There are few topics so heated as the debate between these two camera systems. These two brands have always been in competition with each other, but recently the heat got turned up by a couple of notches. This all started with the release of the Nikon D3 and D3x, including the D700.

Before those cameras were released, i.e. 2007 and earlier, Canon was leaps and bounds ahead of Nikon in both fast prime lenses, speciality lenses as well as sensor technology. Canon's sensors had superior image quality, lower noise and higher resolution.

So when the D3, D700 and D3x were released during late 2007 and early 2008, coupled with some high profile lenses (14 - 24mm F2.8 and some fast primes and updated tilt/shift lenses), everything was thrown upside down. Not only did the Nikons eliminate the lag in technology, they jumped ahead by at least two generations in terms of image quality. Their 14 - 24mm F2.8 lens was better than Canon's expensive 14mm F2.8 II prime lens, and retailed for almost $1000 less. Things were not looking good for Canon. Many people jumped ship. I was tempted as well, but decided to wait a bit.

At the time I just bought the 1Ds Mark III, at that time the best option due to my investment in Canon glass as well as well as it being the only 21MP camera out there. The 24MP D3X was released three months later. I was very happy with the Canon system, however I had these issues:

1. The auto focus on the Canon sucked. Both for tracking moving subjects, and focussing in general.
2. Low light performance lagged behind the D3X - even though the D3X had a higher resolution on the same full frame body.
3. The performance of the camera was sluggish - a faster SD/ CF card made no difference in the write speed of less than 30MB/s.
4. My 16 - 35mm F2.8 II lens was not nearly as good as the 14 - 24mm F2.8 from the Nikon, and I like wide angle photography.
5. The Canon's speedlite flash system lacked behind the Nikon in accuracy.

I bought the 1Ds III in January 2008. By 2012 there was STILL no new Canon camera out. My camera was now more than 4 years old. The Canon 5D Mark II was not an option as the 1Ds3 was better in all respects. The 5D2 might have had slightly, and I mean very slightly better image quality regarding noise levels. But that was less than half a stop.

By then Nikon has released the D3X and D3S, both cameras that were better than the Canon in most respects. The Canon 1Ds Mark III's DXOMark score is 80. Compare that to the 81 of the Nikon D3200, 82 from the D3s and the 88 from the D3X.

In January 2012 both camera manufacturers announced new cameras. Nikon announced the D4 and D800/E cameras, both full frame with the D4 at 16MP camera and the D800/E a 36MP monster. Canon announced two cameras as well, the 18MP 1DX and the 22MP 5D Mark III. This was a very hard choice for me to make. If I buy the 1DX (which at the time of this writing is barely available for purchase), I'd loose 3MP of resolution - not a lot but I actually wanted more. Especially considering that the D3X has 3MP MORE pixels and has much better image quality than the 1Ds Mark III. I could get the 5D Mark III, but that would mean giving up a 1-series body for a 5 series body, definitely a regression. And, it scored only 81 on DXOMark so I'd not gain much in terms of image quality. Or... I could switch to Nikon and get the D800E, which scored an incredible 96 points. That is 7 points higher than a $40000 medium format camera. And the cherry on top is the fact that the D800E is $400 cheaper in Canada than the 5D Mark III. But switching to Nikon implies selling all my lenses and buying new ones. I would lose a lot of money.

That, coupled with the fact that the D800/E was not available for purchase due to the insane demand for it for at least 3-4 months, and me walking in to a store seeing the 5D Mark III on the shelf, concluded the debate. I purchased the 5D Mark III and started comparing it to my 1Ds Mark III. If it was not substantially better I would be both pissed off and would likely have returned it. But if I return it then what? Wait another 4 years for the next Canon camera? No way.

So I tested them. My informal testing, which consisted purely of using the camera as my main photographic gear doing what I usually do when I take pictures, yielded some surprises.

Pros

1. The camera's high resolution LCD screen was a huge improvement over the low resolution LCD panel on the 1Ds3.
2. Autofocus on the 5D3 is near perfect. It focusses in light at least two stops less than the 1Ds3, and its focus is almost always spot on.
3. The camera's performance was significantly faster than the 1Ds3.
4. Image quality was better, but not by much. I'd say 1 stop improvement on noise. DXOMark score reflected this in the 630 point increase in low light performance.
5. Quiet mode is really, really quiet and it is not a gimmick. I have taken several wild life and other photos where the shutter of the 1Ds3 scared the subject away, but not the 5D3.
6. I gained video, but since I almost never shoot video this is not really important to me.
7. Live view supports auto focussing, this is sometimes helpful.
8. The levelling sensor is very nice.

