Which body should I get? Nikon D810 vs Canon 5D Mk iii/iv

[newhere]

Hello,

I have been taking photos for several years using my entry level Nikon (with only a kit lens and a lower end lens, so I am not tied to Nikon), and have in the last 6 months taken several courses on lighting, studio and newborn/child photography. My ultimate aim is to focus on newborn, child and family photography and to do this professionally.

The next step I want to focus on is purchasing a new camera body and one or two lenses, so that I can get completely familiar with them and use them on courses and day to day, and then to use them on shoots. My brother uses canon and has a 60D with a kit lens and 100mm 2.8 macro and a speedlite. So I know if I go canon there will be an ability for us to share lenses.

But the question is, which camera do i go for? I have read a lot about all 3, and it is all quite confusing!
I have managed to look at and feel the D810 and 5D mkiii, and the Nikon felt a little bit more comfortable with the grip.
My main thoughts are: the D810 is rated as a very good camera, higher megapixels for enlarging images than the mkiii (I know mp isn't the biggest concern) a better af system and a better dynamic range than the mkiii and only 2 years old.
The Mk iii is rated highly, but my main concern is that it is a little old now, and in some youtube videos comparing it to the D810, seem to put the Nikon ahead (although I always question the objectivity of videos, that's one reason I'm here!).
The last choice is the Mk iv. The price of the mk iv is significantly higher, and I'm not sure if for the price if it is that much of a step up (I know it shoots 4k video, but i wont be doing video much).

Are there any pros and cons of each that i've missed, or haven't considered?
Is there any other cameras I should be thinking about, or anything else I should be thinking about!

 

[PaulButler]

First thing is that none of your mentioned cameras are in anyway bad. They are all more than capable of producing outstanding results - provided the user has the skills

As with any "which camera" type question, how it feels in the hand is in my view more important. If it feels right then you won't be held back by looking for controls etc and will just be able to get on and shoot. Both makes have the lens range to cover what you want to shoot.

As for borrowing your brother lenses, well on a 5DmkIII/Iv you would only be able to use the 100mm macro

I would just throw in the Nikon D750 too, a very well balanced camera well suited to your needs and not as expensive as the D810. On a similar theme also consider the Canon 6D, I quite enjoyed playing with one.

 

[stevelmx5]

As above, how the camera feels to you is considerably more important as none of your options will fail to deliver results. If you're thinking about shooting studio/portrait, the AF speed isn't going to be a problem either along with dynamic range or megapixels unless your clients are planning to ask for billboard sized images!

Realistically, look at your budget, usability and what focal range of lenses you like to use and make your decision from there. You won't go wrong with any of them.

 

[Cagey75]

Personal preference, what lens system do you fancy more? If you'd said landscape though, I'd have said D810 no question, I'd still veer to it for portraiture too.

 

[wave01]

This is a personnel thing if you like the feel of the nikon then stick with it. We are all different and what suits you won't suit some one else. Its been said all the cameras you have mentioned are more than capable of giving good results.

 

[newhere]

With the auto focus and dynamic range, I will likely be taking shots in natural light too, and outside, with kids running about. Is the af that big a difference, and would the difference in dynamic range really come in to play here too?
two last questions!

I will be doing some very low light photography with a small amount of light and I will be unable to use any flash system,- I've read the Nikon should be able to handle that better, or is the difference between them still very negligible?
What kind of size will I be able to blow the images up to, from the 5D mk iii and D810?

 

[PaulButler]

I've not used the 5D MkIV but would expect it to be better on all counts than the 5DMkIII ...

However, I regularly use a D810 and have used a 5DMkIII. The Nikon is better in terms of dynamic range and use in low light BUT the difference is negligible and once you start to increase ISO then they soon become pretty much the same. I've never felt the AF in either has been lacking so would have no qualms there at all. It wasn't that long ago that both were state of their respective companies art ...

The advantage with the Nikon is that the raw files it produces allow for greater recovery, particularly in the shadows than the 5DMkIII. Pulling up exposure quickly introduces noise ime on the canon files, but much less so on the Nikon files., whether that is important or not is up to you

I'm guessing you mean how big can you print when you say "blow the images up" ... again it really depends on many things, not least is what sort of viewing distance for the images... I have produced A3+ files that stand any inspection, even close up from both systems and I'm reasonably confident that A2 or larger wouldn't be an issue. No doubt the Nikon has an edge there too, but if pure pixel count is important then the 5DS with 50MP would help there. I'm sure that the 30MP of the 5DMkIV will close the gap to the Nikon.

Notwithstanding any of the above, choose whichever you prefer holding and using - it is far more important

 

[sk66]

In that price bracket I would suggest a used Nikon D4... they are quite the steal right now. IMO, newborn/child/family photography doesn't offer many opportunities to get the maximum from a 30+ MP FF camera.

 

[newhere]

I just wanted to update this thread to say thank you

I went with the nikon d810 as it felt much better in my hands. I've used it quite a lot and it has felt really good so thank you for everyone's help.

 

[petersmart]

I've not used the 5D MkIV but would expect it to be better on all counts than the 5DMkIII ...

From the reviews I've seen it is, especially in DR and the abilty to capture shadows with less noise.

but if pure pixel count is important then the 5DS with 50MP would help there.

But the noise levels are quite high even at 400 ISO so exposure would have to be almost perfect to get the best - the resolution though is breathtaking.

I'm sure that the 30MP of the 5DMkIV will close the gap to the Nikon.

Well I'm waiting a couple of years until the price drops a bit then I would love to get one, it looks excellent all round - an almost perfect compromise.

Notwithstanding any of the above, choose whichever you prefer holding and using - it is far more important

Definitely!