Jump to content

Nikon D5200 vs Canon 5D Mark III


Andrew Reid
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

The 5dIII clearly has much more detail in these shots. Look at the wide at 00:54. 

 

You are right but there are other shots where they resolve the same levels of detail.

 

Not sure why that one is the way it is - maybe the codec on the Nikon got stressed out or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enthusiast here, not a pro, so take this question in that spirit. My daughter is a drummer, and I often film her gigs. These are invariably indoors, poorly lit, with annoying LED stage lights that produce unwanted flicker. Basic nightmare. I've tried using a wide variety of cameras over the last year, with a mixture of good and mediocre results. At the moment I'm using a 6D with a canon 50mm 1.4 and an Nex-5N with a Sigma 30mm 2.8 and an old Nikon 50mm 2.8 manual lens using an adapter. For fun i also use the occasional Hero3 Black for interesting overhead views. All of those work pretty well with a couple caveats. The 6D has an issue with moire of course, as you know. The 5N is ok in mid range lighting but noise gets bad quick, especially compared to 6D. While I'd love to shoot wide open on the 6D all the time, the super shallow DoF means I have to pic one member of the band at a time to be in focus. Obviously that's the half the point of such a fast lens, but it often means I can't leverage it as intended. I'm still within the return window for the 6D. I can exchange it without penalty. So basically what I'm asking is if I'd be better off (or at least as well off with money saved) by returning the 6D and getting a D5200. Keep in mind my use case is very much video, and often low light. If I did this, I could pick up a fast 35mm and maybe an 85mm to go with it. Going below 1.8 (or even 2.8) may not be worth it given my DoF requirements. I'd love any thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right but there are other shots where they resolve the same levels of detail.

 

Not sure why that one is the way it is - maybe the codec on the Nikon got stressed out or something.

 

I expect thats exactly the reason. I'm no canon fanboy, not by a long stretch of the imagination, but the 5diii is definitely the clear winner here. Now that I look at it; every shot the 5diii is holding onto much more detail. 

 

The d5200 does have seriously amazing colour and dynamic range for the price, but it falls short in the resolution category. I would be interested to see the results of the same test with the use of an external recorder; the nikon would probably fare far better. 

 

I can see a bit of colour moire in the 5200 footage in the above tests too. Nothing like a 550d/7d/etc but it's worth noting. 

 

I rate the 5dIII resolution pretty poorly too, which doesn't say much for this nikon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I wonder if the D7100 will share the same sensor and image processing as D5200 in video mode, it would be nice to have a weather-sealed, moire-free APS-C option.  Bummer that 1080/60P is still not available with any Nikon.

 

It does share the same image processor and sensor, yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I've got to admit the Nikon D5200 is the "sleeper" HDSLR at the moment. We all knew the GH3 and 5D etc were very good but this Nikon is definitely outputting some very impressive video.... if you've got Nikon glass it's a no-brainer.

 

I'd still like to see the GH3 go against it with the same lens on it (via adapter) and set as whatever distance necessary to achieve the same FOV capture and directly compare the two!

(Hint Andrew!)

 

Imagine if Toshiba put a better sensor in the new D7100.....killer!

 

Thanks for the postings Andrew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I want to root for the underdog and dislike canon's milking every dollar from the consumer the mark 3 seems to resolve way more detail to me in several of the shots. Some shots are equal but those with more detail ( wide of bricks and the wood grain on the chairs for example) the mark 3 was the clear winner for me. I guess if they weren't shot back to back I would not have noticed as much. But the shots of the bricks, and shot of statues in front of the door @1:28 show a wide gap in resolving detail from what I saw.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this comparison shows that the d5200 can hold up well in the condition Andrew put them through. Sure some shots might look better from one camera to the next but they both used different lens - different codecs - different post grading etc. The fact that the d5200 can look as good or equal to a higher end camera is what  Andrew has shown us. There are too many variables to argue wether one is better than the other. One thing for sure is the d5200 is a huge leap forward for Nikon and sub 1k DSLR's. Thanks for your hard efforts Andrew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect thats exactly the reason. I'm no canon fanboy, not by a long stretch of the imagination, but the 5diii is definitely the clear winner here. Now that I look at it; every shot the 5diii is holding onto much more detail. 

 

The d5200 does have seriously amazing colour and dynamic range for the price, but it falls short in the resolution category. I would be interested to see the results of the same test with the use of an external recorder; the nikon would probably fare far better. 

 

I can see a bit of colour moire in the 5200 footage in the above tests too. Nothing like a 550d/7d/etc but it's worth noting. 

 

I rate the 5dIII resolution pretty poorly too, which doesn't say much for this nikon. 

 

The 5dIII clearly has much more detail in these shots. Look at the wide at 00:54. 

Yes and look at how better the nikon captures the highlights and the better dynamic range. Other shots show the 5200 has better resolution That one shot seems a little out of focus for the nikon. From this video its quite obvious the 5200 flattens the canon. Except I doubt it would do this in beauty bokeh shots. The only thing the 5d excels at and is top of the class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK take it easy, I mis-read your phrasing, I thought you were saying you used a custom profile and then the other settings, understand now.

Hey stop being condascending. If its your mistake you should apologise not turn it around to the other persons fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I want to root for the underdog and dislike canon's milking every dollar from the consumer the mark 3 seems to resolve way more detail to me in several of the shots. Some shots are equal but those with more detail ( wide of bricks and the wood grain on the chairs for example) the mark 3 was the clear winner for me. I guess if they weren't shot back to back I would not have noticed as much. But the shots of the bricks, and shot of statues in front of the door @1:28 show a wide gap in resolving detail from what I saw.

Come on Look at the railings in the opening shot or the light strings in the second. Bricks in the third are clearly different perspectives and the nikon is further away. The Nikon is a better camera but then with the canon its like lens flares The camera can make beautiful bokeh shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey stop being condascending. If its your mistake you should apologise not turn it around to the other persons fault.

Hey, the phrasing was ambiguous, a bit of civility doesn't go amiss either! The answer could be a lot more polite too, try it some time, works wonders, you know those old words please and thank you. Back to the topic................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, the phrasing was ambiguous, a bit of civility doesn't go amiss either! The answer could be a lot more polite too, try it some time, works wonders, you know those old words please and thank you. Back to the topic................

The phrasing wasn't ambiguous at all. Telling Andrew to take it easy is a putdown because he was pointing out you didn't read his post. Now your accusing me of not saying please and thank you? So why should I be thanking you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...