As far as low-light focusing...I think the Nikon has the "stronger" AF module; the D800 will function with lenses, or lens/teleconverter combinations, or lens/extension tube combinations that let is as little as f/8. Did anybody see MarkW's near-darkness focusing sample photo with his new D800??? That new AF system fopcusies down to basically, outdoor nighttime levels.
As far as Tyler's "comparable lenses" for the high-end...Canon's 35mm f/1.4 is quite an aged, antiquated design, not worth anywhere near the price it is set at, and lagging behind the all-new Nikkor 35/1.4. Canon is now updating its 24-70 because the old one was getting hammered by the Nikkor 24-70 AF-S. If a guy wants cheap lenses, Canon does have plenty of them. The auto-bracketing feature and MANULA mode? on come on--that's way to slow for many multi-exposure scenarios...the faster the muklti-exposures are made, the less subject movement ends up in the files to combine...manual focus is wayyyyyy too slow compared to a high-speed burst where the multiple exposures are pre-programmed and the camera can execute them without multiple shutter presses done in-between multiple adjustments of the shutter.
So far, nobody has explained to me the exact, accurate, and true nature of Canon's new multiple exposure system; there has been speculation that it has been improved--but is it, actually??? Or does it still have the same old Canon-style, limited auto exposure bracketing system with just three exposures separated by no more than a narrow band of possible setting values???
As far as high-ISO performance...I watched the Digital REV video comparison of the 5D-III and the D800...seems to me that the High-ISO banding the 5D Mark II's sensor had is still present in the new 5D-III's sensor. Also, what I thought was siocking was that the 5D-III was reviewed by a professional wedding shooter,Ryan Brenizier and he noted (and showed) how poor the Mark III's sensor is when recovering from underexposure of just four stops; THAT to me is the worrisome "feature" of the Canon-made sensor in the 5D-III---that to me indicates that Canon has NOT developed the extremely low read noise electronics that both Nikon and Pentax have developed for the new SONY-made sensors they are using. http://www.ryanbrenizer.com/2012/03/a-nikon-users-review-of-the-canon-5d-mark-iii/
Take a look at Ryan's silhouette, where he underexposed by only 2.5 f/stops, and the image looks like CRAP...full of banding. As he states: "5D Mark III files are significantly worse at dealing with pushed exposures than the Nikon D3s, and seemingly also the D4 and D800. The Nikons keep a lot of dynamic range in their shadows, and you can raise exposures quite a bit without significantly degrading image quality. Even if you try to nail exposures, this gives you more dynamic range headway and better ability to creatively dodge and burn an image.This quick test shot put me about 2.5 stops under where I wanted to be even for a silhouette, and even at ISO 100 raising it back up in post introduces noise and banding:"
Look at the sample...that is a crap performance from the sensor...so, for those who think the new Canon is going to be a good performer in low-light and at High ISO levels...uh...sorry, but the new SONY-made sensors in the D7000 Nikon and the Pentax K-5 can shoot a shot with the exposure set for an equivalent ISO value of over 25,000 to 50,000, and the image, with the camera set to ISO 200, and the entirely BLACK RAW file can be opened in a RAW converter and rescued to actually a "decent" image...from what Ryan Brenizer shows, the 5D-III's images can not withstand much underexposure AT ALL, before banding looks like crap--and that is at ISO 100...I'm NOT seeing this from Canon-made sensors...
The thing is, right now, there are very,very few people qualified to evaluate either camera...the cameras are both generally unavailable,and there has not been much real-world evaluation. The banding problem Canon had with the 5D-II appears to still be there in the 5D-III. A camera sensor that cannot recover from a 2.5 stop underexposure at ISO 100??? Uh...both Nikon and Pentax have addressed that issue with incredbly low,low noise electronics that can take the sensor data read-out and not pollute it or 'eff it up...so far, I am NOT hearing that the Canon 5D-III can do that. Both Brenizer, and Digital REV show, and state, that the 5D-III has a lot of noise at elevated ISO values. It's pretty clear--Canon is lagging behind SONY in sensor development...
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/32/32929-22e23acc63d6ecb25e5ee941be87121f.jpg?1734162700)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/39/39497-93752210dd49247220721e5ac8c61245.jpg?1734173613)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/32/32148-95f8731a01012cd472d3896791e3b7de.jpg?1734161045)