Mirrorless, 5D Mark III, D800, DxO Mark Sucks Balls

I just got back from a short photowalk around town with my pre-production Canon mirrorless camera and I have to say it’s a nice little camera. I think most people will love it. What kinda sucks about it is the sensor. It’s not bad but it can’t go up against the latest Sony sensors in their mirrorless cameras. Japan really needs to do something about this in the very near future or else Sony is going to kill us with their dynamic range and low noise. All the pattern noise and banding shit has got to become a thing of the past.

The 5D Mark III, which is the world’s best DSLR right now regardless of what those fucking idiots at DxO Labs say, still has that pattern and banding crap, although you have to mess with the exposure in post for it to become an issue. But there’s none of that on the Sony sensors, and so Canon Inc. needs to improve. If Sony can do it, so can we.



This might not be surprising to you, but people are still emailing me and telling me how wrong I am about the piece of shit D800. I have to say, the feeling I have right now has got to be similar to the feeling John Harrington had when he was practically the only one complaining about the massive amounts of noise on the Nikon D200 and D2x. The noise issue on the D200 was legendary. Even Nikon was ignoring him. Yet, after a few years suddenly everyone’s like “oh yeah of course, there was an issue with excessive noise, everyone knows that?!” Mark my words, after some time has passed and the fucking fanboys quiet down, everyone is going to see the D800 for the inferior camera that it is. And then everyone is going to realize how stupid the DxO Mark tests really are. Down sampling to 8MP for comparisons? Why don’t you guys down sample all your images to 100×100 pixels instead? Today most people view only thumbnails anyway. Just fucking down sample everything to 100×100 pixels and do your tests. That way even my crappy Blackberry phone can look like it rivals the 5D Mark III.

DxOMark sucks balls

Wait jest wan bombaclad minute, mon! Dees nuh look irie ta me!?

The biggest joke is that they claim that the D800 is better than the 5D Mark III in low light. You can’t even begin to imagine how many facepalms the above image is worth. If the D800 is so great, then why is Ken Rockwell shooting with the 5D Mark III instead?

The Canon EOS 5D Mark III is the world’s best digital SLR. It easily lets us create smooth, clean, beautiful and colorful images in any sort of light. It handles much better my cheaper Nikon D800 and D800E; my 5D Mark III handles and sounds smoother, quieter, feels better and makes better-looking images than my Nikon D800E.

The 5D Mark III also has the best LCD ever put in a DSLR, while the LCD on my Nikon D800E is smaller in actual use, and most importantly, the Nikon’s LCD isn’t color-accurate. My 5D Mark III LCD is big, bold, bright, sharp, clear, colorful and accurate, and automatically varies its brightness brilliantly for use in any light. (My D800E also has auto LCD brightness control, but doesn’t work well enough to want to use it.)

To shooters upgrading from the Nikon D800 and D800E, the Mark III is greatly improved over the Mark II, while the Nikon D800 and D800E are a step backwards in ergonomics and LCD quality from the D700. Therefore the status quo has reversed; I used to prefer Nikon, while today with the 5D Mark III, I greatly prefer it to my D800E. Pixels impress amateurs, while guys like me who shoot every day for a living are more impressed at how my 5D Mark III lets me get more of the right pixels faster, not just more of the wrong ones.

The 5D Mark III is the world’s best DSLR.

It’s a huge improvement over the 5D Mark II due to the improvements from automatic color fringe correction, and the greatly improved power, depth-of-field and playback controls.

If you shoot Canon, you deserve one of these.


I told you so.

ONE DOES NOT SIMPLY SHOOT A D800 WITHOUT A TRIPODAll those extra pixels on the D800 are worth jack shit when they also contain more noise. The camera is also slower at just 4fps and the autofocus system just can’t compete with the 5D Mark III. The D800 might perform OK if you have to do an assignment at a retirement home shooting old people moving around in their wheelchairs. And I’ve been told that even then you may need to shoot from a heavy duty industrial grade tripod to get sharp images. But for anything more serious, you’ll want the 5D Mark III. Plus the extra resolution on the D800 is marginal at best. We’ve reached a point where more resolution on the 35mm sensor isn’t giving us any significant return. Best to keep the resolution at a decent level in the 24MP range and instead focus on speed, accuracy and image quality (sharpness, low noise, dynamic range, chromatic aberration correction etc. etc.). Those are the things that really matter. Capturing the right pixels faster, instead of a lot more crap slower.

