First: The Canon vs Nikon war and some of the issues we have.
I've shot with both Canon and Nikon cameras, I love both...but since my first camera was a Nikon I do favor their cameras. However, when Canon introduced their 5D Mark II back in 2009, it opened up a window for cinematographers that we really didn't expect. While the AF system for photography was the dog's poo, it was a revolution as far as what was happening in the cinema world.
It's 2012 and Nikon has finally caught up with Canon in the video department. Canon has finally managed to get a wicked AF system happening. And while the reviews of BOTH the Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon D800 (Direct competition IMO) are absolutely amazing cameras for stills and video compared to the past models, there are some issues.
Let's start with Canon: The 'light leak' issue. While it's unclear if all the first batches of Mark III's have been affected or not, there is a substantial amount of anger in the Canon community about this issue. What happens is if you illuminate the top display to get a better look at your settings, this light leaks into the camera affecting exposure metering. While I'm not sure why one would have their display illuminated during a shoot, the simplest solution is to just not use it OR to get your exposure readings when the illumination is turned off. Still, it's very disappointing that right out of the box we've got this issue. So far I haven't seen this affect actual picture quality or video quality. I'm sure more tests will be done and Canon have announced (In the U.S anyways) that they will be responding to this sometime mid-April (That's about now) to the issue.
The other issue, that is a non-issue IMO, is the video quality. No, I'm not talking about the inability to get clean HDMI out, I'm talk about the 'soft' look of the image. Because Canon wanted to tackle the issue of aliasing and moire, they needed to 'soften' things out (Pretty technical huh!?) BUT, adding sharpening in post brings everything back, something you couldn't do with your 5D Mark II files. On the Mark II, if you added sharpening it would simply cause the already present aliasing and moire to be worse. This time around it handles the sharpening in post like it should. It brings back the detail you need/want. Still, some have complained that this is something they will constantly have to do in post now, completely forgetting the fact that before the Mark III they were complaining about the aliasing and moire and that it is now GONE. We can't have everything at ones boys and girls.
Nikon's turn: The Nikon D800 as far as photographer's tool (Not cinematographer) is a beast and was the way to go as far as pricing was concerned. While I'm not sure about the rest of the world, at least in Japan and some other Asian countries, Nikon released a press announcement saying that there were errors made in pricing. The price now exceeds the price of the Canon 5D Mark III, and while the Nikon D800E was suppose to be more expensive, it is now cheaper than the D800 (Non-E). To me, this just seemed like Nikon underestimated their own product and decided to push the prices up to make more money. Corporate greed...
So with both of these cameras at the same price what does Nikon have to offer that Canon can't. The first is that massive 36MP sensor. This is great for studio photography...and that's where it stops. I'm not saying a sports photographer or wedding photographer couldn't shoot with this, but with file sizes doubling in size, you're workflow is going to slow down some. Also, instead of getting a nice 6 frames with the Canon, you only get 4 with the Nikon. 2 doesn't seem like much, but it can make the difference. That said, at 36MP you've got a lot of resolution and are able to crop and hold a lot of detail in the image compared to the other cameras out there.
What about video? Well, straight out of the camera I've seen some pretty impressive stuff for what I would consider Nikon's first 'real' try at video (Sorry D90 and D7000). It produces SHARP video straight out of the camera BUT suffers from horrible aliasing and moire. Canon is the winner there. Also, with the high MP sensor, the ISO's aren't holding up as well compared to the Canon. BUT what I have yet to see is the CLEAN HDMI OUT feature that allows you to record to an external recording giving you more color space to work with. The fellas at f-stoppers did a quick test and found that the external recording wasn't as robust as they thought it would be, but then they are photographers first and cinematographers in far second. More needs to be seen and done to get a real idea of what can be done.
Regardless of whether you go Canon or Nikon you won't be disappointed with the photography or video features of each camera. If you're invested in Canon glass, you'll be happy with the 5D Mark III. If you have Nikon glass, you won't regret getting a D800. Until Canon releases their 1Dx we won't really be able to compare their flagship cameras (Nikon D4 vs Canon 1Dx).
It's always important to stay calm when new gear comes along. We all jump on the latest and greatest BUT first batches tend to come out buggy and with problems. This isn't just when it comes to Canon or Nikon or even cameras. Wait a while, let them figure things out, then buy. A good 6 month wait would be the way to go before buying something like this. I do have to confess though, I per-ordered my Canon 5D Mark III. Luckily for me, the shop never got their batch in and I was able to put my order on hold and I'm currently waiting for a call back from Canon Japan to see what they have to say about the light leak.
Here's a good review of both cameras: Funny, but not exactly work safe!
This is a shootout of the new Nikon D800 and Canon 5D mkIII DSLRs, with a focus on the video quality in particular. More more detailed info, you can read my write-up of the tests at www.crisislab.com.
Edit: The greenscreen gag at the end was shot on the D800.
Posts
