After the Rumors and the Realities...What about Canon...Can they near the Nikon D800?

GeorgieGirl · Feb 9, 2012

So...with all the Canon Rumors...what are the opinions on the 5D Mark III and that list of rumors when put up against what Nikon just released for their D800...I'm still looking for my first Full Frame DSLR!:mrgreen:

analog.universe · Feb 9, 2012

The rumors I've been reading suggest the 5D III will actually be a 5D "X", and they're saying 22mp at 7.5fps, which sounds awesome, and an entirely different animal than the D800. Apparently they're going to release another body later on (40mp), to compete with the D800.

Markw · Feb 9, 2012

Which is odd, and smart. Everyone from Nikon were wanting a D700 replacement, and Canon had a hand on the upper MP game. Now, Nikon wrangles video AND the upper MP in the same camera, and Canon takes the D700 replacement market. But, if anyone owns a D700, I doubt they'll be jumping to Canon. Either way, it's sure to be interesting, and it'll be fun to watch Nikon scramble and make a killer D700 replacement this year!

Mark

Overread · Feb 9, 2012

Rumours are, as always, all over the place. Heck the 24-70mm MII rumour has only just come true and they were mostly wrong about that (no IS) and that one has been "rumoured" for years now.

For the 5DMIII the only semi-certain fact is that one was spotted with a 200-400mm in Africa. At least an unidentified camera was seen being used out there with the lens. It's supposed that, from looking at the cameras design/outer body shape that the 5DMIII (if that is the camera that was seen) will have an upgraded AF system - with many hoping/wishing/thinking it will be the same/similar AF that the 7D sports currently.

Other rumours are all up in the air and, honestly, you might as well pic MP values out of a hat. Some say more, some say the same some even say less - the only ones who know are canon and they are not letting on.

GeorgieGirl · Feb 9, 2012

One of the things that seems pretty snappy to me about this Nikon release are the notes about this face detection to the extent that there is this logic that does not require any exposure compensation, for background for example. When I think about it, I think why would a system need to have compensation if it was made right to begin with? This struck me as something smart.

analog.universe · Feb 9, 2012

GeorgieGirl said:
why would a system need to have compensation if it was made right to begin with?

To allow the photographer to make choices...

GeorgieGirl · Feb 9, 2012

The choices are still there...apparently just not needed. So for example a portrait with a snow background will no longer need to be dialed in to be 'right'...if I get what this feature is all about.

Overread · Feb 9, 2012

I think what the feature means is that the face detection works so that, when used, the cameras metering system only meters off the detected face area. As a result exposure compensation because of an overly bright/dark background won't be needed.

GeorgieGirl · Feb 9, 2012

Overread said:
I think what the feature means is that the face detection works so that, when used, the cameras metering system only meters off the detected face area. As a result exposure compensation because of an overly bright/dark background won't be needed.

Yes. Exactly. Smart. Very, very smart.

Overread · Feb 9, 2012

Only if it detects the face correctly; and if it detects the right face; and if the face was what you wanted the shot metered and based off; and if there is even a face in the shot to start with

But yes its a smart move to adjust the code, however I can see it causing a little confusion since its effectively pushing people into using spot metering (if slightly expanded spot metering). This might well cause some confusion when shooting - esp since you'll still have to use exposure compensations when shooting other subjects in the same light. Shifting from shooting, say, a dog to a person in the same light and situation might well confuse when suddenly the exposure compensation you dialed in for the dog is suddenly incorrect even though the lighting hasn't changed.

Markw · Feb 9, 2012

I'm sure it'll work perfectly fine. It's a metering and AF system from Nikon's flagship camera. So, I'm sure it'll work as intended.

Mark

EDIT: And the fact that it can focus on 30-40 (can't remember the exact number) faces at once mean's it's incredibly accurate and responsive.

GeorgieGirl · Feb 9, 2012

Is that right... Wow.

MLeeK · Feb 9, 2012

The most recent rumors on the 5d3 or 5dx or whatever it is... are much better than they had been! The focus system had better be a major upgrade or I really may jump ship. Which is a nightmare I don't want to contemplate.
I think the 40MP camera is a bit of extreme overkill... Not sure WHY they feel the need to do THAT.

analog.universe · Feb 9, 2012

MLeeK said:
I think the 40MP camera is a bit of extreme overkill... Not sure WHY they feel the need to do THAT.

To dissuade studio pro's from going medium format methinks....

jamesbjenkins · Feb 9, 2012

Markw said:
it'll be fun to watch Nikon scramble and make a killer D700 replacement this year!
Mark

None of these companies scramble anything in R&D of new technology and camera models. Make no mistake, the D800's life began 3-4 years ago, and the ideas behind it a few years before that most likely. What we're seeing now as a end-product is only what guys behind desks thought years ago would be what we wanted in 2011 (and thanks to the flooding in Thailand, 2012 now.)

With a supply chain and complex as all these 1st tier companies (Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc.) we're getting the culmination of ideas several years old.

Even so, the D800 sure is enticing. It's too bad they had to cram so many pixels on to 35mm sensor...