Nikon D850 vs Canon 5D M4??

[Squalo305]

Yes Im not looking to make a living out of it but I like to print my images in a big size and hang them on walls, so I would like a camera that can make big size images with great quality. Yes Canon will be easier to use because I use one already but I dont mind learning something new. I will check that sony that you are telling me about so I can compare that option!! I really appreciate all the replies and options that you have given me! Thanks

 

[bvanant]

A lot depends on what you mean by "big" prints. 900x600 mm can easily be made with any of the three cameras with interpolation. A 900 x 600 mm photo at 360 dpi for printing needs about 111 MP which is much more than any of the cameras. I routinely print 500 x 400 mm prints with pictures from the Olympus EM1 mark II with no issues. I have seen spectacular wide angle and big animal images from all three cameras (Canon/Nikon/Sony) as well as from cameras with smaller sensors. The Nikon has 45 MP, the Sony 42 and the Canon 30 MP. If you don't crop at all then at a 360 dpi printing resolution the Nikon is native at 585 x 389 mm, the Sony is 564 x 375 mm and the Canon is 485 x 321 mm. None of these is what I think of as big, and surely you will end up cropping some. All of that being said, I don't think there is any photo that you can take with any one of the cameras that you can't get with the others (perhaps a circular fisheye is an exception, as I don't know of one for the Sony) and I would also bet that if you took the same scene with all three and printed them all at 500 x 400 mm no one could pick out which camera was which.

Bill

 

[Marktan]

I've not used the Canon systems, but I do have a Nikon D500 that replaced my D7000 (hobby enthusiast, sports and bird photographer). I've got plenty of lenses and shoot raw. The new D850 is a sweet piece of kit, but it wasn't out when I picked up the D500.

That being said, I ended up choosing the Sony A6000 mirrorless system with a Meikon housing for my underwater shooting. Worked great for the last 2 years. ~25MP with 1080p(60/30/24) video and awesome low light focus (maybe not as good as the new D850 with Expeed5), manual settings, and RAW (Sony *.ARW) files. Also has a setting for underwater white balance that works really well on its own and even better when used with a red filter (67mm wet). AND you can access ALL the menu settings and zoom with the housing. The stock 16-50mm lens (while not the fastest) works great underwater with a pair of video lights; but you're stopping down anyway for DOF. There is even an updated version of the housing that has a dome port, which I don't have. I also picked up an E to F-mount adapter to use some of the Nikon glass with it when on land and in need of a more compact system.

Unfortunately, I flooded the rig down in Playa last September when I unknowingly got a piece of the desiccant stuck between the O-rings when I swapped batteries on the SI. Nothing like watching your housing fill slowly with water and killing the camera when at depth where there is nothing you can do about it; but frankly, that's the whole reason I got it. I didn't want to ruin any of the more expensive DSLRs if it ever did happen (which it did). Out $600 rather than $1800+. My wife wasn't even mad!
Just a thought. Do what you will.

As far as the large prints go, 20+ MP will get you plenty large prints, and you can always upscale if needed in Photoshop if you're doing murals. Remember that the old D1 (5.1MP) and D2x (12MP) both had plenty of resolution and pixel density for the pros back in the day. Crazy that we are at 45.7MP and growing...soon we will be at medium format resolution on prosumer models!

 

[Squalo305]

A lot depends on what you mean by "big" prints. 900x600 mm can easily be made with any of the three cameras with interpolation. A 900 x 600 mm photo at 360 dpi for printing needs about 111 MP which is much more than any of the cameras. I routinely print 500 x 400 mm prints with pictures from the Olympus EM1 mark II with no issues. I have seen spectacular wide angle and big animal images from all three cameras (Canon/Nikon/Sony) as well as from cameras with smaller sensors. The Nikon has 45 MP, the Sony 42 and the Canon 30 MP. If you don't crop at all then at a 360 dpi printing resolution the Nikon is native at 585 x 389 mm, the Sony is 564 x 375 mm and the Canon is 485 x 321 mm. None of these is what I think of as big, and surely you will end up cropping some. All of that being said, I don't think there is any photo that you can take with any one of the cameras that you can't get with the others (perhaps a circular fisheye is an exception, as I don't know of one for the Sony) and I would also bet that if you took the same scene with all three and printed them all at 500 x 400 mm no one could pick out which camera was which.

Bill

Thank you for your reply! Some questions if you where to choose between the canon 5d m4 or the nikon d850 for underwater (also in land but want better option for UW) which one would you choose? And if I have used canon in the past will getting to know the Nikon system be a pain? Also its tempting to go mirrorless just because the size is really convenient for travel and handling but after being a dslr user going mirrorles feels like a step down, doesn it?

 

[Squalo305]

I've not used the Canon systems, but I do have a Nikon D500 that replaced my D7000 (hobby enthusiast, sports and bird photographer). I've got plenty of lenses and shoot raw. The new D850 is a sweet piece of kit, but it wasn't out when I picked up the D500.

