Camera Labs

Anyway, onwards and upwards.

I will let my photographs do the talking.

Oh sorry, I nearly forgot, you can't do that, can you?


I will enlighten you with occasional motivational words of wisdom from the great Mr T though...

I only just read this whole thread for the first time. I guess I couldn`t be bothered reading another what brand thread, now that I have, I want my 15 minutes back.
You guys must have a lot more time than I do.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 7D, 15-85, Canon 85 1.8 USM, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L IS Macro, Canon 70-300L IS USM+Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic

I just want to point out, that quality and detail dont really (always) depend on pixels, and lenses (!).
Your pc screen or tv, or of course your prints, need to be of high quality as well. HD-tv looks incredibly detailed, but it's only 2 megapixels.
Two.
And maybe there will be tvs with 4K resolution (4 megapixels) in a few years, which means that I could get astonishing detailed photos with my 5 megapixel Canon G5 (which was back then around $900). And that is true. A 10 year old camera can take the most detailed photos youve ever seen, which means that you should not invest too much in a camera expecting miracles since you could expect the same (well not literally of course) detailed photos with lesser equipment. The D700 for instance, is a camera with ''only'' 12 megapixels, but the detail it pumps out is amazing. Same for my 350D (8 megapixels) and 50D (15 megapixels).

EDIT:
What I meant, look at this picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/acula/77147707/sizes/l/
Incredibly detailed, but not even one megapixel!

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

Look at this: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon ... lity.shtml
Nikon's pixel quality is much higher than Canon's, because with 1.5 times the amount of pixels, the 100% crops are somewhat the same.
Here you can see the Nikon has about as much noise as the Canon, but same story, with 1.5 times the amount of pixels. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon ... oise.shtml
That means, that if you were to downsample your 36 MP shot to a 22 MP one, there would be much less noise on the D800's photos.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

With a push of a button, the Nikon can look exactly like the Canon. Also, it would be a waste to buy such an expensive body and getting all but everything out of it by shooting JPEG.
You are not really going to shoot JPEG, are you?
Of course not, it's a semi-pro body, so you will be shooting RAW. Then there's no differences between a Canon and Nikon photo because RAW=RAW. That means no sharpness, contrast or whatever is applied to the image.
Also, the Nikon is better at all ISOs. Not the Canon, which is a pity regarding the lower pixel count. So since the Nikon is better at noise, detail, quality and speed, the only reason for the 5D III would be the AF-system. Well, unless youre doing exceptional sport photography, the simplest AF-system would be good enough.
The 50D has a quite good AF-system which I thought of to be using quite much. But, since the first day, I only use the center AF-point which means that all other points are useless for me. Many people only use the center point, so why do you want the best AF-system?
It isnt really going to help you get a shot, unless youre doing sports.

EDIT:
Let me cite Gordon: '' Bottom line? The 5D Mark III is a more sophisticated camera when it comes to AF and tracking in particular, but unless you're a professional sports photographer you'll probably be perfectly happy with the D800's performance.''

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

Please, anybody...

You say you know more than we think, but it is not true since what youre talking is complete nonsense. Digital quality, original quality???
RAW is original quality, or whatever you mean with that.
Since both are priced the same, you should go with the better camera, i.e. the D800.
You are contradicting yourself by saying you want the highest detail possible, but also by saying the lower pixel count, the better.
You say changing a photo after it's taken is not good, but what do you think a JPEG is? The pictures youve seen of the D800 and 5D III are mostly JPEGs, which are thus digitally processed. The RAWs, which you can find in the ''RAW quality'' tab on cameralabs, will let you see the ''real original non digital analogue quality'', and it lets you see the D800 is miles ahead of the 5D III.
You say, that when you change a Nikon to look like Canon, you change the digital quality. Complete nonsense, as for Canon's sharpness, contrast etc. are TOO digitally enhanced (because they are JPEGs). So it's dumb to say Canon looks better, because it does not. Not at all. The ''Canon quality'' is the ''quality'' of the Standard Picture Style. Picture Styles come into action with JPEG ONLY.
A JPEG is a digitally compressed and artifacted, just processed RAW file, though in-camera.