And with the 5D Mark III, Canon Inc. did well in that area. Yes, yes, it could be better, and we’re going to work on it. What will be much hotter in the near future instead of senseless megapixels, are features based on computational photography. The new HDR feature on the 5D Mark III should be seen in this light. Instead of worthless extra data (megapixels) let’s improve the quality of the data we do have and do some meaningful stuff with it.

Joe McNally (left) and a random Sock Puppet, separated at birth?

I was told Japan actually put in the HDR feature to get Joe McNally to switch to Canon faster. Most people aren’t aware of this but we’ve been in talks with McNally for well over 3 years now to make the switch. Negotiations have been tough, to say the least, and one of McNally’s demands was to get him an in-camera HDR feature because it’s an absolutely essential feature to him (each of his shots is combined from at least 7-8 exposures), and Nikon just doesn’t want to deliver. Combined with our new Speedlite system (600EX-RT and ST-E3-RT) based on radio frequency technology, I’m expecting McNally to become a Canon Explorer of Light within a few months. And I hope he takes his friend with him. You may want to check out his latest performance on The Grid with Scott Kelby. Whenever those 2 guys get together they crack me up.

Anyway, I’m late for my meditation session with the swami. I’ll be back soon with more. In the mean time, get a 5D Mark III and do some real photography.

58 thoughts on “Mirrorless, 5D Mark III, D800, DxO Mark Sucks Balls

  1. The 5DIII sucks my sweaty balls. My Nikon Coolpix produces superior images. People, save your money and get a D800 instead.

    • I’m not rehashing, man. People need to be reminded about this stuff. Especially since the fucking press is missing in action.

  2. people keep your d700 or 5DII and save your money for photography classes (you probably need them) and travel to nice places…

  3. thx FC that sums it up realy nice . iven in the user manual the warn about the shutter bluring the images due to the high mp in the D800 ,, and they keep on exsploding also 🙂 this guy was lucky only a smal poof,, http://www.canonwatch.com/another-exploded-nikon-d800/
    (Sony found a way to fuck up Nikoni,m glad Canon diddent bite on the same hock)
    i stil dont want to put my eye against this shit ewer again .
    and it also make al the other smal errors like this seem like an great exstra feature 🙂

    o did i say that the 5D3 had a light leak problem ? well its fixed and now its perfect working whit no other ishues at al .. thats what i cal a perfect camera ..

    (horns blowing in the background)

    after a few sec of silence : BAAAHAAAAHAAAAA!!!

  4. Yeah, boring, FC. And all that panic everybody gets with those measly 36mp… I mean it’s not like you shoot an 8x10in., handheld. And as to Rockwell The Nikon Whore, as you used to call him, I knew he was a moran when he was still that ol’ Nikon whore.
    Time to get rid of that bookmark…

      • maybe this whil exsplain some facts so DXO Marks and other people may se the light more easy 🙂

        In very basic terms:
        image noise is always more or less random from pixel to pixel, so the noise in neighbouring pixels is uncorrelated. As you add and average uncorrelated data the average tends to zero or settle to a minimum value. Image data is not random and so there is a strong correlation between neighbouring pixels. Adding and averaging correlated data tends to settle to a representative average. Downsampling is adding and averaging data from neighbouring pixels and producing a single value, thereby reducing the effect of uncorrelated data.
        I would expect about a 25% noticeable sharpness increase in a downsampled image compared to an identically sized native resolution.

        if somone does not understand this.. .. i give up. (unless its funny not to)

      • Yes, but what? That Canon pay more? That they are not digusted by… anyway. I could hardly care less.

