First "Pro" Camera - What do you think about this setup?

[runnah]

Got to admit that all of the research and rumors and talk and such that I have pretty much decided to wait and get a 5D mkIII myself. The prices are coming down to under $3K and I have the glass for it, so why settle and regret it later.

I've found that tech specs are really just numbers on paper. It's like cars. On paper a Mustang has more HP than a Lotus, but a Lotus is way more fun to drive.

 

[ronlane]

I agree. That's is my point, if you are going to be comparing to ZZZ, then why settle for YYY. You'll just continue to compare it to it which will make you "think" it is inferior, so why not just go all in for ZZZ.

 

[goodguy]

I was very close to getting a 6D, but the specs felt like the camera was built to fit nicely between the mk3 and the 7D rather than being the best it could be. I mean 11 focus points is just silly.


At the end of the day any canon/nikon over $2k isn't going to be a slouch.

I really, really gotta know is this you Jeremy C ?

 

[hamlet]

If you're anything like me and you aren't particularly impressed by the d6xx and the d8xx series, then just wait till the d4x comes out. Where i live it will only cost double the price of the d800e, i am prepared to spend that type of money.

Waiting for the Nikon D4xx to come out, well I have a feeling that when it will come out the messiah will be here too, I am going outside now to look for a white donkey.

The x models come out a year or two after the normal model. The D4 came out in 6 January 2012, we are exactly 2 years into its release so it is not long any more.

 

[Derrel]

Canon is very quick to bring bleeding edge technology to market. It may not be as well integrated, and may have a few minor bumps, they have it first.

UNLESS you mean things like multi-area evaluative light metering or as Nikon called it when they invented it back in the mid-1980's, "Matrix" metering.

Or, distance-aware light metering.

Or color-aware light metering, something Nikon invented,and which Canon required about 15 years to figure out a way around Nikon's intellectual property...

Or remote, multi-flash TTL commander operation...which took Canon forever to figure out...

Or accurate TTL flash metering...wow, that one was a toughie for Canon, mainly because of the color-blind light metering problem...

Or SPOT metering in consumer and mid-level cameras...they're still working on that "cutting edge for Canon" hurdle...

Or how to make a camera in the top 20 in sensor performance...which Canon has not managed to do...yet, but mayyyybe some day...

Or how to make a consumer camera with more than 18 megapixels...

Canon is however, the world's leading photocopier manufacturer.

 

[runnah]

Canon is very quick to bring bleeding edge technology to market. It may not be as well integrated, and may have a few minor bumps, they have it first.

UNLESS you mean things like multi-area evaluative light metering or as Nikon called it when they invented it back in the mid-1980's, "Matrix" metering.

Or, distance-aware light metering.

Or color-aware light metering, something Nikon invented,and which Canon required about 15 years to figure out a way around Nikon's intellectual property...

Or remote, multi-flash TTL commander operation...which took Canon forever to figure out...

Or accurate TTL flash metering...wow, that one was a toughie for Canon, mainly because of the color-blind light metering problem...

Or SPOT metering in consumer and mid-level cameras...they're still working on that "cutting edge for Canon" hurdle...

Or how to make a camera in the top 20 in sensor performance...which Canon has not managed to do...yet, but mayyyybe some day...

Or how to make a consumer camera with more than 18 megapixels...

Canon is however, the world's leading photocopier manufacturer.

I thought Pure Photography advocates didn't care about such things?

 

[JacaRanda]

Got to admit that all of the research and rumors and talk and such that I have pretty much decided to wait and get a 5D mkIII myself. The prices are coming down to under $3K and I have the glass for it, so why settle and regret it later.

I have been considering the 5D mkIII also. One of the guys I follow on Flickr uses the 5D mkIII and gets imo fantastic shots ( I believe he uses 300mm F4 & 1.4 TC). cbjphoto if you care to look. Either way, I think I can hold off until March (hopefully) to see what the 7D Mk II has to offer. That doggone reach thing for birds.....

 

[Derrel]

I thought Pure Photography advocates didn't care about such things?

The underlying technology of 3-D distance, and color-aware light metering, matrix metering, and superior flash metering are the basic technologies that allow beginner and intermediate level shooters to basically, buy a Nikon d-slr and slap it into one of the scene modes, and get good results. The color-aware metering allows the cameras to get better white balance too, and allows the dynamic range enhancement software to make better out-of-camera JPEGs. FOr the longest time, Canon cameras of all price ranges could NOT give very good flash exposure regulation...because until the 7D was invented, every Canon was "color-blind" in terms of metering...

I dunno...I shoot the Nikon D3x, perhaps the finest made d-slr ever on the market. I expect the best performance, and the camera is for me, a no-compromises solution. It's my fourth Nikon flagship-level camera since 2001...I'm used to having the best...For me coming up, Canon was always a joke system....today Canon's system is better than it was in the 1970's and 1980's. But I just wanted to correct apaflo's assertion that Canon integrates cutting edge technology "first", because for 20 years, they have serious lagged in a number of the real fundamentals...like light metering, and flash metering...

