So, I rented this D700...
I'm currently shooting with a 5D2, and after a lot of reading here on Dgrin, i decided to try out a Nikon to really see if I had a personal preference.
I've only had it a few day, I got a 24-70 with it, took it to the zoo, into the backyard, went on a hike with it, basically just trying to get get all the use out of it I can.
One observation I have, is that this seems to be one very versatile camera. I'm loving the fact I get the benefits of the full frame, but also maintain a great shooting speed. Even without the base, I was able to get some simple running animal shots that I really struggle with with the 5D2.
I'm also find myself really enjoying how all the best features seem right at my finger tips. Even the mirror lockup is just a quick flick away.
Anyway, the biggest question I'm left with right now, is wondering why Canon hasn't chosen to do something similar with their line. The D700 seems like a freelance photographer's dream. A semi-pro body that they could do anything from sports, to portrait work. You are really only sacrificing the resolution of something like the 5D2.
So does anybody have any insight into the thought behind these camera lines? Does Canon just like to stick with their high res landscape/portrait vs fast and cropped sports shooter/photojournalism line?
Anybody think we'll see changes to this type of line in the near future?
I've only had it a few day, I got a 24-70 with it, took it to the zoo, into the backyard, went on a hike with it, basically just trying to get get all the use out of it I can.
One observation I have, is that this seems to be one very versatile camera. I'm loving the fact I get the benefits of the full frame, but also maintain a great shooting speed. Even without the base, I was able to get some simple running animal shots that I really struggle with with the 5D2.
I'm also find myself really enjoying how all the best features seem right at my finger tips. Even the mirror lockup is just a quick flick away.
Anyway, the biggest question I'm left with right now, is wondering why Canon hasn't chosen to do something similar with their line. The D700 seems like a freelance photographer's dream. A semi-pro body that they could do anything from sports, to portrait work. You are really only sacrificing the resolution of something like the 5D2.
So does anybody have any insight into the thought behind these camera lines? Does Canon just like to stick with their high res landscape/portrait vs fast and cropped sports shooter/photojournalism line?
Anybody think we'll see changes to this type of line in the near future?
Camera: Nikon D4
Lenses: Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikon 50mm f/1.4
Lighting: SB-910 | SU-800
Lenses: Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikon 50mm f/1.4
Lighting: SB-910 | SU-800
0
Comments
As usual, it's best to consider each as a complete line and make your choice based on your needs and the line which best meets those needs.
Personally I could be happy with either line.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I get the question a lot... "Which one is best?" The subject changes whether it be cameras, lenses, computers, etc.
I like to think about the question in the same vein as car shopping. Most of the time, we don't want the car, we want the ability to get to the destination. It's less about the features, and more about the end result. But, to leave it simply at that would be limiting too. In some cases, I want a bike rack on my car, or a truck to haul a couch, or just nitty-gritty speed to channel my inner Formula 1.
Probably the best way to handle it of course is to have a garage full of cars or a studio full of cameras. Each person will have a slightly different preference depending on the type of imagery and experience they want to have, so the variety of cameras available on the market will enable them to get their best fit.
I shoot nikon d-slr's, but the only reason that's true is because my very first kit purchase (nikon d50, 70-300, 28-70 and a bag) was the best price in Costco. Each subsequent upgrade has made it that much easier to now enjoy the cameras I have now (D3, D300, 24-70, 70-200, 85, 200 macro, etc, etc.). I would been just as happy with Canon because I'm more interested in the resulting image than where the buttons are located.
Good luck in your deciphering the options!
About Me • Photography • Blog • Juneau, AK SMUG • Facebook • Twitter
I think that Canon has a headache in positioning its APS-H sensors that it has to produce a slow full-frame camera in order not to conflict the marketing of APS-H cameras such as the 1DMk4.
And I guess 5DMkIII may make a compromise to around 5fps. If in this case the sales of 1D4 is endangered, then Canon may be forced to produce a full-frame fast camera similar to Nikon's D3s. This is however not as profitable as the APS-H cameras.
Could you expand on the these different paths both companies have chosen? This is what I'm most interested in, getting to the philosophy behind these lines. I'd like to know more about the roads these companies have been traveling to see where I would fall when looking at the types of shots I take, or would eventually like to take.
Lenses: Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikon 50mm f/1.4
Lighting: SB-910 | SU-800
It's called marketing... Start looking into each companies history and decide your self.
IMO
One thing is for sure, Nikon is really pooping on their P&S market. Canon is dicking around their full frame cameras.
BTW, don't forget to learn how to use the "info" button. It is really useful!
Your professional online camera gear rental store
Follow us on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/borrowlenses
The following is a very personal opinion of the observations I have made regarding Canon and Nikon camera strategies, focusing on the middle tier and highest tier cameras. Again, these opinions are my own and they can change in an instant if a new camera should appear from either maker.
Canon appears to have determined that for sports/action they should have 2 camera lines:
The 7D series cameras, with an APS-C/crop 1.6x sized imager.
Some would also include the Canon 1Ds series cameras, with a FF imager and virtually the same responsiveness performance as the 1D (of the same version suffix) with the exception of frame rate.