  5. I actually think that the opposite will be true. As time passes, the superiority of the d800 images will become so obvious, that the burst rate and fake “noise” issues will be forgotten, and everyone will wonder how anyone could have ever made the comparison.

    • Itsok ,,
      you I actually think that the opposite will be true. ? based on what ? ..As time passes ??? please pull a 747 out of you rectum also,, it might be possible ‘As time passes’ ..

  6. After the release of the first Canon 5D, all technology that matters stayed almost the same, now Nikon AND Canon just keep releasing gimmicks to make cameras more expensive and difficult to deal.

    FC, you do planned obsolescence there at Canon?!

    • It’s a slow evolution. Just be patient… At least Canon Inc. knows what to improve compared to Nikon.

      • Fark! They got a lot to improve then! I still laugh when I see some moron proudly carrying a 60D.

      • Yeah the 60D gives me a chuckle. But the 70D is going to be something different.

    • “Yeah the 60D gives me a chuckle. But the 70D is going to be something different”

      Oh Chuck you just gave me something to dream of! Wallet, be still!

  7. Talking about the MKIII screen, and there are new technologies out there to reduce glare from the sun, did they improve the screen visibility of the MKiii? There are more than 120,000 dots now on the MKIII screen compared to the MKII, but during summertime it’s really a pain in the butt to read the screen without killing our eyes because of the sun glare, and i refuse to carry an LCD viewfinder because I don’t want to look like a dickhead. Or is it the same plastic screen we find on all the canon cameras? This area needs to be improved for everyone that is on the go and wants to travel lightly, and there are many patents out there that could be brought to the camera world (transfer of technologies). I will try to give concrete examples another time.

    Probably the best feature on the MKIII – besides its capability to shoot in low light – is the HDR option, a feature that is being used and abused by so many photographers nowadays. It’s going to make it easier for us instead of choosing our bracketing exposures with at least 3 shots or 7 shots for Joe Mac Nelly.

    Another point that needs to be “reinforced” is the magnesium chassis of this camera compared to the Nikons. It’s 100% magnesium and it’s thicker than a Nikon camera. This chassis is super resistant, while on a D800 you might break the clip to attach the lens.

    The D800 might perform OK if you have to do an assignment at a retirement home shooting old people moving around in their wheelchairs. LOL good point.

    I don’t know how bad the noise is on the Nikon, but I am guessing it “should be’ pretty much easy to fix it in camera raw; of course it’s post-production, but then again a good and even bad photographer needs some kind of tweakings to make their pictures stand out. (and it took me a while to accept this reality).

    Take care.

  8. I know this site isn’t for serious photographers that want to discuss a common interest, but is designed for fan boys of one ilk or the other, so I will try to be as partisan as possible in my comments. With that in mind, which camera you prefer appears to depend upon what you want to do with your camera. If you want to take the highest quality single image, then the d800E should be the clear choice. If you are a spray and pray type shooter, a wedding photographer, or a soccer mom, then the Mark III may be the better choice. In either event, the differences shouldn’t be enough to cause anyone to sell their glass and change systems. As for video, it’s an add-on that I don’t really care about. Sometimes it may be convenient, but i’ve only used it a few times on my d7000 and never missed it on the d700. Soccer mom’s may want it, but then again, I doubt that they care about the subtle differences between the two camera’s video features. If I was getting a dslr for video, then, based upon what I’ve seen so far, I think I would prefer the Mark III, but then again, I’m not sure I would get a dslr for video.

    I do think that the Mark III is marketing genius. A great, forgiving, camera for family use. High quality photos of the kids growing up without the hassle of large file sizes. It also has the buffer for sports, and a published high ISO capacity. After having seen shots in low light with both cameras, however, I think the reality of the differences in low light performance are not as great as hyped. The 800 beats the Mark III to 3200, has much greater dynamic range, and shots after 3200 are largely unusable on either camera. That fact that the 800’s poor quality at or above 6400 is worse than the Mark III’s poor quality at or above 6400 is not much of a selling point for me. But for that crucial shot of the kids at the gymnastics competition, I’m sure it’s important to many owners.

