Having a funny couple of days with the Nikon. I can't make certain shades reproduce properly. My walls in the room I'm typing this in are a kind of sage color and there's a case next to me that's a dark, sea-foam green. Pointing the D700 at them makes the wall gray and the case a barely-saturated green. It's weird. Shooting all RAW and same effect in both LR and Capture NX. If I shoot a WhiBal card against it, it makes almost no difference. EVery now and then you see a post by people who talk about how they don't like Canon's color or Nikon's color. I've dismissed these in the past. Whether or not this is a real problem, the fact is that we all need to get used to the quirks in any system and to work with them.
The paranoid part of me if suspecting a sensor problem. In all likelihood, it's pilot error.
All this color nonsense, I think it's from the UV-coated windows in this room. When I fire a flash at the fabric or the green rack case, some color comes back. Could it be that a window could filter something that might fool the sensor? I'm not gonna stress about it.
All this color nonsense, I think it's from the UV-coated windows in this room. When I fire a flash at the fabric or the green rack case, some color comes back. Could it be that a window could filter something that might fool the sensor? I'm not gonna stress about it.
Bought a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G VR ED from our own Pamani and I have to say, it's way better than I would have thought, especially for the money. I have kind of poo-pooed variable aperture lenses, but I gotta say they did a really great job with this one. The VR is one of the most effective I have ever used and the sharpness and contrast are really superb, certainly out to 200-250mm. Part of my switch to Nikon was to get away from white, conspicuous lenses and this one delivers not only in that regard, but also in size and weight. I have used the Canon 70-300 IS (or is it the 75-300?) and it wasn't anywhere near the quality, at least at f/5.6. Never thought I would own such a lens, but it's a pleasant surprise.
Not really, only the one on the side. But HEY, you can see that the walls are a green-sage color!
Ok so tree is not culprit and with this upward shot the wall is mos def sage green.........hmmmm
I did not just sleep with the enemy but jumped head on into switching from KM to Nikon and I am loving it.......I was greatly surprised at how good a lens the 18-200VR is.......so far once I learned you have to press the AF button after turning on the camera (did not read manual first.....) now my photos are turning out in focus........and very SHARP.....dang near cut my eye on one yesterday..... :-}}
Ok so tree is not culprit and with this upward shot the wall is mos def sage green.........hmmmm
I did not just sleep with the enemy but jumped head on into switching from KM to Nikon and I am loving it.......I was greatly surprised at how good a lens the 18-200VR is.......so far once I learned you have to press the AF button after turning on the camera (did not read manual first.....) now my photos are turning out in focus........and very SHARP.....dang near cut my eye on one yesterday..... :-}}
Congrats on your purchase! The 70-300 puts some lens snobbery into perspective.
Yeah, that wall foiled the Nikon, a Canon 400D and an iPhone, so I would pretty much say the wall is broken
Positive Nikon Service Experience
Had a surprisingly good experience with Nikon Service. The D700 and 70-300 were taken on a boat trip, replete with sea spray and on a wave-crashing beach, which involved a splash that had me terrified. Never did either item stop working (the D700 truly is "weather sealed") but the main dial became "crunchy" after a couple days, making me think a little water got in and evaporation had left salt or sand.
I took them to my local Nikon service center and was told that seawater would surely void the warrantee, but wait and see what the techs find. I just got them back and they were both cleaned and serviced under warrantee. The 70-300 had no papers since I bought it from a DGrinner but no matter. They even found the D700 was back-focusing (which explained a few things to be honest!) and now I am so pleased with the 50mm f/1.4G I was ho-hum about, I feel like I got a new camera. The 70-300 had it's SWM focus motor replaced and the VR was adjusted as well.
I had taken Thom Hogan's advice about being specific and honest about the problems, but also leaving a note about what my expectations were for the repair. I didn't say I wanted them to do work for free, but I think it's always a good idea for any kind of service to delicate instruments, as I didn't want to get back a note saying "nothing was wrong with it".
I had heard mostly bad things about Nikon service (compared to Canon's) but in this case I'm floored and grateful. This is one of the ways you perpetuate brand loyalty!
Had a surprisingly good experience with Nikon Service. The D700 and 70-300 were taken on a boat trip, replete with sea spray and on a wave-crashing beach, which involved a splash that had me terrified. Never did either item stop working (the D700 truly is "weather sealed") but the main dial became "crunchy" after a couple days, making me think a little water got in and evaporation had left salt or sand.
