Trying to make up my mind!

ulrikft

Hey!

I've preordered a 5d mkII, but I have not yet decided 100% to actually get one. My alternative is the Nikon d700. I don't want any flames here, just some sound advice.

Right now I have a 70-200 2.8 (sigma), 18-50 2.8 (sigma), 24 1.4 L (canon), 50 1.4 (canon) and 85 1.8 (canon). In addition to this, I have a few pieces of alternative glass that I love to use, mainly the rokkor 58 1.2, but also a chinon 135 2.8 and some other great stuff!

So, on to the problem.. What i mostly do is spontanous portraits, normal portraits, pj-work concerts, sports, some landscape 1-2 times per year. From what I'm gathering, a d700 will print up to 20x30 inches great, but not much more than that, a 5d mkII will print somewhat larger. I estimate that the max reoslution limit for many of my lenses will be somewhere between 14-20 megapixels, so the actual resolution advantage may or may not be that big.

so.. Cons and Pros

5dmkII:

+Resolution
+Video
+High iso capacity (that is a draw though I guess)
+I do already HAVE canon glass
+ Can use alternative glass
+ Canon has great wide primes

- Not (or, hard to say so far, but doesen't seem as good) as good weather sealing as d700
- Lacks the fps of the d700
- Lacks the af of the d700
- slower in general (shutter lag, mirror blackout)

d700:

+ AF speed
+ Weather sealing
+ Wide zoom
+ FPS
+ High dynamic range


-Less resolution
-Cant use that much alternative glass
-Wide, fast primes
-Have to sell a lot of gear.


Well, the lists can be continued forever I guess, I just have a hard time. I know I want fullframe, and I know what I'll be using it for most, but can i live without my cheap 58 1.2 prime (are there alternative alternatives for nikon?), my 24 1.4? the nikon 85 1.4 seems great, so that is not a problem... And am I painting the 5d mkII too dark too early? I have tried it only twice, and that was a preproduction copy..

Bah, I'm thinking a bit out loud here, so I hope you'll all bear over with me

Any thoughts? ideas?

ziggy53

The absolute honest truth is that the Nikon is getting good reviews from users. The Canon is getting good "previews" from a few sources. The Nikon D700 is an increasingly known commodity while the Canon 5D MKII is just barely announced and a while from shipping.

Both are great cameras and both will (probably) allow you to make wonderful images. Neither will take great images for you.

I do have a number of 20" x 30" prints made from 8MPix imagers that I think look pretty good.

Manfr3d

Why not buy a Canon 50D to accompany a 5D Mark II for sports?
That doesn't only give you a great backup camera but might also
cost you less than the financial loss when selling all your current gear.

LiquidAir

Some thoughts:

You are probably wrong in your estimate of what your lenses can do. Larger sensors mean lower pixel density so your lenses will get noticably sharper on a full frame body. Certainly your primes wil have no trouble making full use of the 21MP sensor (I have the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 and they both extremely sharp). Your zooms will likely deliver as well, but you may need to stop them down to f/8 for peak sharpness.

At 16x24 you will see the difference in quality between 12MP and 21MP. You can blow a 12MP file up to 20x30 but it is quite noticably soft; sharpening helps but it is a poor substitue for more pixels in the source.

The 5D AF is plenty fast and very accurate as long as you stick to the center point. The primary issue with the 5D AF is that the other 8 AF points are not nearly as good. If speed is your concern, I'll bet the cameras are quite similar. However, if you consider off center AF points to be critical, then the D700 will likely be the better camera for you.

IGD

Here is the deal.
Consider what you will be shooting and how big you need to print.
If you are going to shoot fast action then the D700 + grip will serve you well. However, if your are mainly going to shoot portraits, weddings, landscapes, snail races... and you regularly print large, then the 5DMKII is the camera to get.
Then again, you already have canon glass, so you could easily wait to see what the 1DMKIV is going to be like. Knowing Canon, It will likely leave the 5DMKII, D3 and D700 in the dust.
Alternately, wait for the Nikon D4 or the canon 1DsMKIV which will likely blow away all of the above mentioned cameras.
The decision as they say is yours.

Art Scott

You already have a substantial investment in canon glass os why not stay the path......if you need largerthan 20x30 inches on an image...get something like Genuine Fractals......I have been using GF since its 3.0 version (it is now up to v5 and I just graded, but had been using the trial version of GF4 to uprez my 20 or so images that it allowed.....trial was for 30 days or 20 something images .... that could be saved without any watermarking or anything)......so my 6 & 8mp cameras would make huuuge images without any problems....by huge I mean bigger than 30x40 inches at 300dpi (or ppi if you want to be truly correct...even tho Photoshop denotes it as dpi in their image sizer)....so bringing my dpi (in PS) to 300 gave almost an 8x10 image....then I uprezed in GF (one step) to my desired size ...say 30 x 40 inches at 300dpi).....now if I wanted it really huge it could be printed at almost 10x that size at 100 - 75dpi and then viewing distance would come into effect....the reason I use a standard of 300dpi on my files to to cut taht viewing distance to nothing.....so the person that has no clue will still see a fantastic print even when standing nose to print....no pixalation (grain)............

Just by getting GF you can save a bunch of money and put the rest back for new gear down the road........

ulrikft

Thanks for all your input guys! I really appreciate it!

I'll step into the thinking box for a few days now I guess