Nikon D700 VS Canon 5d MK II
trailwalker
Registered Users Posts: 7 Big grins
I need some advice. I shoot the Pentax 20D and 7D and love both, won't give them up. However; I want a full frame and have been researching the Nikon D700 and the Canon 5D MK II. I am leaning towards the Nikon D700 after watching a video on how it operates and its menu functions on NAPP. I plan to watch one on the Canon. I have read all the reviews on Amazon, dpreview, and pop photo and its a real toss up. Give me your opinions.
PS: if you are not members of the National Association of Photoshop Professionals (NAPP) Check it out. They have great training videos on photo processing, photography of all types, Canon and Nikon Camera reviews, and even an indepth on how to clean your sensor.
PS: if you are not members of the National Association of Photoshop Professionals (NAPP) Check it out. They have great training videos on photo processing, photography of all types, Canon and Nikon Camera reviews, and even an indepth on how to clean your sensor.
0
Comments
You said it yourself, both cameras make great images. Neither is perfect and both are part of a "system", so consider how each system will affect "your" productivity and wallet.
Look at the lenses you are likely to need to accomplish your goals, as well as accessories, total it up and see if there are any gaping holes in your needs that one system or the other cannot fill. (Not likely, both systems are pretty complete.)
Specifically what are your intended uses for the new system?
Does it matter that the Canon camera might be able to use some of the Pentax lenses? (Mostly older manual-focus lenses however.)
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
All I can say is try each one and just go with what you feel is right. The fact that the Canon is 21MP is in my opinion unimportant, I usually shoot mine at 12MP anyway as the results are just as good with a smaller file size. The only other big difference I can think of is the 51 point AF on the Nikon. As I shoot using just the centre point on my cameras it was not an issue for me but it can be very useful if you plan to shoot fast moving sports.
The bottom line is it's nice to be in a position to have the choice of 2 of the best cameras on the market at the moment so I'm sure either will be perfect.
For me it was the function buttons on the outside, the flash system, the protruding buttons (needed for when I wear thicker gloves) and a few others..
And/or buy better lenses
"Don't worry when you are not recognized, but strive to be worthy of recognition."
-- Abraham Lincoln
Overal the D700 is going to have better iso performance and significantly better AF system. The 5D has it beat in resolution.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
I don't think shooting at a smaller file decreases noise unless the 5d uses some sort of pixel binning that I have not heard of...
You might want to check your facts on that.
However, I would question why the OP needs a FF camera before advising either way.
www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
Some one asked why I wanted a FF, well it appears the full frame cameras, produce sharper, cleaner, less noise pictures with greater resolution. My understanding of this is that this is made possible by fewer but larger pixels of the full frame which allow more light to be absorbed by them. The smaller the sensor the more compressed the pixels the less light absorption. I honestly believe that as fast as technology is changing that this may not be the case in the near future. Also from a cost benefit basis it would be more cost efficient for all the companies to manufacture one sensor size as this could lower production costs. In the meantime I want sharper pictures cleaner pictures than what I think I am getting from my Pentax, knowing full well that the problem could lay with the operator, namely me. Check out my work at www.jmgilbertphoto.com and you tell me. Based on the comments I have read here and communication with a young photographer name Troy Lim and his work at http://www.troylimphotography.com I chose the Nikon D700 and ordered it in order to take advantage of Nikon’s current but limited instant rebates on lenses. I still have my cropped Pentax D-7 and when it comes to rough cold outdoor elements this baby and its batteries keep working when all my friends’ cameras shut down. Thanks everyone and I hope people will continue to post their opinions on this thread. There is so much information out there and many valuable opinions. You just can’t trust the ads. I think you must go to the users to get the real story. Canon sells more cameras then any company out there with Nikon coming in second as for as sells go. For me I think the Nikon will be more user friendly but I also think it boils down to what works for each individual. I had to make a choice and I hope I made the right one.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
The jury is still out as to how much affect the sRAW file formats allow, but the general consensus is that "yes", the use of sRAW does reduce overall random noise at the pixel level (although there are now fewer pixels). The presumption is that sRAW is a type of binning and/or downward interpolation, and the effect is similar to what you do when you use software to interpolate to a smaller resolution.
http://jasonography.blogspot.com/2008/08/part-2-canon-sraw-noise-and-high-iso.html
http://www.dphoto.us/forum/showthread.php?t=7113
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/613417
My personal preference is to shoot full sized RAW and then interpolate in ACR to a "larger" size, apply noise reduction, then downres to the finished size. I think this gives the best noise control results overall, although obviously increasing the workload.