I took them to my local Nikon service center and was told that seawater would surely void the warrantee, but wait and see what the techs find. I just got them back and they were both cleaned and serviced under warrantee. The 70-300 had no papers since I bought it from a DGrinner but no matter. They even found the D700 was back-focusing (which explained a few things to be honest!) and now I am so pleased with the 50mm f/1.4G I was ho-hum about, I feel like I got a new camera. The 70-300 had it's SWM focus motor replaced and the VR was adjusted as well.
I had taken Thom Hogan's advice about being specific and honest about the problems, but also leaving a note about what my expectations were for the repair. I didn't say I wanted them to do work for free, but I think it's always a good idea for any kind of service to delicate instruments, as I didn't want to get back a note saying "nothing was wrong with it".
I had heard mostly bad things about Nikon service (compared to Canon's) but in this case I'm floored and grateful. This is one of the ways you perpetuate brand loyalty!
I'm also a recent D700 convert and have no regrets. I love this camera so much, it simply amazes me every time I shoot with it. So far I've rented most of the standard ED lenses (the equivalent of Canon L lenses) and every one of them is breathtakingly awesome, especially the 14-24, which you already know is just unbelievably sharp and fast.
Anyway, my point is I've gone off brand on a few occasions and my advice is stick to the ED lenses -- they are expensive but worth every penny. Unless you are going super telephoto, then I have to go with the Bigma simply because I can't afford the big Nikkor glass, but I'm sure it's awesome!
I've also had a great experience with Nikon service as well.
On a side note I just got back from a trip with the 14-24 (that I rented) and damn...I hate to part with it!!
On a side note I just got back from a trip with the 14-24 (that I rented) and damn...I hate to part with it!!
Agreed. The only thing that has me bummed about this lens is the flare. The front element is so bulbous, it catches any stray light. I never have a problem with flare—even shooting into the sun—if the background is bright as well. I'll try to find an example of what I'm talking about. Oh that and cleaning it is something that sems to happen way too often. That's what you get with the all-seeing eye!
The rumors of good ISO performance and the SB900 features really make me think I should buy a D700 instead of a 7D. Anyone thing the 7D will match the ISO performance of the D700?
Canon 50D and 2x T2i's // 2x 580ex II // FlexTT5's & MiniTT1's
EFS 17-55 f/2.8 & 10-22 // Sigma 30mm f/1.4 & 50mm f/1.4
Sigma Bigma OS // Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8
The rumors of good ISO performance and the SB900 features really make me think I should buy a D700 instead of a 7D. Anyone thing the 7D will match the ISO performance of the D700?
I'd be surprised to get that kind of ISO performance out of an APS-C sensor, at least in 2009. I gotta say, though, Canon's getting smart with the 7D, even if it's a "market correction" camera. At least they're listening, and watching the competition a little more closely. I like what I'm seeing and if there is a 5DmkIII done in a similar fashion, they'll have a real winner on their hands.
The D700/D3 just eats light for breakfast. Won't they make a nice, new 35mm f/1.4 or AF-S-based 85mm or 135mm?
The rumors of good ISO performance and the SB900 features really make me think I should buy a D700 instead of a 7D. Anyone thing the 7D will match the ISO performance of the D700?
The Nikon D700 and Canon 7D are cameras designed for 2 completely different applications, markets and price groups.
The Canon 5D MKII and the Nikon D700 are more similar and do indeed provide a similar high-ISO printed result. The 5D MKII will downres to a very similar image to the D700 from the same scene.
DPReview compares on a "per pixel" basis, and on that basis the Nikon D700 beats the 5D MKII, but when the 5D MKII is sampled back to D700 resolution they are very equal. DXOMark, which rates only RAW reformance, ranks the 2 cameras as neck-and-neck using their SNR 18 percent and "Print" settings.
Basically both cameras are very nice and the Nikon may have a better AF section, but I will say that I have not had serious AF issues on the 5D MKII except in "very" low light and then the problem is somewhat lens specific. Put the best lenses on the 5D MKII and it works very well indeed.
Bottom line is that if you already have good Canon EF lenses there is no real reason to switch away from the Canon line to get wonderful high-ISO images.
The Nikon D700 is a very good camera, to be sure, but not good enough to warrant a switch unless you "want" to change.
Basically both cameras are very nice and the Nikon may have a better AF section, but I will say that I have not had serious AF issues on the 5D MKII except in "very" low light and then the problem is somewhat lens specific. Put the best lenses on the 5D MKII and it works very well indeed.