That being said, I ended up choosing the Sony A6000 mirrorless system with a Meikon housing for my underwater shooting. Worked great for the last 2 years. ~25MP with 1080p(60/30/24) video and awesome low light focus (maybe not as good as the new D850 with Expeed5), manual settings, and RAW (Sony *.ARW) files. Also has a setting for underwater white balance that works really well on its own and even better when used with a red filter (67mm wet). AND you can access ALL the menu settings and zoom with the housing. The stock 16-50mm lens (while not the fastest) works great underwater with a pair of video lights; but you're stopping down anyway for DOF. There is even an updated version of the housing that has a dome port, which I don't have. I also picked up an E to F-mount adapter to use some of the Nikon glass with it when on land and in need of a more compact system.

Unfortunately, I flooded the rig down in Playa last September when I unknowingly got a piece of the desiccant stuck between the O-rings when I swapped batteries on the SI. Nothing like watching your housing fill slowly with water and killing the camera when at depth where there is nothing you can do about it; but frankly, that's the whole reason I got it. I didn't want to ruin any of the more expensive DSLRs if it ever did happen (which it did). Out $600 rather than $1800+. My wife wasn't even mad!
Just a thought. Do what you will.

As far as the large prints go, 20+ MP will get you plenty large prints, and you can always upscale if needed in Photoshop if you're doing murals. Remember that the old D1 (5.1MP) and D2x (12MP) both had plenty of resolution and pixel density for the pros back in the day. Crazy that we are at 45.7MP and growing...soon we will be at medium format resolution on prosumer models!

Thank you for your reply! Some questions if you where to choose between the canon 5d m4 or the nikon d850 for underwater (also in land but want better option for UW) which one would you choose? And if I have used canon in the past will getting to know the Nikon system be a pain? Also its tempting to go mirrorless just because the size is really convenient for travel and handling but after being a dslr user going mirrorles feels like a step down, doesn it?

 

[Christian]

I have been shooting UW since film days and have been a ”semi-pro”, meaning my bills got paid by my regular job, but I have also recieved money from magazines by supplying pictures. Money in is a lot less than money out.
My wife says it is a very expensive hobby.
I don’t want to crush your dreams, but there are v e r y few people making a living on UW images. Maybe 5.
The camera models will do the job. But you shoot a whole system. Camera, lens and port. You want something that works.
For wide angle photography (rectilinear), FF (fullframe) is generally harder to obtain acceptable results with than cropped sensor DSLR:s inme. Also, super high rez will add to the complexity as a lot of glass won’t cut it.
If you have the possibilty to look at housings, do it and get a feel for the ergonomics. See what you like. Then make sure they have good ports that will support the glass you intend to work with. A great lens might be ”useless” UW —14-24 anyone.
Personally, if I were to get a new camera (I might) I would take a look at the D500. DX is wonderful for UW.
Right now I’m still a happy user of a D200 in a Hugyfot housing.

 

[Marktan]

Thank you for your reply! Some questions if you where to choose between the canon 5d m4 or the nikon d850 for underwater (also in land but want better option for UW) which one would you choose? And if I have used canon in the past will getting to know the Nikon system be a pain? Also its tempting to go mirrorless just because the size is really convenient for travel and handling but after being a dslr user going mirrorles feels like a step down, doesn it?

I'm in the Nikon camp, so while I can respect the Canon, I'd personally lean towards the D850 or what @Christian suggested, the D500 with it's DX Crop sensor. But I say this because I've got Nikon Lenses and have used Nikon cameras for a while (D200, D2x, D7000, D500). The mirrorless isn't as much of a step down as what you might think. On paper the A6000 is right up there with the D500 as far as FPS, Focus points, etc. I actually like the smaller form factor better sometimes when I'm trying to be more discreet, and I don't have the added battery grip that I do on the Nikons. I also like the video better on the Sony. Yes, the Nikon has 4k, but it crops it even more, and the auto focus, depending on lens (and if you're not using an external mic), can get distracting with the "chatter".
If you're familiar with the Canon system and have glass, go Canon.
Just my 2c.

 

[JackConnick]

What he said... the D500 is an awesome UW camera. I just spent 12 days or so shooting a D850 and it's a nice upgrade from my D800 (which I have a body and housing for sale used). The new Nauticam D850 housing is a full pound lighter, which made a nice difference.
The dynamic range of the APS-C and FX sensors is so much better than m4/3rds in my experience, focus is very fast as well. FF is hard to beat for wide angle as a result, but APS-C and M4/3rds work well for macro.

I have an article here comparing experiences:
Micro 4/3rds vs. APS-C & Full-frame Cameras: Mexican Shootout or Standoff?

 

[Christian]

Many good points made. Travelling with a Dslr isn’t exactly swift. My rig is pretty neat with inon 240:s, but it’s still like carryinf a small pig around on land. If you don’t dive TO take pictures (you dive AND take pictures). Make yourself a favor and your life easier by looking at s modern compact. They are very good now and with a nice strobe set up, can produce stunning images. Good luck.

 

[lizpekler]

Many good points made. Travelling with a Dslr isn’t exactly swift. My rig is pretty neat with inon 240:s, but it’s still like carryinf a small pig around on land. If you don’t dive TO take pictures (you dive AND take pictures). Make yourself a favor and your life easier by looking at s modern compact. They are very good now and with a nice strobe set up, can produce stunning images. Good luck.

True, any modern with compact camera can just do its job. Adorama's Nikon D850 is priced around 3K+ for its body alone.