I made a few videos on the new cameras and thought it would be appropriate to post here.
So far, there are 4, with plans of more on the way.

<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="640" height="360" src="http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/1943416394_rVQTWgj?width=640&height=360&nologo"></iframe>


<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="640" height="360" src="http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/1943454409_gZMM6wf?width=640&height=360&nologo"></iframe>

<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="640" height="360" src="http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/1943178785_vCzWfnB?width=640&height=360&nologo"></iframe>

<iframe frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="640" height="360" src="http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/1943392806_r9Brz5X?width=640&height=360&nologo"></iframe>

Thanks so much, Marc, for your testing and analysis of these rather awesome new bodies.

good stuff Mark. So will you be investing any money into nikon glass or what?

Qarik, I have always owned some Nikor glass, 16m fish, 20mm F2.8 and Tamron 28-200 just for messing around! I will now get the 14-24mm.

Glad you enjoyed Ziggy!

Thanks for posting these Marc. Not sure if you have seen Thom Hogan's initial review of the D800/e but it is interesting to read his take
http://bythom.com/nikond800review.htm

He makes some great points about the demands of this camera. In good hands with great glass, it seems to be the best landscape camera out there at the moment. In less than capable hands and good glass...well, it doesn't hide those faults at all and serves to magnify them.

For what I do, the 5D3 was the right choice. In your hands, I'm sure the D800 is getting put through its paces quite well

Originally Posted by eoren1 He makes some great points about the demands of this camera. In good hands with great glass, it seems to be the best landscape camera out there at the moment. In less than capable hands and good glass...well, it doesn't hide those faults at all and serves to magnify them.

Its always been that way, especially with 4x5 field cameras!
If you get everything right, the quality of the file "full frame" is almost what a drum scanned 4x5 sheet of film looks like in regards to resolution. But, what makes it mo betta than any film ever was, is the extra dynamic range

Thanks, a pleasure to watch. Regarding part 3, Canon DPP solves that banding issue, as far as I know. I don't know if the latest LR/ACR does, were you using the latest? Regarding part 4, no mention of the D800 AF?

My personal use of my 5D3 is more in line with Ken Rockwell's... http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comp...d-mark-iii.htm (not that I'm that good). And I shoot sports. I like to think I am good at that.

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft Thanks, a pleasure to watch. Regarding part 3, Canon DPP solves that banding issue, as far as I know. I don't know if the latest LR/ACR does, were you using the latest? Regarding part 4, no mention of the D800 AF? My personal use of my 5D3 is more in line with Ken Rockwell's... http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comp...d-mark-iii.htm (not that I'm that good). And I shoot sports. I like to think I am good at that.

Yes, that was the latest update for LR! Actually I have been battling those bands ever since I began shooting with the Canon 1ds M2. Chuck would always attempt to get us to use the Canon software but there were too many compromises. Good to hear it solves the banding.

Just finished a safari in Africa with the "Andes" Andy Biggs and Williams where we all shot wildlife with the D800. It will be the next vid. We all agreed the auto focus was superb, in fact EVEN Harry B. thought he would make it his main camera for birds

I'm sure you can make that Canon work like a charm too

Originally Posted by Marc Muench Just finished a safari in Africa with the "Andes" Andy Biggs and Williams where we all shot wildlife with the D800. It will be the next vid. We all agreed the auto focus was superb, in fact EVEN Harry B. thought he would make it his main camera for birds I'm sure you can make that Canon work like a charm too

The D800E was a real surprise to me Marc. I went on the trip intending to use the D4 as my main body, After reviewing my images after the first few days the D800E became my main body for the rest of the trip. Its AF was just as good as the D4 and its performance was fine up to ISO 1600.

Cool. My 5D3 pleases me every time. I would like to see some practical examples of where you have battled Canon banding. Every desk jockey pixel peeper has a shot of their bookshelf pushed 3 stops. ;) It simply hasn't been an issue for me in the real world, but I am not a landscaper.

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft Cool. My 5D3 pleases me every time. I would like to see some practical examples of where you have battled Canon banding. Every desk jockey pixel peeper has a shot of their bookshelf pushed 3 stops. ;) It simply hasn't been an issue for me in the real world, but I am not a landscaper.

Marc deals with dynamic range on a massive scale, partly because of the subject matter and conditions, and partly because of the scale of size (extremely large prints).

I'm sure that he has been dealing with the limits of single image dynamic range for years. Techniques for using multiple, bracketed exposures have existed for some time now, but that involves additional processing and storage. The rather nice thing about the Nikon D800 is that it has such a wide dynamic range in a single exposure (especially at base ISO). While you don't always need the dynamic range, it's almost always an advantage to have more "available" for those times when there is interesting detail in the deep shadows. It's nice to have the option to "either" bring out that detail or subdue the detail, as compositional needs require.

For images with a lot of fine detail in the lower and lowest tones it can make a visible difference. It can mean better edges for dark feathers and dark fur, for instance. Similar improvements for dark landscape elements.

DXOMark* is showing around 2.5 stops more dynamic range at ISO 100 (normalized for an 8"x12" print). That equates to more than 4 times the deep shadow detail data for the D800 vs the 5D MKIII. By ISO 1600 that difference is dramatically reduced, however.

I plan to stay on a Canon based platform for at least this iteration of new cameras. For my purposes, the 5D MKIII will solve the majority of issues I have with the 5D MKII without a change in manufacturers. I retain all of my current glass, and I keep the option to use more adapted lenses than I could use on a Nikon system. For my purposes, it just makes more sense to improve my system with the 5D MKIII than to replace my system and lose some capability with the D800.

