Nikon vs. Canon Hi-Res shootout

Curtis Brown, makeup by Wendy Martin; photographed with the Canon EOS1Ds MkIII, 24-105/4L (at 70mm), 1/250 sec., F10.0, ISO 100.
Curtis Brown, makeup by Wendy Martin; photographed with the Canon EOS1Ds MkIII, 24-105/4L (at 70mm), 1/250 sec., F10.0, ISO 100.

I recently had the opportunity to test the new 24.39 megapixel Nikon D3X. I currently use the Canon EOS1Ds MkIII, which shoots a 21.1 megapixel file, but I’m always looking for the best equipment, and I try not to buy anything without testing it first.  In addition to some lens tests and landscape shooting, where I compared the lenses I would most likely be using to my current Canon equipment, I also put together a studio shoot to compare systems. I figured it made sense to set up a shoot with people and interesting lighting, since that is the main focus of my business. I was anxious to see what the camera could do under controlled conditions, with light falling on a subject from highlight to shadow.

Top: Nikon D3X, 24-70/2.8G; Bottom: Canon EOS1Ds MkIII, 24-105/4L (Both photos taken at 70mm, 1/250, F10.0, ISO 100).
Top: Nikon D3X, 24-70/2.8G; Bottom: Canon EOS1Ds MkIII, 24-105/4L (Both photos taken at 70mm, 1/250, F10.0, ISO 100).

With my good friend and stellar makeup artist Wendy Martin, we came up with a couple of ideas. One of my favorite places on the planet is California’s El Mirage dry lake bed. Inspired by that location, I’ve always wanted to do a photo of someone covered in cracked earth makeup.

Wendy knew all of the tricks for making this happen, and was quickly able to research and buy all the right supplies and colors for the shoot.

Next, we needed the perfect model for the shoot. We were hoping for someone with a shaved head and really interesting eyes. We looked at a lot of models, but my favorite was Curtis Brown, of One Model Management. Curtis is a veteran model, and has been featured in Soloflex and REI ads. He has killer green/hazel eyes. He travels all the time for modeling work all over the country, but we were very fortunate to land him for a day and collaborate with him on our shoot.

We booked a rental photo studio with Holly McDonald, a fabulous producer from 808, Inc., and were all set for our shoot. Nathan Lindstrom was on board as an assistant to complete our small crew for the day.

Wendy spent quite a bit of time mixing the masque material with various airbrush colors and a powdery red makeup, that almost looked like dirt. After experimenting for a while, we discussed airbrushing the cracked masque in various colors, particularly earth-tones, but finally decided that the reddish color would be a great contrast to Curtis’ eye color.

Makeup artist Wendy Martin applies the mud makeup to Curtis Brown. (Photo by Nathan Lindstrom)
Makeup artist Wendy Martin applies the mud makeup to Curtis Brown. (Photo by Nathan Lindstrom)

After mixing the makeup, it was time for Wendy to apply several thick coats to Curtis’ head and shoulders. She used a hair dryer to dry the makeup until it started cracking. Just the movement of Curtis’ facial muscles and skin caused the tight dry makeup to crack and give us the perfect look we were all after.

We had two different lighting schemes in mind, but eventually decided to stay with a very simple setup……one large Plume Wafer Hexoval, slightly to the right of the camera, equipped with a single Dyna-Lite 4040 head.

Everyone did a great job, particularly Curtis, who sat for hours with all sorts of gunk caked all over his face. He is a serious pro.

Both cameras produced great files, but in the case of this particular picture, I thought the camera I currently use, a Canon EOS1Ds MkIII, produced the best image. I shot several tests over a couple of weeks with the D3X, but this photo was instrumental in convincing me to stay with my current Canon system.

Another image from the shoot in black and white.
Another image from the shoot in black and white.

Read more about my Nikon D3X vs. Canon EOS1Ds MkIII test at Sportsshooter.com.

13 thoughts on “Nikon vs. Canon Hi-Res shootout”

    • Corey-

      Not necessarily. I think you would have to carefully weight the pros and cons. If you shoot a lot of sports action, especially as a press photographer in low-light situations, I think you would have to seriously consider the Nikon. The 5D MkII has advantages in the realm of video, and it has incredibly large file size and features for the price.

      If you shoot portraits for a living and just need hi-resolution, I think you could honestly go either way.

      The fact is, both of these companies will continue to leapfrog each other in one arena or another. Part of running a professional photography business is deciding when the right time is to upgrade, and making good business decisions….not just jumping on every new camera that comes out. The Canon IDs MkIII’s work well for me, and the type of work that I do now.

      [WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.

    • Corey,

      Not necessarily.

      I think if you make your living shooting sports action, particularly in low light, then you should definitely look at the capabilities of the D3.

      I think if you just shoot portraits for a living and need a hi-resolution camera, you could go with either system.

      If video is a concern…the 5D MkII is pretty cool, and it has huge file size for the money.

      Please remember, that these companies will continue to leapfrog each other in one arena or another. Running a sound photography business means more than just taking good pictures…..it means knowing when to upgrade as a business decision, not just chasing the latest camera gadget.

      For the work that I do now, the 1Ds MkIII’s are working great.

      Best,

      Robert

  1. I would like to see a comparison with equal primes. This test, while at the same focal length, had one lens at its maximum zoom and the other closer to a mid-point.

  2. Alex, the 24-105 f/4L is known for not being a very sharp lens. The 24-70 f2/8L it’s much sharper.
    I agree though that a prime lens would have been much relevant but I am sure Robert couldn’t manage to get those primes easily..

    • Daniel-

      I have 15-20 colleagues who would argue your point on the 24-105 vs. the 24-70. The 24-70 is indeed sharp at smaller apertures, but the 24-105, in the opinion of most photographers I know, is better all around. It’s possible that you ended up with the best/sharpest 24-70 in the world though. 😉

      As for primes, as I explained in the piece, this was not scientific – this was a test for what I do. I would love to shoot primes all the time, and I own a few, but it’s simply not practical for shooting high-profile people with tight schedules. A zoom is essential. Every time you change a lens, you risk your subject walking away. I compared the lenses I would be using the most often – in this case, the medium zooms and the wide angle zooms.

  3. Awesome… I remember when you were shooting this. I walked into the studio to grab some gear and sort of interrupted you guys. Anyway, I like the way it turned out. I’ve had my 1DsIII for almost 3 years, and I wouldn’t trade it for anything… YET.

Comments are closed.