 |
Canon EOS 5D Mark III |
|
Nikon D600 |  |
||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
differences
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
recommendations
Relative to the best recent pro DSLRs, and ignoring price
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark III |
|
Nikon D600 | |
||||||
 |
Snapsort recommends the Nikon D600. |
similarities
Compared to recent DSLRs
| Common Strengths | Common Weaknesses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Compared to recent pro DSLRs
| Common Strengths | Common Weaknesses | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Snapsort is not aware of any interesting strengths shared by these two products. |
|
dxomark
|
|
competitors
Shared Competitors |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
||||||||||||
 |
Canon EOS 6DPro DSLR $1,899 - $1,917 body only $2,399 with 24-105mm lens |
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
Nikon D800Pro DSLR $2,797 body only $3,187 with 70-300mm lens |
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
Nikon D7100Entry-level DSLR $1,197 body only $1,497 with 18-105mm lens |
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
Canon EOS 5D Mark IIPro DSLR $2,405 body only $2,699 - $3,000 with 24-105mm lens |
|
||||||||||||
 |
Nikon D700Pro DSLR $3,400 body only |
|
||||||||||||
 |
Canon EOS 7DPro DSLR $1,299 - $1,725 body only $1,499 with 28-135mm lens |
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
Nikon D7000Entry-level DSLR $897 body only $997 with 18-105mm lens |
|
|
|||||||||||
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Competitors |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
||||||||||||
No significant competitors found that are specific to the Canon EOS 5D Mark III. |
||||||||||||||
Nikon D600 Competitors |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
||||||||||||
No significant competitors found that are specific to the Nikon D600. |
||||||||||||||
appearance
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Showing 7 comments
Thanks Jim.
When you are 30 you need camera that does the job and locks settings to be confident that they are not changed.
For you are enthusiast I do not see any reason to buy a full frame camera... except to pick up girls.
1. the nikon d600 is noticeably small and light, which is a very good thing. BUT, the grip is too small to fit fingers(well, im 20 and i believe i've got standard hands) which can be very awful for a long shoot-out. I personally like the mark iii for its grip. its lot, i mean a LOT better than d600. it feels fantastic, fits very well in hands that you can just ignore the extra weight easily.
another thing is LOOK. yeah, it does matter. the SEXY look is important because you are investing a lot of money that you saved for years. so, you know, for satisfaction, at least.
the nikon d600 looks so much like a machine rather than a camera. the shooting lay-out on LCD screen is too complicated and messy. on the other hand mark iii has neat-colorful LCD layout, which is gorgeous. i like the mark iii for its look and sexy shutter sound. one thing you might notice using d600 for the first time, the shutter sound is loud and brutal. and for the first time i pressed the shutter, it actually jumped from my hands, but it was okay :O
one thing i absolutely hate is d600's plastic front plate. i really dont want to spend my savings on plastic. so should you. buy a tank
2. image quality wise nikon d600 is a killer. for 1k less price, you will get the same image quality like mark iii. nikon d600 produces fantastic color, very good high iso performance and dynamic range(its got great dynamic range but ask yourself, if you really shoot at shallow DoF, do you really need that? what would you do with that extra dynamic range? dynamic range is an great option that works for landscapes shooters. for others, 11EV is huge, its more than enough for everyone) someway d600 is really, really better than the 5d mark iii, specially for the price point.
BUT, 5d mark iii produces slightly better skin tones, which is very pleasing to look at, to be honest.
3. 5d mark iii focus is the best i've ever used. nikon d600's focus is slower than canon but its fast enough and fantastic for me.
frame rates are quiet equal, but canon's better. just because canon can keep up the focus and i can take more photos in a row.
Resolution is also quiet close. but nikon's better.
3. nikon d600 video is not up to canon. cold skin tones, abnormal color cast at high iso, weird audio and exposure settings and the unchangeable aperture control option for video just kill the d600. if you zoom to check you focus in live view/video, the refresh rates drops badly, which is very frustrating.
5d mark iii video looks flat in dark situations but its lot better. manual audio option and high iso video quality is absolutely fan"freaking"tastic
4. I like nikon's eight way menu button. its really better than canons nipple thing. also the front and rear jog dials are very handy. the auto focus assist lamp is an usable option too. the pop us flash is "okay" but who use it?
on the other hand, the mark iii has lovely, very handy touch pad.
i dont understand why both of them put mode dial locks, the nikon lock is an absolutely pain. you'll need four hands to change it. canon's easier but but why you guys put the locks?
NOTE : i dont know how dxomark rates sensors but i just can't believe them.
just because they are not "TRANSPARENT" to us. and the results dont
match in real world. nikon d600 files are
more detailed and canon 5d mark iii files are smudged when you zoom in
100 percent. Nikon d600 may have lower noise at high ISO but at high iso
you'll see nikon produces washed out colors. they are hard
to fix in post edit because you'll start loosing details and the 24mps won't work then. yeah, canon starts producing grains at
6400 but the colors are "accurate" and you can use them all the way up to 25600
i personally print my photos a lot. most of them are wallet
size. grains don't matter but good resolution doesn't matter either.
color does matter.
ASK YOURSELF. if you are not a pro and don't print for billboards, go for good colors rather than resolution
Finally, im an enthusiast, want to buy an over all good full frame dslr
for both photography and shooting video. I will consider 5d mark iii for over all goodness. because, i don't have
to worry how the lighting situation is. i can soot in all possible
situations. but i can't justify the mark iii
for the high price tag and d600 for not being an overall good camera,
basically for not so good video.
Right now 5d mark iii sells
around 3200 for body only. if the price drops near 2400-2700, it'd be
one of the best selling cameras in history, i can tell you.
nikon d600, you are over priced baby. get down to 1200-1500, only then i might consider you.
if you are not an enthusiast/hobbyist. for only photography purpose you can use nikon d600 very nicely. but i'd say wait to drop its price. Nikon D600 doesn't deserve 2000 dollars
Better low light (better color sensitivity at higher ISO's and NO BANDING!!!!!)
Higher Dynamic range from 50-1600(After 1600 both dynamic range and
Signal to Noise are Same. Color sensitivity is better throughout)
$1500 CHEAPER!
5D Mark 3:
Faster (by a lil bit)
Superior auto focus (not even close)
Lenses are better and cheaper and offer 1.2, which Nikon doesn't
If you're new to Full Frame and don't have a ton of lenses GO NIKON.
If you are crop guy./gal you can't use your lenses with Canon anyway so
go Nikon if you're a Canon crop shooter and Nikon if you're a Nikon crop
shooter. The only difference is the Nikon crop shooter gets to keep
his/her lenses.