RAWs, they are the original quality photos. Look at the RAWs, and quit talking nonsense.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

Im using Canon and Panasonic, and Im recommending Nikon. Biased...? Explain. I just want for you that you buy the best camera for the idiotly big sum money, why would you buy a lesser camera because YOU THINK that it is better since IT IS CLEARLY NOT.
Why do you think were all wrong since we all have quite a lot more experience than you? Which is visible, only because you talk about digital quality, Canon having better overall quality, contradicting yourself etc.
You know, go, buy your 5D III. Go. Be dumb.
Go loving it, only Canon users with large amounts of lenses will buy the 5D III since there is no other option. In 10 years, I might buy a 5D II or 1Ds III because they are great NOW and THEN. In ten years, both are 14 years old then. Why do you think I would do that?
You should look at Sony's FF DSLR, which is techy and everything you want.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

Glad to see I'm not the only one that you're throwing your toys at, ZEMBANU!

You've been on the rum, by the looks of your typing!

Hmm

24-70 and 24-105

Now that makes sense!!!!

Wow - you're truly enlightened!

OOOOOH, touchy.

NO ONE on this thread (apart from YOU!!!!!) is biased.

Folk on this forum genuinely give UN-biased opinions. That's the beauty of CL.

Ruben has just explained what RAW means. Not his opinion.......FACT!

What is to do with you man?

It now seems YOU are getting flustered & frustrated by swearing. It' ok for you to do it, but if another poster had done that, you'd have said they were being rude.

You have some `issues` & they won't be resolved for you on here.......obviously!

_________________

Nikon D700 & D7100 bodies + Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR11, 1.7TC, 50mm F1.4G, 16-35mm f/4G VR, 105 F2.8 VR macro, 70-300mm lenses. A couple of filters, Giotto tripod & ballhead. Lowepro Slingshot 302 AW

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcarlos/

Biased? Hardly. Given that I've never actually owned a Nikon camera but pointed out that the D800/E can take some razor sharp photos hardly makes be biased.

If "biased" means we don't tell you what you want to hear, go ahead and maintain that attitude. You won't get far in life doing so, never mind this forum.

To say you "know enough" without the practical experience of using the cameras is downright laughable and it's not the case that people here don't like your choice. It's the case that you're talking a lot of gibberish that we disagree with but because you're so "knowledgeable", you won't hear anything that disagrees with what you said.

_________________
Bodies: Canon EOS 550D w/ Magic Lantern
Lenses: Tokina AT-X 116 Pro DX f/2.8, Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Accessories: YongNuo Speedlite YN-468 Flash, Neewer Macro LED Ring Light, Meike Battery Grip, YongNuo RF-602 Wireless Flash Trigger & Receiver YongNuo WR-128 Wireless Remote Control

TBH, I don't think anyone could convince you of ANYTHING!

Have YOU heard of ....... listening?

_________________

Nikon D700 & D7100 bodies + Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR11, 1.7TC, 50mm F1.4G, 16-35mm f/4G VR, 105 F2.8 VR macro, 70-300mm lenses. A couple of filters, Giotto tripod & ballhead. Lowepro Slingshot 302 AW

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcarlos/

You've made your mind up & that's fine. (sigh & relief)


THREAD CLOSED.

_________________

Nikon D700 & D7100 bodies + Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR11, 1.7TC, 50mm F1.4G, 16-35mm f/4G VR, 105 F2.8 VR macro, 70-300mm lenses. A couple of filters, Giotto tripod & ballhead. Lowepro Slingshot 302 AW

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcarlos/

...who?

And here's some RAWs: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon ... lity.shtml
Yes they ARE processed BUT the quality of the crops is the greatest you will ever see AND BOTH CAMERAS are the SAME processed. Same as maths. C+7=N+7 (Canon and Nikon both processed THUS equivalent)
Both minus 7 makes them the same. So youre looking at the same ''quality'' now.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies