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

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 05 Oct 2014 (Sunday) 03:23
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

D750 vs 5d3 sample test in a review???

 
ptcanon3ti
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,391 posts
Gallery: 442 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 6476
Joined Sep 2012
Location: NJ
     
Oct 26, 2014 14:24 |  #151

gabebalazs wrote in post #17234140 (external link)
For landscape shots, especially the way you do it (one shot, low ISO) definitely the Nikon/Sony is better. No question about it. I'm totally fine with that.

What I'm not fine at all is, and this is not aimed at you, when I hear generalized statements that the Nikon/Sony is better in any situation. Just because it is better at low ISO DR? Again, it has it's advantages at low ISO, hence the better DxO score. But once you reach an ISO (800-1600 depending on model), the DR advantage is gone.
I shot about 1500 shots at a wedding last night, only about 10% was below ISO 800. So to me the Nikon/Sony DR advantage at low ISO means pretty much nothing. Landscapers think the exact opposite, and I'm fine with that too.

So the bottom line is, and it has been said many times, whether one is better or worse than the other is dependent on the intended use. Generalizing is not going to work. It's almost like saying blondes are better looking than brunettes. :) Crepes are better than pancakes. Apples are better than oranges :)

Agreed. I guess all of my frustration comes from canon's inability to hang at low iso DR. I've been doing HDR landscapes now for a long time...still working out the processing bugs. If only canon had a sony sensor with their own ergonomics and focus system. *sigh

I'd really like a D810 AND a 7D2. :D


Paul
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/petshots/ (external link)
Body - Nikon D750
Lenses - Nikon 20 f1.8 / Nikon 16-35 f4 / Sigma 105 OS Macro / Sigma 24-105 f4 Art / Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC / Sigma 150-600 "S"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Oct 26, 2014 15:36 |  #152

Yeah, I totally understand you. And HDR doesn't always work, e.g. what if there is some wind and the leaves, grass, etc. is moving, you can't align the layers perfectly then. I don't do HDR, but I presume that would pose a problem...


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Oct 26, 2014 16:09 as a reply to  @ gabebalazs's post |  #153

If you use Canon's 2 shot bracketing on the newer cameras you get less movement in objects. You can have the shots three stops apart which is usually plenty DR for any landscape photo using a Canon sensor.

If one uses manual blending in Photoshop instead of auto HDR software, the movement between shots is absolutely zero issue and can be easily dealt with, but may take a little more time.

I've never once missed a Landscape photo due to limited DR on a Canon camera, and that's with really pushing the limits on crazy difficult scenes.

When working with a Nikon RAW file, you can't properly extract the full dynamic range without the software going into an HDR tone mapping mode. Photos look like trash with the shadow and highlight sliders maxed out. In order to make a Nikon file look as good as it can, it has to be processed as two separate files and then manually blended anyway.

In the end the exmor sensors need nearly just as much work to make use of them in post processing. There is also the limitation of what a lens can provide in high contrast edges, which matters more to a scene's useable dynamic range than any current sensor design.

For landscapes, extra DR doesn't hurt, but it sure doesn't help much either. There is no free lunch and is why I still use Canon cameras even though I do 100% landscape work.

The extra low ISO DR is far more useful for any other type of photography where bracketing and tripods are not an option.

---------------

On the other hand. As a competitive person. It makes me happy seeing the "competition" dump systems for reasons that don't make much sense. In 100% of the cases I have see landscape photographers switch to Nikon, their photos stayed the same or in most cases got worse. :lol:

---------------

With that said, I am really liking the color output of the D750. Combined with the tilt screen and compact size, it looks like an amazing landscape tool for full frame users. It also looks to have great high ISO ability. If Nikon also has the lenses one wants, then I think it would be one of the best cameras for landscape on the market right now.


My 500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drveede76
Member
121 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
     
Oct 26, 2014 17:10 |  #154

Canon_Lover wrote in post #17234295 (external link)
If you use Canon's 2 shot bracketing on the newer cameras you get less movement in objects. You can have the shots three stops apart which is usually plenty DR for any landscape photo using a Canon sensor.