    From all the comparisons of the d800 and Mark III that I have seen so far, I have come to several conclusions:

    1. In good light with good technique, the d800 produces significantly better image quality.
    2. The d800 has vastly superior dynamic range and better color rendition.
    3. Nikon did not improve their focal system as much as Canon, but the Mark II was crap, so now they are about equal. I have not been entirely happy with the d7000 or d700 in this regard so I will wait for further reports on this.
    4. Mark III has greater FPS, but this relates to #1 above, and I don’t shoot sports.
    5. Mark III has smaller file sizes, but this relates to #1 above, and I can get a new hard drive.
    6. Mark III has better low light performance at or above 6400 – I don’t care, but some may.
    7. Mark III has better auto white balance. To me this is a real difference. Even if you shoot in RAW, getting the white balance right in post is a hassle. We will see if Nikon can fix this.
    8. Landscape photographers that use live view to get focus prefer the Mark III live view system.
    9. The d800 has a problem with the color cast of the lcd, but I expect this to be fixed in a software update.
    10. Items 1 & 2 above subsume all else.
    11. Canon shooters are desperate to find reasons to prefer the Mark III. (Why else would they eschew DXO marks for the opinion of KR. My god, he shoots in JPEG, espouses the virtues of the POS 18-200 and calls himself a professional photographer because he runs a photo blog.)
    12. No matter what camera I own, my photography won’t change much.

    • And let’s not forget that the D600 is coming with around 22-24 MP and, being a Nikon, will no doubt have a better sensor than the overpriced, over-rated 5D MKiii! 😀

      • ye and lets not forget that Volvo.Samsung.Apple.what the fuck ewer ..is comming whit xxxx bether somting,, thats way bether than its xxxxx,,, ye .i,m impressed whit your insights .. how can you know al this ,, i,m givving up then Nikonians’s got to be s supreme race ,,

        i,m going to bed.. g nite !

  9. btw! totaly off topic (sorry) i think somones going to get iven bigger titties next year!!!!


    • Yes, go bury your head under a pillow and pretend the D600 ain’t coming. I’d be doing that too if I’d just paid big money for a 5D Mk iii.

    • —So funny – I thought it was about the tape. At least Nikons don’t contain peanut products or byproducts in their manufacture.

      —–So Depressing —-

      Feel free to combine and Google: 5D3, D800 and D4 whit the following words ..

      autofocus issues, Commander function, autofocus problems,bugs,exsplode, freezing, lock-up, lockup,battery, Nikon, patch, problem, problems, repair, kaboom,unresponsive, viewfinder,display,Bomb,card compatibility, green cast,

      when you are done.. you whil understand wy Canon 5D3 users are in HEAVEN! Compared to Nikon D800/D4 users. Canon did it way bether than Nikon in this round i love my 5D3 and i whil keep on smiling when i think of how lucky i am , i was a tiny fart away from buying the D800, thx to my local camera dealer i got to test both models first .

      the main reasons for Proffesional Cameras have lower mp than theyr less exspensive’ modells. there is 4 main reasons that pulls allot your cpu, manufactures can’t put more in to the housings at the present time.

      1.Autofocus ..
      2. movment blur. cpu cant keep up. to high for VR to compensate efficent.
      3. shooting speed.. you need alot from cpu to get those mp down to your card.
      4. iso Noise becomes higher .

      (4. ) when you raise iso sensetivity to ISO XXX that litterarly give you a higer %
      chanse of a single pixel to get the wrong info or not to get any info at al.
      it just ads up following the amount of mp your camera have.

      It simply does not get bether whit more mp..

      there is alot of reasons wy i use the 5D3 ,and i dont have the time to list them al.
      but since most of the ishues people here have is regarding D800 and the 5D3
      il try exsplain those again ,

      For hand held shooting, a D800 Shooter can no longer use the value of the lens focal length, to determine the minimum shutter speed. Example: Using the 5D3, I can shoot with a XXmm lens at a minimum hand-held shutter speed of 1/50sec assuming one takes best care to avoid camera shake. With the D800, the minimum value would be around 1/100sec at best, if not faster due to the higher MP.

