How should I compare low-light performance between the Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon D800?
Asked 5/15/2012
3 views
2 answers
0
I'm trying to choose between the Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon D800, mainly for low-light shooting. Looking only at 100% crops and megapixel count seems misleading: the 5D Mark III has fewer, larger pixels, while the D800 has much higher resolution. What is the right way to compare their low-light image quality if my real goal is the best final image after post-processing and output at normal print/web sizes? Does the D800's higher resolution help once images are downsized, and should I be looking at normalized comparisons such as print-size or 12MP tests rather than per-pixel noise?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
8
All other things being equal, bigger pixels give a better performance. In the real world though, all other things are extremely rarely equal.
However, given both are latest full-frame models, one would guess the 5D Mark III does better (which I just reviewed it here and you can see full-resolution samples at all ISO sensitivities) in terms of high ISO. Keep in mind that both Canon and Nikon have higher end models even more optimized for low light, the 1D X and D4.
Now, as you reduce image resolution by downsampling, you can effectively simulate bigger pixels. The site DxOMark which measures sensor performance works by comparing non-resolution limited output normalized to 12 megapixels. Under that measure, their numbers for the D800 at high-ISO are better than those of the 5D Mark III. At full-resolution though, results are mostly likely reversed (which I expect to find out but the D800 has not arrived yet).
Originally by user1620. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1620
14y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Compare low-light performance at the same final output size, not at 100% pixel view. Per-pixel noise can favor lower-resolution sensors, but what matters is the noise in the final image you print or share.
Higher megapixel cameras like the D800 can be downsized, which effectively averages noise and can simulate the benefit of larger pixels. That means “bigger pixels = better low light” is only true when all else is equal, and in practice it often isn’t.
For a fair comparison, look at normalized tests such as print-size comparisons or DxO’s 12MP-style measurements rather than pixel-level crops. Based on the community answers, those normalized comparisons slightly favor the D800 at high ISO, even though the 5D Mark III may look cleaner per pixel.
So: if your goal is the best processed final image at the same display/print size, compare normalized output, not sensor pixel pitch alone. Also remember both brands had even more low-light-optimized bodies in that generation (Canon 1D X, Nikon D4), but between these two, the higher-resolution D800 can retain an advantage once downsized.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
How can I compare two cameras objectively for low-light performance?
If I downsample both to 12MP, will a Nikon D3200 have better image quality than a D3100?
Can a Canon 5D Mark III file print sharply at 40x30 inches?
Canon 5DS R vs 5D Mark IV: which gives more real detail for wildlife, especially at higher ISO?
Canon 5D Mark III vs 5D Mark II: which differences matter most?