[DxO] DxOMark verdict: D800 v. 5DMIII

[DorkSterr]

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings

DxOMark verdict: Nikon D800 – 95, Canon 5D Mark III – 81 | Nikon Rumors

 

[mjhoward]

OUch... again.

 

[jaomul]

That's some achievement in technology terms

 

[EchoingWhisper]

That's some achievement in technology terms

Not really.
From DxOMark - "

If we wanted to get a little nit-picky, however, we might be tempted to point out that there has been no significant progress with respect to pixel quality since the D7000 and the K5 first appeared back in 2010…."​

 

[Derrel]

Yes, 2010 was a banner year for the pixel crop from the Sony vineyards...as I understand it, people are paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars per bottle for pixels bottled under the Nikon and Pentax labels...

 

[LungFish]

Doesn't seem to fit with the hands on comparisons, as per usual.

 

[mjhoward]

Doesn't seem to fit with the hands on comparisons, as per usual.

Hands on, the 5D MKIII won't meter properly... They're basically charging $3500 for the performance of a D700 sensor and AF inside a broken 50D body.

 

[STM]

And the D800 does not have light leak problems.

 

[rexbobcat]

Does this mean that I can't get good pictures without a Nikon?

I've been so blinded using my 8 year old 1D Mk II.

I now wonder how I ever survived with such inferior equipment

 

[jaomul]

Does this mean that I can't get good pictures without a Nikon?

I've been so blinded using my 8 year old 1D Mk II.

I now wonder how I ever survived with such inferior equipment

I would be sceptical enough about the numbers, and that camera of yours remains great but it is impressive that the resolution is so high yet the quality remains. I do believe though that people can only see 12 dynamic range (this may be ill informed)so maybe thats why older cameras seem as good

 

[Derrel]

Here's a link to a test of the Nikon D1, Nikon D3, Nikon D7000, Fuji X-Pro 1, Nikon D800, Canon 5D-Mk II, and Canon 5D-Mk III. All images were shot at f/5.6. SInce the D800 shoots the largest image, all the other cameras had their images up-sampled using Photoshop CS5 (using the bicubic interpolation method) so that all comparison images would be of the same size. Nikon D4, D3 (D700), D800, D7000 and Canon 5D, 5D Mark II, 5D Mark III and Fuji X-Pro 1 and X100 High ISO Sample Image Comparison

As he points out, "To show each camera fairly, I used actual images directly from each camera. If I had shot raw data instead, I would have needed to process each file with software to turn that data into a visible image, which also would have shown differences in each piece of software's interpretation as well as differences between cameras. Unknown to most casual users is that even if I used the same software, say Adobe Camera Raw, it processes files from different cameras differently. By using real JPGs, we can see exactly what each camera is doing. Feel free to run your own experiments with raw data if you prefer. Sharper renditions will enhance detail, but exaggerate noise, and vice versa. Ditto for differences in letting Adobe or whoever do the noise reduction instead of the cameras themselves in JPG. If you want these results in raw data, shoot it yourself and please share with us the results as I do."

Looking at these images, it's quite obvious...the 36MP Sony-made sensor in the D800 performs very well across a wide range of ISO levels. Where the Canon cameras are getting their butts kicked is in the dynamic range results, especially at lower ISO values...that is where the Sony-made sensor technology paired with the electronics Nikon has developed since 2007 is allowing Nikon's cameras to offer Dynamic Range figures that are significantly higher than what Canon is able to do with its sensor and electronic technology. The DxO Mark rating formula gives a pretty good amount of weight to base-level ISO dynamic range capability in their "Landscape" segment, according to the articles that have analyzed the DxO mark methodology. Now that Canon has lost its lead in sensor quality, it's amazing how many Canon shooters now discount the DxO Mark figures and claim that they cannot see any differences in images made with "any"camera,etc.,etc.. Still--the 5D Mark III is a very good camera. It's just that since Nikon fired around 50% of its long-time executives and replaced them with younger men, Nikon has been producing best-in-class image quality by using on-chip noise suppression sensor technology that SONY has patented, and which Canon has no access to. Leapfrogging...

Still, even if the 5D III is not top-top-top rated, it is QUITE a good performing camera...it's a LOT better than the old 1Ds 11 MP or 16.7 MP 1Ds Mk II,and so on...the 5D-III has in fact the BEST-performing camera sensor Canon has ever released. And that's saying something.They now have a decent focusing system and even better video. Once they get the light leak issue figured out, and drop the price $500-$700 it'll start selling well.

 

[DorkSterr]

What in the world is wrong with the D4 Screenshot? They all look very soft...

 

[Derrel]

What in the world is wrong with the D4 Screenshot? They all look very soft...

I'm gonna guess that that's due to the rather low default degree of sharpening the D4 applies to the in-camera JPEG files it creates. Low in-camera sharpening means the JPEGs will have minimal sharpening artifacts. Consumer-oriented cameras quite often apply more in-camera sharpening at their default output settings. Also...the 16 MP D4 images are being up-rezzed so that they are the same size as 36 MP D800 files.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Looks like the D800 is the new King. At $500 less too, and better ISO performance. Who would've thunk it.

 

[sovietdoc]

I am a bit skeptical about DxO results because DxO score shows that D800 is significantly superior in low light. I've shot with 5D3 and D800 at 12800 and higher and D800 isn't even close. Resampling images to the same size doesn't help either.

Now only if Nikon released a 26mp D800s with 8 fps continuous shooting, using the same sensor they have in D800 with moire tweaks and better low-light performance, and sold it for 2 grand, Canon would have nowhere to run.