If one uses manual blending in Photoshop instead of auto HDR software, the movement between shots is absolutely zero issue and can be easily dealt with, but may take a little more time.

I've never once missed a Landscape photo due to limited DR on a Canon camera, and that's with really pushing the limits on crazy difficult scenes.

When working with a Nikon RAW file, you can't properly extract the full dynamic range without the software going into an HDR tone mapping mode. Photos look like trash with the shadow and highlight sliders maxed out. In order to make a Nikon file look as good as it can, it has to be processed as two separate files and then manually blended anyway.

In the end the exmor sensors need nearly just as much work to make use of them in post processing. There is also the limitation of what a lens can provide in high contrast edges, which matters more to a scene's useable dynamic range than any current sensor design.

For landscapes, extra DR doesn't hurt, but it sure doesn't help much either. There is no free lunch and is why I still use Canon cameras even though I do 100% landscape work.

The extra low ISO DR is far more useful for any other type of photography where bracketing and tripods are not an option.

---------------

On the other hand. As a competitive person. It makes me happy seeing the "competition" dump systems for reasons that don't make much sense. In 100% of the cases I have see landscape photographers switch to Nikon, their photos stayed the same or in most cases got worse. :lol:

---------------

With that said, I am really liking the color output of the D750. Combined with the tilt screen and compact size, it looks like an amazing landscape tool for full frame users. It also looks to have great high ISO ability. If Nikon also has the lenses one wants, then I think it would be one of the best cameras for landscape on the market right now.

Good points, are there any side by side comparisons between a D810/750 and a 6D/5Diii? I would like see a side by side to see what the realistic difference in the DR at 100 ISO. I have seen that the Sony sensor's DR falls off and is far below the 6D by 3200-6400 ISO. My 6D at 2.8 is clean up through and including 12800 ISO. Which for me is more important, everyone has their own needs.

Dave


6D, 24-70L 2.8 ii, 16-35L 2.8, 70-200L 2.8 IS ii, 24-105L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Oct 26, 2014 17:22 |  #155

drveede76 wrote in post #17234356 (external link)
Good points, are there any side by side comparisons between a D810/750 and a 6D/5Diii? I would like see a side by side to see what the realistic difference in the DR at 100 ISO. I have seen that the Sony sensor's DR falls off and is far below the 6D by 3200-6400 ISO. My 6D at 2.8 is clean up through and including 12800 ISO. Which for me is more important, everyone has their own needs.

Dave

Between any exmor and canon sensor there is going to be a huge difference at iso 100 in the Dr from a single exposure. I used to own a D800 and have processed files from most exmor sensor cameras.

In practice, it takes just as much post processing time and skill to make use of exmor files as it does to combine bracketed shots from Canon. Lazy exmor processing will always look worse than a properly hand blended bracket from Canon.

I can't state strongly enough how much I am liking the colors from the D750. Nikon's and Sony's color always looked weird along with the WB and tint. I would take a D750 over a D810 if handed to me for free. If I was shooting weddings or doing photojournalism I would have a Nikon camera without a doubt. For landscapes, there's not much to draw me over.


My 500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,139 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6241
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 26, 2014 17:36 |  #156

Canon_lover, while mostly true, I disagree with some points. 2 shot bracket is my preferred with canon, but doesn't work well for really long exposures, bulb shots.

Regarding *missing* shots, not technically not missing, just pushing to uncomfortable levels. There is no free lunch, I agree, but that ability for canon to pull shadows comparatively is kinda ridiculous.

I shoot with a 14mm lens that is difficult to use with filters. I can effectively brush or apply a GND in post with any worries about noise pattern.

I definitely understand the no free lunch principal and even bracket with the Sony when I would with the canon's, but the canon's can use at least a stop better to put away practical differences concern.

The megapixel race.... Images are a tad crisper for sure, generally more crunchy files from a the Sony, that lack of AA on top of higher resolution (by a large factor) really does make a difference.

