| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Canon 1D Mark IV vs. Nikon D3s "Shootout"
Josh Lehrer, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Fairfield | NJ | USA | Posted: 5:26 PM on 01.22.10 |
->> Hey folks! I put something pretty cool together...David Bergman and Robert Caplin were generous enough to lend me some of their time, and I set up a really cool "shootout," with David using the Nikon D3s and Robert using the Canon 1D Mark IV. We shot in the darkest, dingiest place imaginable, and here are the results!
http://tinyurl.com/ycyuh9o
The blog post has a full set of ISO comparisons with links to download the original raw files from the D3s, D700, Mark IV, and Mark III. Pixel peepers, this is for you!
Thanks to my employers at Unique Photo for providing some of the equipment, to Coastal Sports for letting us shoot there, and to David and Robert for making this all happen! |
|
Peter Buehner, Photographer
|
Orono | ME | USA | Posted: 5:54 PM on 01.22.10 |
| ->> Excellent comparison. Thanks for all the work. |
|
Gregory Greene, Photographer
|
Durham | NH | USA | Posted: 6:48 PM on 01.22.10 |
->> I had already made up my mind to stick with Canon and get
the 1D4 but that was a well done comparison none the less.
Either one sound great.
Thanks! |
|
Brian Westerholt, Photographer
|
Kannapolis | NC | USA | Posted: 9:37 PM on 01.22.10 |
| ->> Correct me if I am wrong, but everyone seems to be talking about and comparing high ISO between the Mark IV and the D3S - wasn't the MAIN issue with the Mark III the AF tracking, especially in bright sun, high contract situations? Don't get me wrong - I would love to buy a Mark IV and be able to shoot night sports for Wake Forest at more the 1/500 shutter speed. Brad Mangin's test at an NFL game was a start - personally I am waiting to see how the Mark IV fairs in Spring Training. Those conditions should indicate if the AF issues have indeed been fixed in the Mark IV. |
|
Josh Lehrer, Photographer, Assistant
|
Fairfield | NJ | USA | Posted: 9:44 PM on 01.22.10 |
->> Brian,
Agreed. But when we put the Mark IV in Robert's hands, and then switched him out to the Mark III, it was immediately apparent that the focus was far superior, there were almost no backfocused shots when using the Mark IV. A more scientific test is definitely needed, and it is something I plan on doing soon!
Thanks for reading! |
|
Brian Westerholt, Photographer
|
Kannapolis | NC | USA | Posted: 11:57 AM on 01.23.10 |
->> Josh,
I do appreciate the work you two did to bring us this comparison. I am glad to see that most of the reviews of the Mark IV have been positive when it comes to the AF. For me it's not about which is better, Canon or Nikon, as I have too much money invested in Canon glass to even think about switching. I had a conversation with Brad Mangin after his review, and he basically said the Mark IV's AF was the best ever in a Canon DSLR - so I am encouraged and looking forward to getting my hands on 1 (hopefully 2) bodies by the fall sports season.
-Brian |
|
Daniel Malmberg, Photographer
|
Huskvarna | Sweden | Sweden | Posted: 3:03 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> First of all!
Thanks for a really good test.
Much appreciated.
I am really looking forward for the "more scientific" AF-test.
Just having one question.
In the test it is claimed that " There are some ... exposure adjustments."
I am a bit curious about how on how much exposure adjustments was made on the different cameras?
Are the cameras not giving exactly the same exposure at the same ISO-setting?
Again, thanks for a terrific test :) |
|
Garrett Hubbard, Photographer
|
Washington | D.C. | USA | Posted: 12:05 AM on 01.24.10 |
| ->> yes. thanks for sharing your findings. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|