      I have plenty off knowledge of down-sampling methods,i’ts a werry well known and effective method to reduce noise in an image. Downsampling D800 images to 5D3 resolution not only reduces D800 image noise, it also gives them a sharpening effect, and retains better detail than an identically shot 5D3 file. a downsampled Image whil always look sharper and it whil contain less noise.. this is a fact.. live whit it !
      any test or rewy using Downsampled images is W.R.O.N.G
      regarding camera IQ and ISO performance.

      IQ have come to a stage that is totaly more than most need already
      and when both CPU and other components no longer can keep up ,
      the only reason to buy a 36mp camera today is for Studio use.

      you have a tripod glued to it. and have 2 huge studio flashes and matching battery strapped to it also ..

      English is not my native language no need to tell me.. , i already know:)

      have a nice day !

  10. Hey Chucky, check this out, the D800 is having some AF problems and even Thom Hogan thinks NIkon fucked up on this.

    “The one thing I think Nikon is getting wrong here is this: Nikon knows they messed up and shipped some number of defective cameras. Yet they are defacto forcing the customer not only to detect the problem, but to pay for shipping of the unit back to Nikon for repair. I think the least Nikon could (and should) do is this: for every camera they receive that actually gets fixed by this new recalibration test, Nikon should refund the shipping cost to the customer. If I were in charge, I’d go further than that and try to find some small reward I could include above and beyond that, along with a note of apology.

    Yes, that’s costly. But so is a US$3000 camera that doesn’t focus right. Why is the customer the one that gets punished here? ”

    So the two biggest Nikon whores on the net are trashing Nikon now???

  11. Pingback: How to get sharp images with a Nikon D800 | Fake Chuck Westfall

  12. Yeah, DxO must be Nikon whores as well. It’s not that Canon has failed to live up to the competition, it’s that everyone is a Nikon whore. You know, if Canon owners don’t want higher resolution, greater dynamic range and better color rendition at the expense of file size and technique, they can always get a d40. 5mp and you don’t have to fool with RAW images – you can all join your new fan boy KR and shoot everything in JPEG, hand held without a hood or tripod. Better yet, get a p&s. Wake me up when Canon makes a camera worth changing systems.

    • Correction, Canon owners don’t want more pointless megapixels (“resolution”). We do want better dynamic range and colors, and a fast camera instead of the slow as fuck 4fps because of the fucking huge files that eat your memory and disk space like it’s chocolate covered candy.

      • We do want better dynamic range and colours,’

        Ba Hahahahahaha, well you farked up there! The Mark 3 went backwards from the Mark 2 in that regard! 😀

      • Backwards by a few small points in numbers. However, what matters are ACTUAL RESULTS. Numbers don’t show everything, as is the case with those fuckwads at DXOMARK.

  13. Pointless megapixels? Yeah, that’s like too much money. With that rationale medium format shooters must be really crazy. Who wants a crystal clear image that jumps off the page – apparently not Mark iii owners. I don’t understand why Canon shooters are willing to shell out $3500 on a second rate camera, but are too cheap to spend $100 on a larger hard drive and some RAM.

    And what is it that you shoot that requires more than 4fps but less than 7? Personally, I take my shots one at a time. In rare instances I may do a burst if I’m shooting hand held and want to guarantee a clean shot, but other than that . . .? My kids are out of t-ball. Sure it would be nice to have more fps in case I ever needed it, but I never have, and I wouldn’t want to sacrifice any IQ to get it. Obviously Nikon understands that. Canon just underestimated the competition.

    This is going to be a short lived debate. Nikon is going to come out with a 24mp high fps camera for the soccer moms, but understands they won’t want to pay $3500 for it. After that Canon is going to have the drop the price of the Mark IIi and develop a high mp camera to compete with the d800/d800E. If they don’t do both, they are going to lose market share. I previously said that the Mark III was marketing genius, but I am beginning to think that Nikon has outmaneuvered Canon.