Aside from pure sensor performance, canon does dumb down the crap out of their camera. I think cameras with heavy App presence are the way to go.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Oct 26, 2014 17:55 |  #157

Charlie wrote in post #17234382 (external link)
Canon_lover, while mostly true, I disagree with some points. 2 shot bracket is my preferred with canon, but doesn't work well for really long exposures, bulb shots.

I'm curious if you have a specific example of this scenario? I have never encountered this problem before. It's not like you can't touch the shadow slider with Canon RAW files. In fact the latest Canon sensors look the same with the shadow slider pushed to the max in ACR as it does on exmor sensors. You have to lift the global brightness or black levels really hard to see the difference. The difference doesn't show until past a 3 stop push at ISO 100.

I guarantee 100% if I ever once miss a shot because of a lack in DR from a current Canon sensor, I will sell my Canon gear the next day and buy something with exmor. Until then I have always found a way to get my results. :cool:

You can tell I am not another Canon fanboy ( regardless of screen name lol) because I am aware of the real differences in technology. In practical use I find that exmor is far more helpful for at low ISO when a tripod or bracketing is not possible, such as with weddings and journalism. I would gladly use a Nikon for weddings over any Canon.


My 500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brexxi
Mostly Lurking
12 posts
Joined Oct 2014
     
Oct 27, 2014 08:36 |  #158

Canon_Lover wrote in post #17234415 (external link)
In practical use I find that exmor is far more helpful for at low ISO when a tripod or bracketing is not possible, such as with weddings and journalism. I would gladly use a Nikon for weddings over any Canon.

Weddings require more low-light performance. Why would you choose Nikon over Canon for it? The Nikons are supposed to have worse high-ISOs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,432 posts
Likes: 2392
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 27, 2014 09:29 |  #159

Brexxi wrote in post #17235339 (external link)
Weddings require more low-light performance. Why would you choose Nikon over Canon for it? The Nikons are supposed to have worse high-ISOs.

That no longer seems to be the case.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,185 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5934
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 27, 2014 09:34 |  #160

Per the DPReview studio review tool... I think the Sony sensor has the edge at the low ISO noise floor, but doesn't have any advantage really at the high end of the spectrum.

2nd set is via the "print" option on the DP review studio tool.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonVsNikon
Senior Member
255 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Oct 27, 2014 10:05 |  #161
bannedPermanent ban

Be sure the scale down the images for an accurate comparison.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Oct 27, 2014 10:06 |  #162

TeamSpeed, I think we should post the same image in PRINT mode also, where the output size is the same for all. In that case that D810 is roughly the same as the 6D.

Regardless who "wins" this race, I think that's the fair method when we compare 2 or more cameras. I know you know that too, so I was wondering if you could post the same in PRINT mode from DPreview.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,185 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5934
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Oct 27, 2014 10:08 |  #163

I will add the print mode, but the 100% pixel view is very, very useful if you are one of those that need to crop your images due to limited focal lengths in your bag. If X is cleaner than Y at the pixel level, then you have more material to work with long-term, than to just take that image and print it.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Oct 27, 2014 10:17 |  #164

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17235498 (external link)
I will add the print mode, but the 100% pixel view is very, very useful if you are one of those that need to crop your images due to limited focal lengths in your bag. If X is cleaner than Y at the pixel level, then you have more material to work with long-term, than to just take that image and print it.

Thanks for the PRINT mode post.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Oct 27, 2014 10:41 |  #165

Brexxi wrote in post #17235339 (external link)
Weddings require more low-light performance. Why would you choose Nikon over Canon for it? The Nikons are supposed to have worse high-ISOs.

Not true. I like the viewfinder shooting ergonomics of Nikons. Add the low ISO ability and it would be a dream for outdoor wedding shots in high contrast scenes. I also think the tilt screen is also a huge plus for weddings/events. I'm 6'4" and still need to hold the camera over my head at certain times.

I no longer shooting weddings, so my needs are soley based on landscapes. Landscape photography is ironically the last place low ISO DR is needed if you use simple and solid techniques.


My 500PX (external link)

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

40,046 views & 0 likes for this thread
D750 vs 5d3 sample test in a review???
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Crazeenick
857 guests, 323 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.