Bottom line is that if you already have good Canon EF lenses there is no real reason to switch away from the Canon line to get wonderful high-ISO images.
a 5DmkII and a 135mm is magic—a standard I hold my current system to. Whereas I cannot compete in resolution, that for me is a benchmark. The 7D is in direct competition with Nikon's D300 not the D700 anyway. I can't help, though, be happy to see Canon improving their ergonomics. If only they would get the three main buttons (by the top LCD) away from each other!
The Nikon D700 and Canon 7D are cameras designed for 2 completely different applications, markets and price groups.
The Canon 5D MKII and the Nikon D700 are more similar and do indeed provide a similar high-ISO printed result. The 5D MKII will downres to a very similar image to the D700 from the same scene.
DPReview compares on a "per pixel" basis, and on that basis the Nikon D700 beats the 5D MKII, but when the 5D MKII is sampled back to D700 resolution they are very equal. DXOMark, which rates only RAW reformance, ranks the 2 cameras as neck-and-neck using their SNR 18 percent and "Print" settings.
Basically both cameras are very nice and the Nikon may have a better AF section, but I will say that I have not had serious AF issues on the 5D MKII except in "very" low light and then the problem is somewhat lens specific. Put the best lenses on the 5D MKII and it works very well indeed.
Bottom line is that if you already have good Canon EF lenses there is no real reason to switch away from the Canon line to get wonderful high-ISO images.
The Nikon D700 is a very good camera, to be sure, but not good enough to warrant a switch unless you "want" to change.
I just wish Canon would come out with some features of the SB900. I mean, all I want is some gels, nice gel holder and a defuser. Nothing at all too expensive. Programmable WB with gels is an easy trick. I just hope canon catches on.
I'm just wishing for some increased ISO sensetivity... But with two EF-S lenses, I'm not looking to move to the 5D MkII.
Canon 50D and 2x T2i's // 2x 580ex II // FlexTT5's & MiniTT1's
EFS 17-55 f/2.8 & 10-22 // Sigma 30mm f/1.4 & 50mm f/1.4
Sigma Bigma OS // Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8
I actually had decided to buy 5DMK2 but changed my mind after using both. The D700 is much faster handling, and has a larger, brighter viewfinder. IMHO the 5DMK2 is a better landscape and studio portrait body, while the D700 owns the sports and field use category. It also has superior build quality and weather sealing.
The D700 is seriously just a D3, sans some lcd's and the grip. I have shot both, and like many, prefer the D700 for anything but super-tele duty.
And regarding the 7D sensor being anything close to a modern FF camera? Not gonna happen...you can never escape the fact that bigger is better. Especially when is comes to CMOS and CCD technology.
Comments
Sure you're on the right thread?
The paranoid part of me if suspecting a sensor problem. In all likelihood, it's pilot error.
Yes, my monitors are calibrated!
WHERE'S THE GREEN AT? This wall is a sage-colored fabric. Doesn't it look gray (or colorless) to you? The WhiBal was clicked on by the WB tool in LR2.
Aaaaah which camera
Probably the D700, judging from the title of this thread.
any trees close by the window???
D700
It is quickly becoming my camera of choice with the fuji/oly playing backup when their specific talents are needed
Not really, only the one on the side. But HEY, you can see that the walls are a green-sage color!
Ok so tree is not culprit and with this upward shot the wall is mos def sage green.........hmmmm
I did not just sleep with the enemy but jumped head on into switching from KM to Nikon and I am loving it.......I was greatly surprised at how good a lens the 18-200VR is.......so far once I learned you have to press the AF button after turning on the camera (did not read manual first.....) now my photos are turning out in focus........and very SHARP.....dang near cut my eye on one yesterday..... :-}}
Congrats on your purchase! The 70-300 puts some lens snobbery into perspective.
Yeah, that wall foiled the Nikon, a Canon 400D and an iPhone, so I would pretty much say the wall is broken
Had a surprisingly good experience with Nikon Service. The D700 and 70-300 were taken on a boat trip, replete with sea spray and on a wave-crashing beach, which involved a splash that had me terrified. Never did either item stop working (the D700 truly is "weather sealed") but the main dial became "crunchy" after a couple days, making me think a little water got in and evaporation had left salt or sand.
I took them to my local Nikon service center and was told that seawater would surely void the warrantee, but wait and see what the techs find. I just got them back and they were both cleaned and serviced under warrantee. The 70-300 had no papers since I bought it from a DGrinner but no matter. They even found the D700 was back-focusing (which explained a few things to be honest!) and now I am so pleased with the 50mm f/1.4G I was ho-hum about, I feel like I got a new camera. The 70-300 had it's SWM focus motor replaced and the VR was adjusted as well.