----------------------

*(While these measurements only relate to using DXO RAW conversion, it still provides insight into what may be happening in other RAW converters. ACR is also showing substantial improvements at base ISO for the Nikon D800, but I haven't seen exact measurements of the difference.)

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft Cool. My 5D3 pleases me every time. I would like to see some practical examples of where you have battled Canon banding. Every desk jockey pixel peeper has a shot of their bookshelf pushed 3 stops. ;) It simply hasn't been an issue for me in the real world, but I am not a landscaper.

I could show you thousands of examples every week, unfortunately. In a high-volume workflow where using DPP is absolutely impractical because of the speed with which we must turnaround our images.

Bottom line- I process thousands of images per week from both Canon and Nikon, from various bodies including the mk2 and mk3, the D700, and sometimes a D7000 or 7D etc. here or there. And hands-down the Nikon bodies have FAR more usable shadows than Canon.

What on earth could we be doing that makes such differences so important? HDR portraits, for one. You can click through to my studio's website in my signature I believe. (http://www.linandjirsablog.com/) The studio shoots on 5D mk2's, 5D mk3's, and D700's. I'm trying to talk them into getting a D800, simply for this one reason. I don't care at all for the green, plaid-noise 5D mk3 shadows...

We definitely don't qualify as "desk jockey pixel peepers", but we certainly find ourselves pushing our shadows to the max very often...

Of course to be fair, I'll admit that most people simply won't be pushing the envelope as far as we do. If you can fit most of your exposures into the usable dynamic range of a single mk3 CR2, then yeah the mk3 is an amazing camera with more speed than the D800, and a great focus system for anyone who wants cross-type AF points off-center... Other than that, though, I see the D800 as a superior machine for anything involving extreme dynamic range or resolution...


=Matt=

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft Cool. My 5D3 pleases me every time. I would like to see some practical examples of where you have battled Canon banding. Every desk jockey pixel peeper has a shot of their bookshelf pushed 3 stops. ;) It simply hasn't been an issue for me in the real world, but I am not a landscaper.

BTW, those books in my video are all the books I have published over the last 20 years of my career, well and a few of my fathers, of which I have done most of the press checks for.

I have put in my 10,000 hours + in front of a calibrated monitor doing nothing but pushing pixels, all created with various digital cameras and film formats.

I love my job and am usually busy, so this D800 phenom was so noticeable it was the inspiration for me beginning a video series. I dont even know anyone at Nikon!

I will say that it never hurts to study your tools and I firmly believe that you will improve the quality of your work by studying all the available technology.

The bands do suck but I have simply worked around them when using my Canon equipment since 2005!

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft Cool. My 5D3 pleases me every time. I would like to see some practical examples of where you have battled Canon banding.

Fair enough Jack

"I" know there is no diff between the bands I see in my files between a bookcase and those I see in a rock tree or sky, but you make a good point as I too am always skeptical of other camera tests online and never make my mind until I test myself.

So while I was working on a image taken a few years back and began opening up the shadows, as i normally do and...... thought of your question :)

Here is a sample taken with my Canon 1Ds M3, 24mm F1.4. Taken at ISO800 30sec at F5.6
I understand this is a night shot but its just one example where I could sell this much larger if there was better shadow detail, especially no bands. I have my ways of making it look acceptable but...... a D800 would make it look great!

Here is most of the file as seen at 15%


Here is a section at 100% horizontal bands visible




I found it interesting that the bands were horizontal in the 1DsM3 but vertical in the 5DM3


I will be testing the Canon 1Dx while in Hawaii in 2 weeks Thanks to BorrowLenses.com! I will see if the dreaded bands have been exterminated. I just hope they dont show up at a 45degree angle

Cheers!

Originally Posted by Marc Muench Fair enough Jack "I" know there is no diff between the bands I see in my files between a bookcase and those I see in a rock tree or sky, but you make a good point as I too am always skeptical of other camera tests online and never make my mind until I test myself.

Yeah, I know that the banding exists in certain circumstances, and that there's no difference between a bookcase and a rock, of course. I just have never seen it show up in any of the photos I take. I don't do much shadow lifting though, or serious landscaping. So I wanted to see a real-life example to see if it can be reproduced in a photo that I might take. Thank you for posting the example. I don't think I've ever taken a shot like that either, lol!

Originally Posted by jmphotocraft So I wanted to see a real-life example to see if it can be reproduced in a photo that I might take. Thank you for posting the example. I don't think I've ever taken a shot like that either, lol!

The other way to view any faults of a sensor, take a picture of a white piece of paper evenly lit, the same way you would for testing for dust on the sensor. Open in any RAW converter software and begin applying great amounts of contrast followed by darkening. The white should turn dark grey and then the pattern (or whatever) noise will show.... along with the dust

Haha, I know who you are and I appreciate your contributions here very much. I did not call you a desk jockey pixel peeper - just that many of those types have already shown a banded picture of the inside of their office or bedroom, etc, so it would be interesting to see a more practical example like a landscape or portrait.

Great review,
I found a couple of shots by Air Team Cannon with the new MarkIV.
They were using some fast glass..if you know what I mean
http://500px.com/photo/8819431
http://500px.com/photo/9654285
Gary

And your in the next video Harry :)

FWIW, the shadow detail you can pull up from a D800 kills the D700.