    • The 5D3 IS marketing genius. It has the best overall feature combination. Why do you think one of the biggest Nikon whores on the Internet (Ken Rockwell) uses a 5D Mark III instead of a D800?

  14. Because he will say whatever brings traffic to his site. His opinions are inconsistent and frequently illogical. He’s either bipolar or doesn’t really believe what he writes and merely throws crap out there to be contrary. The only thing that comes through consistently in his opinions is his ego. Anyway, time will tell on the 5d/d800 choice. I’m confident in my choice for my purposes. In the meantime, enjoy your Mark III.

    • You think I care about traffic? Why would I want lots of traffic? I’m not running any ads here and nobody the fuck is paying me to waste my time here. Time I could better spend banging some hot chick in my bedroom. Think about that for a while.

  15. What part of EXPOSE TO THE RIGHT do people not understand?

    The D200 produced excessive noise only if you were an amateur who didn’t know how to expose. The D200 was all about preserving the highlights, whereas newer Nikons are all about preserving the shadows (thanks to complaints by “tester” sites and blogs since they usually spend the most on camera gear, having more money than talent most of the time). I owned a D200 and it was great, noise-wise, image-wise, etc. I remember weiners on DPReview complaining about “banding” when no shot I have ever taken showed banding since I don’t make a habit of shooting directly into desk lamps. I have a 20X30 print from a D200 on my wall shot at 3200iso and the lab tech didn’t believe it was a D200 shot since he had “heard all this bad stuff.” Had no problem selling shots through Corbis with it either. No complaints.

    Off topic, your blog isn’t very good, just so you know. You’re trying to be all “internet funny” by recycling tired old memes with a photographic element added but really, you should try a new approach. Nothing is more painful than an old fart trying to be hip like the kids.

  16. Sadly, this debate is carried out in such a childish way that it is difficult to understand the objective pros and cons. Not because I consciously searched for information, I ended up here more or less by chance. Personally, I asked a couple of professional photographers in Stockholm for advice and ordered a D800 – mostly due to the lower price – both cameras are good. I got it yesterday.
    Be well

  17. Pingback: Introducing the Nikon 1D Mark III (AKA the piece of shit D800) | Fake Chuck Westfall

  18. I recently attended the $3300 lottery in getting a D800e whose AF system (phase detection) works accurately and reliably. Unfortunately I didn’t win and had to return it to the retailer. The live view AF (contrast detection) worked perfectly, but who really wants to take pictures with his/her arms stretched out all day long? I bet the D800, etc. will be history soon. Nikon please start working on a D700x with 16 Mp. No rush though, I am not going to buy a new NIkon DSLR for another 2-3 years, or until Nikon has proven that it can consistently ship product that works perfectly right out of the box. Don’t get me started on the D600 issues. The recently offered very aggressive discounts on the D600 makes one wonder if Nikon can’t get rid of them quickly enough.

  19. Hello everyone i want to share my experience.I also recommend to everyone please check camera first *(itself) then take final decision. I also search lot of website. people compare and telling advantage and disadvantage. But i was so confused.Then i decide to check my self. Now I am REALLY happy find out best DSLR THAT is Canon 5D Mark 3. Mark 3 better than d800/800e 36.3 MP. They have just announced 36.3 MP but not really at 200 zoom too much noise. 5D Mark 3 at 200 zoom not noise.colour,contrast,WB,sharpness superb…… but Nikon D800 / D800e are not so good that i was expecting from nikon even 36MP camera in this world.I dont know just for advertising or some attraction but not real. I am very disappoint from Nikon. First I want to buy Nikon after lot of research on internet but this is not true just check results,review and comments on Internet. Please Please….check your self then Buy you desire camera…..Best Of Luck….

  20. Pingback: Why Scott Kelby switched to Canon | Fake Chuck Westfall

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s