+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out (/showthread.php?tid=192533)
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - pRICE cUBE - 07-04-2016
The fanboys fight about which brand is better. I just want both cameras to ship in mass so I can pick up a D4s or 1DX fir less than $2k.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - AllGold - 07-04-2016
pRICE cUBE wrote:
The fanboys fight about which brand is better. I just want both cameras to ship in mass so I can pick up a D4s or 1DX fir less than $2k.
Yeah, my days of buying $5500+ cameras are long past.
My last purchase was a 1Ds Mark III, originally an $8K camera, for less than $900.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - pRICE cUBE - 07-04-2016
AllGold wrote:
[quote=pRICE cUBE]
The fanboys fight about which brand is better. I just want both cameras to ship in mass so I can pick up a D4s or 1DX fir less than $2k.
Yeah, my days of buying $5500+ cameras are long past.
My last purchase was a 1Ds Mark III, originally an $8K camera, for less than $900.
It used to be that the latest $5-6k camera made a real difference. Now the previous gen cameras perform almost as well as models replacing them. In Nikon's case, it appears the D3S, D4, D4s all outperforms the D5 in noise. Some people will grouse about DXO's testing but it was a good reference when Nikon was ahead, now it is flawed when Nikon is behind.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - Billybob - 07-04-2016
AllGold wrote:
[quote=Billybob]
[quote=DP]
I've paid for my Mk. II a few times over... If you can do that, then the cost is a small factor. It's been my exclusive tool although I do have an SL1 as my backup camera. Interestingly, the SL1 does a damn nice job for what I shoot. I intend on using it more for my "art" stuff (birds and other wildlife and landscape) and see how it stacks up.
You must get paid a bit (a lot) better than the rest of us if you've made that kind of change off a camera that's only been around 2-3 months.
Or did you get a pre-release copy?
If you read back earlier in the thread, he said 5D Mark II, which has been out a long time.
Excuse me for jumping to the conclusion that a response to my post about a $6000 camera which response referenced a Mark II in a thread about the 1D X Mark II would be about the $6000 camera.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - Billybob - 07-04-2016
pRICE cUBE wrote:
[quote=Billybob]
I've almost completely switched over to Nikon but the low-ISO DR and 16 fps of the Canon have my mouth watering.
Oh! They both cost over $5000.
Never mind!
miley-shocked003:
The previous version 1D X had dropped to 2200-2500 on eBay.
That is an awfully tempting price.
Lol, I wish you hadn't mentioned it.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - Billybob - 07-04-2016
pRICE cUBE wrote:
[quote=AllGold]
[quote=pRICE cUBE]
The fanboys fight about which brand is better. I just want both cameras to ship in mass so I can pick up a D4s or 1DX fir less than $2k.
Yeah, my days of buying $5500+ cameras are long past.
My last purchase was a 1Ds Mark III, originally an $8K camera, for less than $900.
It used to be that the latest $5-6k camera made a real difference. Now the previous gen cameras perform almost as well as models replacing them. In Nikon's case, it appears the D3S, D4, D4s all outperforms the D5 in noise. Some people will grouse about DXO's testing but it was a good reference when Nikon was ahead, now it is flawed when Nikon is behind.
Regardless, it is not a substantial improvement.
By contrast, the DR and FPS improvement in the Mark II are significant gains. You can never have too many FPS. I was shooting a baseball game last week with a 10fps Nikon D500, and definitely wanted more fps to catch the bat connecting with the ball.
Of course, $6000 is still too much $$.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - pRICE cUBE - 07-04-2016
Billybob wrote:
By contrast, the DR and FPS improvement in the Mark II are significant gains. You can never have too many FPS. I was shooting a baseball game last week with a 10fps Nikon D500, and definitely wanted more fps to catch the bat connecting with the ball.
Of course, $6000 is still too much $$.
Ooooooh, the D500 is on my watch list. How do you like it so far?
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - pRICE cUBE - 07-04-2016
The 1DX Marl 2 has a gain in dynamic range but if I was stuck with a 1DX I would be happy as a clam. I don't recall last time someone looked at one of my sports pics and said, "Dang, look at the dynamic range on that shot!".
I am not sure why the Nikon D5 scored so low on noise in comparison, it seemed as though they were on a roll and had Canon's number.
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - IronMac - 07-04-2016
DP wrote:
I've paid for my Mk. II a few times over... If you can do that, then the cost is a small factor.
I picked up an Olympus OM-D body and lens, paid for itself within a week. Not monetary value but let's just say I got some compromising photos. Bwahahaha!!!
Re: Canon 1DX II vs. Nikon D5 in latest DXO sensor test, fanboys to freak out - Billybob - 07-04-2016
pRICE cUBE wrote:
[quote=Billybob]
By contrast, the DR and FPS improvement in the Mark II are significant gains. You can never have too many FPS. I was shooting a baseball game last week with a 10fps Nikon D500, and definitely wanted more fps to catch the bat connecting with the ball.
Of course, $6000 is still too much $$.
Ooooooh, the D500 is on my watch list. How do you like it so far?
I love it, but I haven't really put it through its paces yet. I shot a Cubs-Mariner game at mostly ISO 3200 equivalent (it's an indoor stadium, so no bright sunshine to help), and I love the IQ. The noise is well managed, and the colors stay vibrant. As I mentioned, however, 10 fps is not fast enough when the pitchers are throwing 97+ mph (Fernandez for the Mariners hit 101 a couple of times!). I'm still searching for that elusive bat-connecting-with-ball shot.
I'll post a gallery of shots in the next couple of days.