Canon 1D Mk3 vs Nikon D3 (Final Word/Nail in the coffin ?)

Have to laugh though, a seriously bad test being put forward as unbiased. That's the most biased test I've seen, and I've seen it ripped apart on every forum that's linked to it, even by Canon shooters :lol:
 
Pixel Peepers that care more about 100% views than the image being captured ;)
 
I guess it's the same as the audiophiles who claim to hear a huge difference between speaker cable that costs >£2000 per metre

As the old adage goes, some people listen to the stereo to hear the music and some people listen to the music to hear the stereo.
 
That was quite good to read though, I've learnt loads of stuff I didn't already know even if I'm left wondering what's what by the end of it.

One thing even simple old me did notice though was that the guy who set up the test said he used a 3047 head and Gitzo 1325 tripod, but I have that exact head/tripod combo as far as I can tell and its a Manfrotto 055CB Tripod with 029 3-way Head...

I would like to see some tests that conclude something from this.
 
theory said:
One thing even simple old me did notice though was that the guy who set up the test said he used a 3047 head and Gitzo 1325 tripod, but I have that exact head/tripod combo as far as I can tell and its a Manfrotto 055CB Tripod with 029 3-way Head...
Click to expand...

Its definitely a Gitzo tripod and 3047 head is quite plain to see the labels, Gitzo has them on the top of the legs and the head has 3047 written right across it ?
 
I'll have to take a pic when I get home but it looks (to me anyway) exactly the same as mine, the head even has the little 6 sided mount thingy. I guess they just look really similar?

I was chuffed that I had such a 'neat bit of kit' when I saw all the crazy gear the OP had so it really threw me off when I read that it was gitzo stuff. Oh well, going off topic a bit... This is the head I have --> http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?i...tto+head&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=active&sa=N

is that a bit weird?

EDIT - I've changed my mind about the legs :) but the head is the same I tell you!!! haha
 
theory said:
I'll have to take a pic when I get home but it looks (to me anyway) exactly the same as mine, the head even has the little 6 sided mount thingy. I guess they just look really similar?

I was chuffed that I had such a 'neat bit of kit' when I saw all the crazy gear the OP had so it really threw me off when I read that it was gitzo stuff. Oh well, going off topic a bit... This is the head I have --> http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?i...tto+head&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=active&sa=N

is that a bit weird?

EDIT - I've changed my mind about the legs :) but the head is the same I tell you!!! haha
Click to expand...

The head's a Bogen 3047 which is exactly the same as a Manfrotto 029. IIRC Bogen is the brand name that Manfrotto is sold as in the US. Gitzo and Kata are also part of Manfrotto though I believe Gitzo is still a higher end product :shrug:
 
Remind me to go to a US Lexus owners club forum the next time I want an unbiased purely scientific test on digital camera performance. :cuckoo:
 
NorthernNikon said:
Remind me to go to a US Lexus owners club forum the next time I want an unbiased purely scientific test on digital camera performance. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I believe that, in keeping with this kind of exhaustive testing, Mac Donalds are conducting resolution tests on the Canon 200mm f2.
 
It does not take a genuis to work out that the slightly less than full frame D3 should exhibit less noise, however, the fact is that the EOS 1D mark III's are as good as due to the excellent digic 3 processor. IMO and the 1Ds is as good, depsite having far more pixels.

Diego.
 
icecavern said:
Pixel Peepers that care more about 100% views than the image being captured ;)
Click to expand...

As well as people who tend to crop a lot (like when you need a 500 mm lens but you only have a 300 mm lens :p)

It also seems that there has been USM applied where he claims there has been none. That or the image processors or precursor circuits had a go with the sensor data before spitting them out as nef/cr2 files.

It's a pity he didn't post the raw files as well.
 
NorthernNikon said:
Remind me to go to a US Lexus owners club forum the next time I want an unbiased purely scientific test on digital camera performance. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...
soupdragon said:
I believe that, in keeping with this kind of exhaustive testing, Mac Donalds are conducting resolution tests on the Canon 200mm f2.
Click to expand...

Should it matter what forum/website the test was posted on? I think not.

The guy has looked at a different aspect than other review sites, and to me has given an unbiased report on his results.
He has even offered to send the RAW files to people who would like to have a look at them themselves, so they can report their own findings.

If the findings would have been posted by one of the many respected reviewer sites, then would we be getting the same questions to the results.

The only thing I would have done differently, would have been to turn off the default sharpening when processing,
as even at the low standard setting, it would have added artifacts to both files.

The problem with doing tests like this is:

There's always going to be someone who'll want to shoot you down.
 
How much notice would ardent Lexus fans on this site take note of a TP user doing road tests of a couple of comparable cars in a farm yard?

Still not convinced that balancing a tripod leg on wobbily cardboard boxes give too much credibilty to his test :naughty:
 
It doesn't matter where the results/tests are posted Matt, that is very true. However it's the test that matters, and it is flawed and completely pointless IMHO.

The focusing on each camera has to be tested ( you know the 45deg focus chart test etc ) to make sure all cameras focus correctly with the lens. You have no idea if the adapters used focused correctly on the cameras.

Then the big one... You can't compare a FF sensor with a 1.3 crop sensor in this way. The images posted have a higher pixel density on the Canon. There was a post of the images at the correct crop to give the same pixel density of the two cameras ( with the D3 showing more text etc ) and there was nothing in it between the two images quality wise ( which is what I'd expect. )

Some people are talking about it being convienent that the D200 went missing before testing, well that would have been 1.5 crop ( D200 ) Vs 1.3 crop ( Mk3 ) Vs FF ( D3 ) which again would have been almost worthless.

