financing, agreements, design, factory, trimming etc, then lots of people get the chance to complain that they aren't doing anything.

The problem here is that they can't inform the market until they have a product on the way to the stores, or the sales would tumble.

I hope you are right.

davidc502 wrote in post #16495049
I'm not a demanding shooter, but I do push the shadows. The question is how many push the shadows to the point where they see banding. My guess is not many. However, if one tends to under-expose or is in a situation where underexposing is a must, banding may be seen sooner, when pushing the shadows. Having said that, this problem may affect more than what I figure.

When I shoot dance competitions, it's a good idea to underexpose 1-2 stops or risk a lot of clipping/blown highlights. So far with my 5d2, in that situation, when I push the shadows, I've yet to see banding. Pulling out the shadows 2 stops is hardly pushing the envelope, but considering these photos are underexposed to begin with, I thought I might see some banding, but no.

I shoot dancers too, and so far yes i cant push too much, and i,m on iso 3200 , but thats the way it is, i still got those contracts.
Friends are more important than the camera DR
And creativity

sega62 wrote in post #16495123
I shoot dancers too, and so far yes i cant push too much, and i,m on iso 3200 , but thats the way it is, i still got those contracts.
Friends are more important than the camera DR
And creativity

What do friends and camera DR have in common. You lost me.

davidc502 wrote in post #16495049
I'm not a demanding shooter, but I do push the shadows. The question is how many push the shadows to the point where they see banding. My guess is not many. However, if one tends to under-expose or is in a situation where underexposing is a must, banding may be seen sooner, when pushing the shadows. Having said that, this problem may affect more than what I figure.

When I shoot dance competitions, it's a good idea to underexpose 1-2 stops or risk a lot of clipping/blown highlights. So far with my 5d2, in that situation, when I push the shadows, I've yet to see banding. Pulling out the shadows 2 stops is hardly pushing the envelope, but considering these photos are underexposed to begin with, I thought I might see some banding, but no.

Banding does show up even with proper exposure. I've experienced this with the 5D 2 and 5D 3.

Hogloff wrote in post #16495201
What do friends and camera DR have in common. You lost me.

Friends don't let friends buy Canon!

jdizzle wrote in post #16495210
Banding does show up even with proper exposure. I've experienced this with the 5D 2 and 5D 3.

You're absolutely correct, and I've been able to confirm this on the 5d2. I was just saying it may affect more people if they underexpose.

Hogloff wrote in post #16495201
What do friends and camera DR have in common. You lost me.

doesn't take much to lose you,
CONTACTS, tyat's what I meant, they don't go crazy for DR, its much more the creativity, which you can't buy!

sega62 wrote in post #16495419
doesn't take much to lose you,
CONTACTS, tyat's what I meant, they don't go crazy for DR, its much more the creativity, which you can't buy!

Sorry, but you still lost me. Are you saying you can't be creative with a high DR camera? Or you can't be creative with a Nikon camera. Or your friends are snobs and only hang with people that shoot Canon? What is it?

davidc502 wrote in post #16495232
You're absolutely correct, and I've been able to confirm this on the 5d2. I was just saying it may affect more people if they underexpose.

I haven't seen banding at normal exposure readings with my 5D2 and 5D3, but I usually shoot manually and open up exposure by +3/4 or more from meter reading.

Hogloff wrote in post #16495448
Sorry, but you still lost me. Are you saying you can't be creative with a high DR camera? Or you can't be creative with a Nikon camera. Or your friends are snobs and only hang with people that shoot Canon? What is it?

What I meant is people who are into art, dancing, well they are more into creativity, meaning they will take your stuff, as long as they like it, it doesn't take anything real fancy with DR, more photoshop!

Basically art is what it is, you like it or not, its subjective!
Not like technique!
So in the end you can shoot Nikon, Fuji, olympus, as long as you are creative, that is what I was answering to the other shooter, who also shoots dancers....
in the dark!

sega62 wrote in post #16495466
What I meant is people who are into art, dancing, well they are more into creativity, meaning they will take your stuff, as long as they like it, it doesn't take anything real fancy with DR, more photoshop!

Basically art is what it is, you like it or not, its subjective!
Not like technique!
So in the end you can shoot Nikon, Fuji, olympus, as long as you are creative, that is what I was answering to the other shooter, who also shoots dancers....
in the dark!

Still not sure how DR plays into this. So you can't be creative if you shoot a camera that has more DR.

Didn't know DR and being creative were mutually exclusive

It's rather easy to understand though. Whether a picture is good or not, is determined by how creative the photographer is i.e. how creative/good he is with light. Dynamic Range is not the deciding factor. It's never a bad thing to have a sensor that can capture a broad Dynamic Range, but a good picture can be taken with any camera, even with those with vastly inferior sensors (e.g. smartphones).

jocau wrote in post #16495629
It's rather easy to understand though. Whether a picture is good or not, is determined by how creative the photographer is i.e. how creative/good he is with light. Dynamic Range is not the deciding factor. It's never a bad thing to have a sensor that can capture a broad Dynamic Range, but a good picture can be taken with any camera, even with those with vastly inferior sensors (e.g. smartphones).

Yes, but with all things being equal ( that includes the photographer ), the better the camera, the better the results. A photo with more dynamic range will always be at least as good as the same photo with less dynamic range, quite often the photo with more dynamic range will be better.

CanonVsNikon wrote in post #16495527
Still not sure how DR plays into this. So you can't be creative if you shoot a camera that has more DR.

Didn't know DR and being creative were mutually exclusive

they can be, believe me, you don't NEED it, was like that before the Sony sensor, trust me!

jocau wrote in post #16495629
It's rather easy to understand though. Whether a picture is good or not, is determined by how creative the photographer is i.e. how creative/good he is with light. Dynamic Range is not the deciding factor. It's never a bad thing to have a sensor that can capture a broad Dynamic Range, but a good picture can be taken with any camera, even with those with vastly inferior sensors (e.g. smartphones).

How come Jocau you get it, and some don't, I know english is not my primary language, nut still, with a little effort people usually catches on!

And yes, people were shooting before the Sony sensor!
Great pics, and will still do with the Digic 5 +

I rest my case!