Cons

1. I miss the ergonomics of the 1Ds3. The buttons, the vertical grip with extended battery etc.
2. The 1Ds3 made moving the focus point easier with its wheel adjustment.
3. The 1Ds3's auto focus points were clearer in certain lighting conditions than the 5D3.
4. Shutter sync speed is lower on the 5D3. I used to be able to use 1/250 with the 1Ds3 on my Elinchrom lights, now I can only do 1/160.

The pros outweighed the cons, so I kept the 5D3 and sold the 1Ds3.

But ever since that purchase I had been looking enviously at the Nikon D800E. With its 96 DXOMark score it had by far the better image quality, and much more resolution for larger prints. I have seen several examples where the D800E can be pushed by 1-2 stops in the shadows and retain almost perfect image quality with no banding and almost no noise, whereas the Canon 5D3 was a horrible mess.

So when I found a D800E in stock at Broadway Camera in Vancouver downtown, I knew I had to try it. I bought the D800E, a 24 - 120mm F4 lens as well as their new 105mm F2.8 VR macro lens. The idea was to see how well the camera compared to what I have based on focal lengths I'd use a lot.

For the Canon I used the 5D Mark III, with the 24 - 105mm F4 IS lens as well as the new 100mm F2.8 IS L macro lens. Since I was only allowed 50 shutter actuations in order to be able to return it, I had very limited room for testing. In fact, I only took 18 photos. But that is all it took to convince me with overwhelming confidence which camera to keep. Drumroll please...

I chose the Canon 5D Mark III.

Yes, I had the same reaction from the sales guy when I returned it. He thought I wanted to return the D800E for the D800 due to moire, but that was the last of my concerns. In fact, I did not see any moire in any of the photos I took, even when I tried to. Why did I choose the Canon?

1. A camera means nothing without a lens. It is not about the one or the other, it is about a camera system. A great body with crap lenses will yield crap photos. Conversely, a crap body with Leica lenses will yield crap images. Everything in the optical path of the camera needs to be great. I have no doubt that the sensor in the D800E is much better than the 5D Mark III's, BUT... I could not see it. Not with either lens. And I tried very hard. It was only with the studio test and the 105mm lens that I saw a clear benefit of the D800E - it really does have more resolution and image detail. But studio work comprises less than 0.5% of what I do.
2. In almost every photo I took the lens yielded horrible purple fringing, even on areas with large white pebbles - where there is no real contrasty edges, it still caused purple fringing and colour casts. The Canon had no purple fringing, under the exact same conditions.
3. The canon lens had a flatter field of view, less distortion and a more pleasing bokeh. This goes for both lenses.
4. The ergonomics of the D800E frustrated me a lot.
   
   • When you shake the camera it had irritating rattling noises. This was due to the flash mechanism. The 5D3 is dead silent.
   • When viewing something bright, there is an irritating, bright reflection off the mirror box through the viewfinder. The Canon has this too, but you have to really tilt the camera and look for it, and it is much more subdued due to coatings I presume. Put it this way, I have never noticed it on the Canon until the D800E prompted me to try and find the same reflections.
   • The build quality of the lenses lagged behind the Canon significantly. The focus / zoom rings were not as smooth.
   • The viewfinder of the D800E is much darker than the 5D3. Not sure why but this frustrated me when trying to take photos under low light situations.
5. Then the focus. Oh boy. The D800E was worse than the 1Ds3. It could not focus when it became slightly dark. The focus assist lamp kept on coming on, whereas the 5D3 focussed without any assistance, perfectly, and quickly even when I could not even properly see what I was focussing on through the viewfinder.
6. Nikon has a crappy 105mm macro lens (yes I can buy a Sigma or Tamron, but why?). They do not have a 5:1 MP-E 65mm lens. They do not have a 17mm F4 TS/E lens. They do not have a 8-15mm F2.8 fisheye zoom lens. They do not have a 85mm F1.2 lens. And that matters to me as I use those lenses a LOT.
7. Nikon's latest flashguns are not as sophisticated as Canon's 600EX-RT with its wireless triggering.

So there you have it. I have ventured over to the dark side and found that what I have is better (for my use). I am sure the D800E is a brilliant camera, but I get better results with my 5D Mark III and Canon lenses. In the end that is what is important with a camera system - ensuring what you have, works for you. Yes I want higher resolution. Better low light performance. More dynamic range. Ability to push shadows by 2 stops. But not if it is at the expense of basic image quality issues such as purple fringing, or lack of auto focus when you need it most.