Also I think the original poster lost a lot of credibility by obviously being biased to Canon in the first place, and not knowing what a 100% crop was, amonst other things in his posts.

I personally look at objective reviews from unbiased photographers ( Andy Rouse etc ) who have all said that the D3 is a huge leap up from previous Nikons, and that now they have finally caught up ( and maybe slightly edged ahead by a tiny margin in real life ) with Canon.

What always annoys me about the X brand is better than Y brand is that it looses sight of the thing that's important. THE PICTURES! I shoot Nikon because I like the way they handle and I know where things are. If you put a D200/D2x on a table with the 1D Mk3 cameras and told me to take a photo of something, I'd immediately pick up a Nikon. Not because the Nikon is better, it's because I wouldn't have to work out how to work it, I'd pick it up and shoot. Because getting the shot is more important than what it was shot with...

Just my 2p for what it's worth.

Pete
 
chuckles said:
Still not convinced that balancing a tripod leg on wobbily cardboard boxes give too much credibilty to his test :naughty:
Click to expand...

I haven't read the whole thread but I believe he has stated that it was only resting on those boxes when the photo of the kit was taken, for the shots being compared it was set up correctly on 3 legs.
 
icecavern said:
I haven't read the whole thread but I believe he has stated that it was only resting on those boxes when the photo of the kit was taken, for the shots being compared it was set up correctly on 3 legs.
Click to expand...

You don't think he was rattling your cage maybe?:suspect::thinking:

chuckles said:
How much notice would ardent Lexus fans on this site take note of a TP user doing road tests of a couple of comparable cars in a farm yard?

Still not convinced that balancing a tripod leg on wobbily cardboard boxes give too much credibilty to his test :naughty:
Click to expand...

Someone at last with a sense of humor on this thread:eek:


:lol::lol:
 
chuckles said:
How much notice would ardent Lexus fans on this site take note of a TP user doing road tests of a couple of comparable cars in a farm yard?
Click to expand...

Does this mean Lexus fans can't have an opinion about anything else other than Lexus's?

chuckles said:
Still not convinced that balancing a tripod leg on wobbily cardboard boxes give too much credibilty to his test :naughty:
Click to expand...

As already said, the reviewer said the tests were done with all three legs on the floor.

icecavern said:
What always annoys me about the X brand is better than Y brand is that it looses sight of the thing that's important. THE PICTURES! I shoot Nikon because I like the way they handle and I know where things are. If you put a D200/D2x on a table with the 1D Mk3 cameras and told me to take a photo of something, I'd immediately pick up a Nikon. Not because the Nikon is better, it's because I wouldn't have to work out how to work it, I'd pick it up and shoot. Because getting the shot is more important than what it was shot with...
Click to expand...
I totally agree with your point here Pete.
I'd be quite comfortable with both brands, as long as they had Tamron glass on them ;)
 
icecavern said:
The focusing on each camera has to be tested ( you know the 45deg focus chart test etc ) to make sure all cameras focus correctly with the lens. You have no idea if the adapters used focused correctly on the cameras.
Click to expand...

Pete, he says in the article all of the shots were manual focussed using the cameras live view, and focus confirmed by several people before the shots were taken, at least 2 of these other people were Nikon users, so AF is not an issue in this instance.
 
IanC_UK said:
Pete, he says in the article all of the shots were manual focussed using the cameras live view, and focus confirmed by several people before the shots were taken, at least 2 of these other people were Nikon users, so AF is not an issue in this instance.
Click to expand...

I know I couldn't tell how spot on focus was by using Live View, whether I use Nikon, Canon or a Fuji disposable. You can only really tell how shapr an image is once you've got it up at 100%.
 
And if the test favoured Nikon (Heaven forbid:D) we would have had exactly the same arguments by the respective opposite brands/sides:cuckoo:




:lol::D:thumbs:
 
NorthernNikon said:
I know I couldn't tell how spot on focus was by using Live View, whether I use Nikon, Canon or a Fuji disposable. You can only really tell how shapr an image is once you've got it up at 100%.
Click to expand...

I think it says they used max magnification on the live view screen ?

To be honest it doesnt bother me, im happy with my Mk3 and i suspect there arent many people unhappy with their D3's most of these tests are pure <insert rude word here ;)>
 
Matt said:
Does this mean Lexus fans can't have an opinion about anything else other than Lexus's?
Click to expand...

Blimey - is that what I said? :thinking:

As already said, the reviewer said the tests were done with all three legs on the floor.
Click to expand...


As for the tripod - I couldn't be bothered to read it to the point that somebody else queried it ;)

I do find it strange that this is the only review/test I've ever seen which reaches this conclusion.....

... then there is the inconclusive acceptance (almost blind acceptance at that) the RAW converter's algorithms are treating the native files the same..... we've all seen different converters handling Nikon, Canon RAW files and giving different results. So why not have differeces within the same software set/program - ie Capture One?
 
The only reason this thread exists is because the d3 is a match and in some ways superior to the mk3.
If the Canons didn't care (and I suggest they protesteth too much) it would have been left to decompose at the crappy car forum that spawd it.

Don't rise to it Nikonites, or thou shalt be struck down with the same inferiority complex.


personally I think manual focus favours the mk3 in a fuzzy kinda way...:p
 
Yep - you're right!

And they couldn't even get the exposure right so that a white page IS a white page!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top