I had taken Thom Hogan's advice about being specific and honest about the problems, but also leaving a note about what my expectations were for the repair. I didn't say I wanted them to do work for free, but I think it's always a good idea for any kind of service to delicate instruments, as I didn't want to get back a note saying "nothing was wrong with it".
I had heard mostly bad things about Nikon service (compared to Canon's) but in this case I'm floored and grateful. This is one of the ways you perpetuate brand loyalty!
I'm also a recent D700 convert and have no regrets. I love this camera so much, it simply amazes me every time I shoot with it. So far I've rented most of the standard ED lenses (the equivalent of Canon L lenses) and every one of them is breathtakingly awesome, especially the 14-24, which you already know is just unbelievably sharp and fast.
Anyway, my point is I've gone off brand on a few occasions and my advice is stick to the ED lenses -- they are expensive but worth every penny. Unless you are going super telephoto, then I have to go with the Bigma simply because I can't afford the big Nikkor glass, but I'm sure it's awesome!
I've also had a great experience with Nikon service as well.
On a side note I just got back from a trip with the 14-24 (that I rented) and damn...I hate to part with it!!
Agreed. The only thing that has me bummed about this lens is the flare. The front element is so bulbous, it catches any stray light. I never have a problem with flare—even shooting into the sun—if the background is bright as well. I'll try to find an example of what I'm talking about. Oh that and cleaning it is something that sems to happen way too often. That's what you get with the all-seeing eye!
EFS 17-55 f/2.8 & 10-22 // Sigma 30mm f/1.4 & 50mm f/1.4
Sigma Bigma OS // Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8
I'd be surprised to get that kind of ISO performance out of an APS-C sensor, at least in 2009. I gotta say, though, Canon's getting smart with the 7D, even if it's a "market correction" camera. At least they're listening, and watching the competition a little more closely. I like what I'm seeing and if there is a 5DmkIII done in a similar fashion, they'll have a real winner on their hands.
The D700/D3 just eats light for breakfast. Won't they make a nice, new 35mm f/1.4 or AF-S-based 85mm or 135mm?
The Nikon D700 and Canon 7D are cameras designed for 2 completely different applications, markets and price groups.
The Canon 5D MKII and the Nikon D700 are more similar and do indeed provide a similar high-ISO printed result. The 5D MKII will downres to a very similar image to the D700 from the same scene.
DPReview compares on a "per pixel" basis, and on that basis the Nikon D700 beats the 5D MKII, but when the 5D MKII is sampled back to D700 resolution they are very equal. DXOMark, which rates only RAW reformance, ranks the 2 cameras as neck-and-neck using their SNR 18 percent and "Print" settings.
Basically both cameras are very nice and the Nikon may have a better AF section, but I will say that I have not had serious AF issues on the 5D MKII except in "very" low light and then the problem is somewhat lens specific. Put the best lenses on the 5D MKII and it works very well indeed.
Bottom line is that if you already have good Canon EF lenses there is no real reason to switch away from the Canon line to get wonderful high-ISO images.
The Nikon D700 is a very good camera, to be sure, but not good enough to warrant a switch unless you "want" to change.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
a 5DmkII and a 135mm is magic—a standard I hold my current system to. Whereas I cannot compete in resolution, that for me is a benchmark. The 7D is in direct competition with Nikon's D300 not the D700 anyway. I can't help, though, be happy to see Canon improving their ergonomics. If only they would get the three main buttons (by the top LCD) away from each other!
I just wish Canon would come out with some features of the SB900. I mean, all I want is some gels, nice gel holder and a defuser. Nothing at all too expensive. Programmable WB with gels is an easy trick. I just hope canon catches on.
I'm just wishing for some increased ISO sensetivity... But with two EF-S lenses, I'm not looking to move to the 5D MkII.
EFS 17-55 f/2.8 & 10-22 // Sigma 30mm f/1.4 & 50mm f/1.4
Sigma Bigma OS // Canon 70-200 IS f/2.8
The D700 is seriously just a D3, sans some lcd's and the grip. I have shot both, and like many, prefer the D700 for anything but super-tele duty.
And regarding the 7D sensor being anything close to a modern FF camera? Not gonna happen...you can never escape the fact that bigger is better. Especially when is comes to CMOS and CCD technology.