I have used sRAW format to conserve storage space on memory cards (when I don't need the highest resolution), but I rarely use it in practice.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Could be the OP was a 35mm shooter and like me, just longs for same ability to crop in camera without haiving to loose so much of what your shooting on a crop body........for wildlife a crop bod is great since it gives an apparent boost to focal lenght.......but for people shooting I miss my 35mm framing.........after 5 or 6 years of DSLR crop bod shooting I still want to do tight cropping for portraits and weddings and have to keep reminding my self not to do it.....crop in post not in camera........
Now if s
Sigma would just make the 17-70 in a FF model..
..I'd be in lens heaven.......
You seem to be considerably misinformed. The Canon 5D MKII does not have "scene modes". It does have "Picture Styles" which are simply shortcut presets to Sharpness, Contrast, Saturation and Color Tone. If you shoot RAW the styles are also recorded and Canon software can use the particular style as preset by the company, or you can use the Style Editor to change the settings to your own needs in Canon's DPP software. The presets are likewise customizable in the camera, and 3 - User presets are also customizable. The concept is very similar to the D700 "Picture Control" settings.
To characterize the 5D MKII AF system as "very weak" is another misconception. The 5D MKII was not designed for sports/action and the AF section is fine for what the camera is designed for.
You are correct about the Nikon D700 in that it is a fine camera and if I shot Nikon I would have one, no doubt. The 5D MKII has its own qualities which have made it very desirable and I certainly love my copy.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
One thing I haven't seen mentioned is cropping. If you decide to crop during post production, you can crop more from a 5DmkII image and still have a high resolution image. How much more that is, I will let the math guys tell you:)
Also, if you haven't checked out Ken Rockwell's reviews on both, it is worth a look:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/index.htm
BTW, I just picked up a Mark II (sold my 5D) and I love it!
Good luck!
John
Surprised nobody has even mentioned this massive feature that the 5d has and the Nikon doesn't, the video off the 5d is stunning. Just got mine 2 weeks ago BTW, loving it!
Cool story bro!
Sorry, had too.
I have been a Nikon shooter for years... So I'll say a few things you should know about Nikon.
Nikon's tend to have a yellowish/green tint and inaccurate reds in Jpeg or when using Nikon software.
Nikons Capture NX 2 software sucks, I have used it for years, I rather not go into details.
Nikon lenses are almost always more expansive than Canons, and sometimes over rated.
Nikon doesn't have the snapping AF that Canons have.
Nikon lenses are harder to get.
Am I missing anything else?
Now I bet you're wondering why is a Nikon shooter talking smack about Nikon.
Seriously though, the D700 AF will of course be better, but the AF on my 5DII is better than the AF was on my 40D. It's no slouch.
The video is a huge plus if you have kids.
A bigger consideration, I think, is the lens system you are buying into. Canon's system is simply more well rounded and complete. Nikon has no answer for the Canon 70-200 f/4L (with or without IS) nor the 100-400L, nor the 24-105 f/4L IS. If you want a top quality 70-200, you're shelling out for the f/2.8 VR, which is expensive, big, and heavy. I will have a 70-200/2.8IS someday, but not at the expense of selling my f/4IS. It's too light and versatile to give up!! It's very easy to throw in a bag and take along anywhere.
All that aside, the D700 is a great camera, I'm just waiting for the Canon version.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
just look how horrible this guy's test on 5D II's AF performance >> http://birdphotoph.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=review&action=display&thread=2274
18-55 IS • 15 2.8 Fisheye • 24-70 2.8L • 50 1.8 II • 70-200 2.8L IS • 100 2.8L Macro IS • Kenko 1.4X & 2X
580EX II • 270EX
Romy Ocon is a god of bird photography.
Link to my Smugmug site
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
The Canon does video (I couldn't care less as I am a still photographer not a movie maker). The Nikon has high ISO capability (important to me) and can use any of the older AI/AIS lenses from the 1970s at great quality and a fraction of the price (a big plus for me as I have several and all are wonderful and sharp!). Nikon has the CLS flash system that is unbeatable. I chose Nikon, but I believe you will not be disappointed with the Canon offering in this space.
As for the commenter that bad-mouthed Capture NX he has no clue how to use it. It is one of the most powerful and innovative pieces of sotware and the best Nikon RAW processor there is. It has a lot of features missing (or just coming out) in PS, pioneered by NIK Software (the producer) and later added to NIK's other products. Very powerful if you have enough PC and memory.
Nikon D700, D300, D80 and assorted glass, old and new.
I routinely shoot my Canon 5D Mark II at ISO 3200 and see no need to apply more than very light noise reduction. The D700 may be somewhat better in this area, but the 5D2 is quite good too.
Actually, I often shoot old Nikkor AI/AI-S lenses on my 5D2 using a mount adapter (I recommend the ones sold by "big_is" on eBay, with the programmable EMF chip for focus confirmation). Auto-exposure works great in aperture priority or manual modes. The only thing it doesn't do is automatically stop down the aperture before shooting -- I have to use the aperture ring manually. But I actually kind of like that, because it means I can see DOF all the time. The 5D2's big, bright viewfinder doesn't get uncomfortably dim until about f/11 under good lighting conditions.
I love the mechanical feel of the AI/AI-S lenses. Optically they are generally quite good, but on a purely technical level modern lenses are often better. I did some comparisons a while back between a 1977 Nikkor 20mm f/4 AI (said to be one of Galen Rowell's favorite landscape lenses) and a Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L. Both made sharp pictures, but the Nikkor had much more trouble with ghosts and flare when the sun was just outside the frame.
That said, my Nikkor 85mm f/2 AI-S spends a lot of time on my 5D2. It's a great lens and a pleasure to shoot.
I keep hearing that Nikon's flash system is better than Canon's, but I don't really know what the differences are. Aside from macro rings and fill flash, I actually don't use flash all that much; most of the time, I'd rather just boost the ISO and use available light.
Got bored with digital and went back to film.
Another is slightly light build quality. The camera feels solid but somethings like the memory card door feel like they really skimped on the plastics. I'm also not a huge fan that they couldn't have added a SD card slot, seems like CF is getting harder to find. Feature has been on 1d series camera for a while and should have been on the newer prosumer stuff as well.
Overall I like the 5D but it didn't impress me right out of the box like I've held some other cameras.
I have never seriously looked at Nikon because I've always had some connection to Canon but now with the newer Nikon cameras, I'm thinking of them in my next future purchase. I don't use many lenses but would loose my favorite Canon 15mm fisheye. lol
Used to think the NX was the best raw processor for NEFs, and thought nay sayers didn't know how to use it or just needed to upgrade their computers (just like yourself).
With LR being the most advertised alternative, I tried it but I felt that it treats NEF files like a dog. So I used NX for a while longer.
That is until I tried Capture One 5.1. I was just floored, the only disadvantage is that it has a tiny bit more chroma noise with NR turned completely off. But I was able to get through 300 photos last night in just 25 minutes (WB correction, auto levels, adjusted green added contrast), with Capture one 5.1, can you guess how long that would of taken me in NX2?! I also feel the choice of several ICC profiles beats the few picture controls that also add there own zero point curves.
I used NX for years, process thousands of photos, spent countless hours using it I know what I am doing!
I also don't care about the "u-point" technology, I have used it, but I don't really like doing local adjustments anymore.
Back on topic..
OP, I'd try to locate a dealer near you, handle both cameras. Bring a memory card, try out lenses, ask questions and have fun. I assure you that would answer more questions that we could.
So I need to start shooting at 1mp! I could shoot in the dark!
No, but if you shoot at 0MP you can!
Seriously though, downsampling reduces noise, pretty obvious when you think about it.
5D mkII = the sensor has better resolution but the high ISO performance is a bit off.
If you are not making huge prints, and have no need for video than the D700 is the clear winner.
Otherwise you need to weigh the strengths, 12MP is a good amount of resolution but the 5D just gives you an extra cushion for cropping, then the D700 gives it for lower light.
Personally I love the build of the Dxxx bodies and can highly recommend them. The controls are great, and it really offers the ability to jump into any type of photography.