D3 Vs 5D...intresting

[wilson68]

Original from Italian website :
http://www.luciolepri.it/lc2/marcocavina/articoli_fotografici/TEST_Canon_Nikon_full_frame/00_pag.htm


Translate from Google:
http://translate.google.com/transla...frame/00_pag.htm&langpair=it|en&hl=en&ie=UTF8

 

[artyboy]

the D3 has already surpassed Canon's latest flagship in high ISO; comparing it to a 2.5 year old 5D is just out-of-whack.

 

[bernstein1234]

Kenrockwell has already did a test, and yes, D3 thrashes 5D. But this is like kind of expected, since 5D is 2.5 years old. But one consideration is the price of D3: $7k without lens... how many of us here would actually pay this for a hobby?

 

[Xing]

the D3 has already surpassed Canon's latest flagship in high ISO; comparing it to a 2.5 year old 5D is just out-of-whack.

seems contrary to what you have proclaimed leh... the 2.5 yr old canon 5d is still holding out pretty well in this review :thumbsup:

 

[psalm27]

the D3 has already surpassed Canon's latest flagship in high ISO; comparing it to a 2.5 year old 5D is just out-of-whack.

You should compare D3 with 1DS Mk III instead and not D5 that is 2.5 years old. D3 is Nikon best and 1DS Mk III is Canon best. Maybe it should be compared with 1D Mk III for it price range. If D3 doesn't surpass 5D in performance, it is not worth for a 2nd look.

I'm actually please to hear that D3 is taking the bench mark of 5D in comparison. It is just like comparing a Merc with Toyota.

This is just my 2 cents.

 

[wind30]

seems contrary to what you have proclaimed leh... the 2.5 yr old canon 5d is still holding out pretty well in this review :thumbsup:

yup, especially when the 5D is paired with the 17-40 lens. But actually the review did not test much. Seems to be like a resolution test. From the review, I would be hard pressed to say which is better if you looked at the 17-40 lens pics.

 

[night86mare]

one look at the last picture makes me laugh

99.99% of perfection

so i guess the reviewer will keep his d3 forever, even if the d4, d5, d6 and d7 come out :bsmilie:

 

[KY1977]

I think 1 positive point with the Nikon is that they allow crop lens to be used. Unlike Canon which 'discourage' prof from using EFS lens.

 

[artyboy]

i did not compare the D3 to the 5D, they did.
yes, the 1Ds Mk III should be used in comparison since they're both flagship models.
but i can understand why they used the 5D instead, becos they're both similar MP-sized FF DSLRs. nah, im not beating up the 5D, i used to have one. its IQ is one of the best even when compared to the latest DSLR offerings. but the D3 has now taken the high ISO low noise crown. regardless, saying that the D3 is "better" than the 5D is like saying that your neighbour's Sports Benz is better than your BMW. technology never stops moving, its a fact of life.

 

[APetGuppy]

D3 & 5D are wrong comparisons...It's abit too obvious that D3's technology is way way superior to a 5D, maybe Mark III will be better to compare. Anyway I must admit that the D3 is freaking awesome anyway...

 

[zaren]

based on the test images on that website, this is my assessment (camera that performed better in each test/zone) of resolution/sharpness.

14 mm:
Zone A : 5D
Zone B : 5D
Zone C : 5D
Zone D : D3
Zone E : D3

18 mm:
Zone A : 5D
Zone B : 5D
Zone C : 5D
Zone D : D3
Zone E : D3

24 mm:
Zone A : 5D
Zone B : 5D
Zone C : D3
Zone D : 5D
Zone E : D3

Assuming that the sharpness settings are identical for both cameras, the 5D is better at the centre of image, while the D3 is better at the edges/corner. YMMV.

 

[junniee]

agree

based on the test images on that website, this is my assessment (camera that performed better in each test/zone) of resolution/sharpness.

14 mm:
Zone A : 5D
Zone B : 5D
Zone C : 5D
Zone D : D3
Zone E : D3

18 mm:
Zone A : 5D
Zone B : 5D
Zone C : 5D
Zone D : D3
Zone E : D3

24 mm:
Zone A : 5D
Zone B : 5D
Zone C : D3
Zone D : 5D
Zone E : D3

Assuming that the sharpness settings are identical for both cameras, the 5D is better at the centre of image, while the D3 is better at the edges/corner. YMMV.

 

[Russ]

To me it was more a test comparing the 2 lenses than it was the 2 bodies.

Considering the 5D+17-40L combo costs about 60% of the D3+14-24 combo and is 2.5 years older in technology, I can't say that I am that impressed with the D3.

I just hope that the megapixel madness stops at about 25MP for FF. I see little point going beyond that level.

 

[hazmee]

Wow. Canon's not so high end 5D still rocks! One thing I find it weird though. Canon's corner sharpness is quite a dismal even using the same Nikkor lens. Canon must be busy 'fixing' this problem.

 

[doodah]

I have no idea what we are doing.

If we want to consider resolution, then we are in fact comparing lens quality. And true, there's nothing like the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8.

If we look at image quality at high ISO, the D3 is certainly up there. But Canon 1Ds MkIII holds up just as well, especially when one realizes it's a 21 MP camera. After downsizing, the 1Ds MkIII images at high ISO are simply NOT distinguishable from the D3.

If we want to compare a 2.5 year old camera (which is probably going to be replaced soon) to a brand new camera, we may as well ask ourselves: where in the world was Nikon ALL THESE YEARS when Canon was offering several full frame cameras??? Remember: Nikon had the (i) D2x, a US$5000 professional camera whose performance at ISO 400 is as bad as ISO 3200 on a typical Canon DSLR (ii) D2H, a 4 MP professional sports camera whose specs are a complete joke (11 AF point, 4 MP, poor high ISO performance) when compared to the 1D series.

 

[SnakeJackal]

OOT ... picture quality should have the following weigtage when comparing 5D and D3
1. resolution 10%
2. composition 50%
3. colour 10%
4. lighting/contrast 10%
5. focus speed and focus accuracy 10%
6. X-Facor

 

[calebk]

OOT ... picture quality should have the following weigtage when comparing 5D and D3
1. resolution 10%
2. composition 50%
3. colour 10%
4. lighting/contrast 10%
5. focus speed and focus accuracy 10%
6. X-Facor

If you are comparing image quality from a purely technical point of view, WRT to sensor quality (camera bodies), then only resolving power, colour and noise handling matter.

What does composition, lighting/contrast, focus speed and accuracy, and X-factor have to do with it?

 

[alternatve]

OOT ... picture quality should have the following weigtage when comparing 5D and D3
1. resolution 10%
2. composition 50%
3. colour 10%
4. lighting/contrast 10%
5. focus speed and focus accuracy 10%
6. X-Facor

X-Factor!

To see which one brings in the chicks better? :think:

Samuel

 

[nightwolf75]

closing off another needless brand 'comparison'... if it can be even called a comparison in the first place... 2 different techs, from different 'eras' (in so far as digital is concerned) make this a moot comparison.