I wonder for how long though.
Let's see how the Canon 5D MkIII does when they test it.
From the higher ISO tests I've seen, the new Canon is FAR superior.
All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.
Until the next new model is released from one of the major brands. I see little benefit in real terms of these rating systems.
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
makes yer feel good knowing your latest baby is a winner..LMAO......
Oh dear :P
I can't help but opine that the use of phrases such as FAR superior, smokes the competition, blows it out of the water etc. are just hyperboles for the current crop of full frame sensors.
When you're already close to/within a stop from an ideal 100% efficient bayer sensor there won't be much in it when all the cameras are out in the field, tested and the dust has settled.
I think understanding the nuances of each sensor's performance and learning to use its strengths will eek out more IQ than any inherit properties of the sensor at this level.
New figures brought to you from DXO - the same software that rated the D200 as having lower noise than a 5D Mark 1. I do not doubt that the D800 is a superb camera, indeed, if I hadn't just bought new gear and in the wrong lens mount to boot, I'd more than likely be looking to buy one for myself, but it's pretty difficult to regard a DXO rating as meanigful or useful when that software has such a terrible record of gross error and silly results. Hey - maybe DXO has improved so much that it's now worth paying some attention to, I wouldn't know - I stopped looking at DXO numbers years ago when it first became obvious how nutty they were.
All that said, I see no reason why the D800 shouldn't be an absolute corker of a camera.
And that said, for the things I do, it probably wouldn't be much (or even any) better in actual practical use than my 5D II. (I'm talking landscapes here.) It might ace the 1D IV though. (Birds.) That would be a very, very interesting comparison!
Edit and critique at will. Tokina 10-17 fish, Canon 10-22, 24-105, 100-400, TS-E 24, 35/1.4, 60 macro, 100L macro, 500/4, Wimberley, MT-24EX, 580EX-II, 1D IV, 7D, 5D II, 50D.
I think the bottom line is , the D800 looks like a great camera for nikon users
I'm happy with the 5dmkIII after initial use to date (haven't heard complaints from those who actually have it in their hands, just those who are comparing it to other cameras)
Isn't it a win win situation and is there really a need for brand bashing trying to convince someone that one is better than the other?
Call me Dylan! www.everlookphotography.com | www.everlookphotography.wordpress.com | www.flickr.com/photos/dmtoh
Canon EOS 5dmk3 : 17-40 F4 L, 70-200F2.8 canon L, 24-70mm canon L, Gitzo Safari +1178 ballhead. |Canon 5dmkII, 16-35mmF2.8 II L, Gitzo 2541 )
Singh Ray/Hitech/Lee assorted filters, Z pro modified system Cokin holder
Post : Lightroom 3.6 catalogue -> Export as 16bit TIFF, Edited CS5 -> resized for web.
5D Mk II, 500D, 17-40mm L, 24-105mm L , Benro Tripod and selection of ND & Grad LEE Filters
"There are no shortcuts to any place worth getting to."
“I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.”
― Douglas Adams, The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul