Sensor rating: D800 VS 5D mkIII

By DxOMark, the most trusted sensor performance measurement institution. Don't comment with fanboy angry words, this is a factual lab measurement that leaves room for little comments:

Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Nikon D800

Not only that is a huge difference, but since Nikon is beating Canon at everything single measurement, even low light performance, that is humiliating. FYI, the Nikon D800 is the highest ever at that benchmark. 

The Canon is pricier and supposed to perform better in low light...well not even there. And you don't even have the huge definition...ouch.

With digital, dynamic range is traditionally very poor (that's why I rarely shoot digital), and the Nikon is doing ok from ISO 100 to 400. The Canon EOS 5D Mark III doesn't. The relatively poor built quality of Canon VS Nikon is a well establish fact (take both in your hands and be honest with yourself), and since the 2 most important things for a good picture after the subject and the photographer are the lens and the sensor, we are left with one question: is Canon at least better at lenses?

In regards to the amount of pros I know who shoot Nikon lenses on Canon with an adaptor, and the number of poor comments of premium Canon lenses (some like the 17-40mm are beaton by Tamrons). I'd said the conclusion is pretty clear: Canon has by far the best marketing department.

Now once again, you can be an awesome photographer with Canon gear, as well as with 40 yo gear. The camera doesn't do much, but the latest Canon I used (a 7D) was highly disappointing, the 2500€ lens I had with it was just has bad. I am more and more certain that for the time being, Nikon VS Canon is a no brainer. It has been the case for as far as I can remember actually (my F5 was already nailing competition in 1995). It just is unfortunately virtually impossible to get a Nikon D800.

Then of course if you like the real stuff, you don't care since you shoot Velvia or Tri-X on a medium format camera :D.

D800 rating #1 at DxOmark

...what the hell is DxOmark?

DxOMark is "the trusted industry standard for camera and lens independent image quality measurements and ratings. "


In other words, if you wonder how your sensor performs against an other, and argue online based on your visual interpretation of  a 1:1 crop, give it up, check DxOmark, close the debate. Then you'll be able to stop counting pixels and do some actual photography :)


Now wait, if I despise pixel counting, why am I mentioning that ranking? Answering this question requires asking an other question: why do some people still shoot film? Well among the reasons, film has a much superior dynamic range than any digital sensor. That is simply an awesome property and one of the reasons I shoot mostly film no matter what. It means you can shoot a high contrast scene and both dark and bright zones will come out with a proper level of exposure. Beyond the technical talk, it just makes photographs way more subtle, refined, colors are nicer, and landscapes in particular looks a zillion times better. Digital photographer use filters, or HDR (high dynamic range) to simulate the better dynamic range of film. 


But now, look at this: 

At ISO100, 200 and 400, the D800 offers even better dynamic range than a D4. This + 36MP + built in HDR mode make it the best landscape SLR you can which for. Of course, any large format camera will destroy it, but for digital, it's good stuff. It overtakes the D700 all the way, and only the D4 ranks better from ISO 800 and above.


Every camera is best at something, for large prints plenty of light shots, or long exposures, the D800 is your friend. 


Oh and according to the ranking, the D800's sensor doesn't only overtake the D4, it also is ahead of the 50000$ Phase One IQ180MP best of the best digital medium format camera... So i'll say it: when I heard about the 36MP, I was like "yeah right...crap". I was wrong.