The 5D-Mark III is the FIRST mid-level body Canon has made that's not a joke...the 5D classic and the 5D-II both were $389 EOS ELAN bodies with digital guts and cheap focus systems from low-level APS-C bodies...priced at $3,499 at entry into the market...

Canon;s done the same thing with the 5D-III versus the D800...priced it $705 MORE-expensive than a better-made Nikon. But still, the 5D-III is the first decent, high-performance body FF Canon has made at under $7,999. The 6D is a calculated money-grab it seems...it is the good/better/best, designed to "PUSH" the buyers to the highest profit-level FF camera, the 5D Mark III.

 

[Tailgunner]

I agree. That's is my point, if you are going to be comparing to ZZZ, then why settle for YYY. You'll just continue to compare it to it which will make you "think" it is inferior, so why not just go all in for ZZZ.

That would be too easy.

 

[runnah]

Derrel, I am just busting your balls on this one.

I see my camera as a tool to do my job and frankly out of all the cameras on the market it best met my needs. Brand wasn't a factor at all when it came down to buying.

 

[apaflo]

I thought Pure Photography advocates didn't care about such things?

Those are, generally, the things "Pure Photography advocates" do care about. They don't make very good marketing fodder though, hence Canon may not pay much attention in terms of R&D.

Some times that causes a roll reversal, because things like Nikon's advances with a variety of non-Nikon sensors has provided them the advantage in marketing as well as system integration. That was my point to begin with, that Nikon is a small company with more input from their engineers than is true with Canon.

 

[Derrel]

Derrel, I am just busting your balls on this one.

I see my camera as a tool to do my job and frankly out of all the cameras on the market it best met my needs. Brand wasn't a factor at all when it came down to buying.

Well, whatever. No worries! For those who wonder about how a camera can actually "improve" their photography, here's an article Thom Hogan wrote, where he describes which,specific Nikon cameras actually improved his photography.

Answering My Own Question | byThom | Thom Hogan

I see the 5D-III for what it was: Canon's realization that the 5D classic and 5D-II were cheap bodies, fitted with good sensors, and that Nikon's innovation with the D3,D3s, and the D700's runaway success represented the first real,significant challenge to the Canon status quo of selling a CHEAP, under-capable body with a GOOD sensor in it. The 5D-III is one of the best cameras available today in terms of what it does, what it offers, and where it's positioned. It HAD TO BE GREAT, because since 2007, Canon had steadily been losing customers to Nikon.

For a long time, the web was filled with the idea that Canon needed to make a "Nikon D700-class body...you know, a camera that actually handled great, and could focus at a very high-level someplace besides JUST the center AF point." And so...the 5D Mark III was born!

Yeah, the 5D Mark III is a nice camera body. I LIKE it's fit,finish, and feel. Last time I needed a new, top camera, I evaluated it, the D4 and the D3x, and went with the D3x. I could be happy with a 5D-III, but I own more Nikon glass than I own Canon glass.

 

[runnah]

Well, whatever. No worries! For those who wonder about how a camera can actually "improve" their photography,

Ooo going for the jugular.

Be a fanboy and defend your particular sacred cow with every breath, that is fine with me.

 

[apaflo]

I've found that tech specs are really just numbers on paper. It's like cars. On paper a Mustang has more HP than a Lotus, but a Lotus is way more fun to drive.

What gives the list of specs meaning is the priority of each list item for different photographers. No priority... no meaning!

Techies tend to go on and on about, for an example, lens sharpness as the be all end all of what counts for a bird photographer. In the end it boils down to a priority by price, as the longest focal length with the sharpest images is the "best" by that yard stick. Is it valid?

I've been having an ongoing discussion with a chap who virtually never makes large prints and only produces images for display on the web. He swears by a number of "inferior" lenses, says he can hand hold a 500mm lens (on a cropped sensor camera) and owns not just one 10x superzoom, but three different ones! For his intended use, his priorities are very appropriate.

I am always looking for shots that print at least 16x20 and hopefully 24x30. I've never considered buying any 10x zoom. I see MTF charts as a great source of information. I like big sturdy tripods. Basically my priorities are virtually all exactly the opposite of this other chap.

Which of us is "right"? Both! We look at the same list of technical specs and place a very different weight on each item. We each are willing to invest significant money in the "right" lens, and neither of us tends to waste money on the wrong equipment. But clearly we need different equipment, and in fact have almost no gear in common! But we both pay a huge amount of attention to spec sheets.

 

[runnah]

What gives the list of specs meaning is the priority of each list item for different photographers. No priority... no meaning!

You are correct sir. For me I needed a dslr that was great at stills and great at video. Right now that was a canon. I spent hours looking at footage comparing to two and made my choice based on that. If nikon had been better I would have gotten one. Simple as that.

I am not here bashing one brand over another to make me feel better about my purchase. Because at the end of the day, more megapixels and more ISO isn't going to make me better or worse.