Canon seems to suggest the 1Ds series more for studio/fashion/glamor photography, although you will also find overlap in the wedding and event genre, with the 1D series and 5D series also showing well in all of the same pursuits as the 1Ds (except that the 5D series is not designed for sports/action).
The 7D is very well suited for sports/action photography in good light, but it suffers somewhat indoors and at night games. The AF system is not well suited for low-light and the entire camera system slows in low light, probably because of how the AF system ties to the metering system. (This slowdown is even mentioned in the user manual.)
The Canon xxD camera bodies are the middle tier cameras and sacrifice some performance for cost. They work extremely well for general photography and you often see them at weddings and events. They overlap other photographic genres but they are not really designed for sports/action photography. All Canon xxD cameras are, of course, APS-C/crop 1.6x
Nikon has chosen to use FF and APS-C/crop 1.5x imagers for their top-tier sports/action cameras.
The Nikon D3 series are the current FF sports/action camera bodies, but the Nikon D700 are also considered for sports/action. The D700 is more chameleon like with the shooting rate increasing with the addition of the Nikon vertical grip and appropriate batteries. The responsiveness of the D700 is very good even without the vertical grip and just behind the D3 series cameras.
The D300 series is the Nikon top-tier APS-C camera and it shares similar AF specifications to the D3 and D700. Most users agree that it is not as fast to focus as the 2 FF cameras, but still very fast and fast enough for sports/action.
The D90 and D7000 are the middle tier Nikon cameras and the D90 shares a very similar imager to the D300 with similar image results. The D7000 is the new kid with a new imager, AF system and shutter. While the D90 and D7000 are not designed for sports/action, I bet they are often used in that capacity especially for daylight sports.
All of the above Nikon cameras are also used for studio/fashion/glamor with the top tier D3/D3s/D3x and middle tier D700 at the front. I see a lot of wedding and event photographers using the D700, but I also see the D300 and D90 as well. I suspect that the D7000 will be a very nice wedding camera too.
There are certainly standout lenses from each manufacturer in every major range and I don't see amazing deficiencies from either camp. There is also an extremely nice range of third-party lenses available for both manufacturers so I don't see a compelling reason to chose one manufacturer over the other in terms of lenses.
Nikon has chosen to keep a more traditional user interface, compared to older film SLR cameras, while Canon has a very different philosophy in their user interface. Once you learn one interface, you are good to go and I don't really see much practical difference in the field. My father has Nikon and I have Canon but I don't struggle to change between the 2, and I don't understand when people tell me one interface is so much better than the other. I really can appreciate both.
Nikon was first with a flash system to use focus distance (i-TTL) as a major component in calculating flash output. Ever since Canon released the E-TTL II system in 2004 the situation is largely synonymous and I find both systems equally competent, although Nikon and Canon do have slightly different ways of handling Manual and Aperture priority with regard to flash. Learn whichever system you have and you can achieve excellent results.
Please don't hold me to any of the above as it's just my opinion at this moment and I could change my opinion at any moment with regard to all of the above cameras. Indeed, all of the "classifications" of top-tier and middle-tier, and the sports/action/studio/glamor/wedding/event/etc. are subject to change if I see active users successful with a particular camera in a particular genre of photography. Please add a very large "-ish" to the classifications above, especially if you disagree with my choices.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I can't comment about the Canon line, but I think you've hit the nail on the head with your thoughts on Nikon. I love my D700. It really is a chameleon of a body. A nice wedding/event camera with incredible low light capabilities. Slap on the grip and you've got very high FPS with a great AF module.
My only gripe is that Nikon has not chosen to have a pro body with a cropped sensor in their recent lineup. I have a D300 and D2Xs. These do not have the AF capabilities of the D700/D3 in my hands. When I need extra reach, I'm still at a loss with my extensive lineup.
Longer glass required!:cry
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
The 5D3 is supposed to have near-7D AF. But if they put 8fps in a 5D3, it would kill 1Ds3(or mk4) sales. And no one would ever want a 7D, unless they couldn't afford a 5D(I know, quite a few people, but see my next sentence). If you had a 5D, there would be no reason to buy a 7D. And 1D sales would go down as well.
For us, the 5/7 series split is good in a way. Sure, it might be convenient to have both in one body. (reminds me of the 3D which btw is coming out this year
So, it ain't gonna happen. People will wish. The 3D rumors will continue. And I'm sure Kevin's 3D rumor page will celebrate its 10th anniversary in 2014. Sure, I'd like to see a 3D. Do you want a 3D? (everyone's hands go up). Do you NOT want a 3D? (Canon's hand goes up).
I don't like 3D , they're just too gimmicky.
of that guy, I forget his name, who did that video of a 3D (actual 3-dimension; it had two parts, with two lens mounts) and put it on his website. It was SO cool, but he took it down.
The OP shoots a 5D2, I think he already knows how well current full frames do.
I am not saying Nikon doesn't spec their models in a calculating way..they do..but in a simpler way that favors their customers to a degree. Their AF systems tracks right down the line D3,D700,D300, D7000, D90, etc. They bifurcate the full frame/crop models and their price points follow exactly down the line. They also include features like on board flash control down the line. Their UI and button layout track and get less feature rich down the line. You hardly ever hear debates like "5dmk2 or 7d?" in nikon world because you just get the D700. *shrug* This may mean that Nikon can not keep adding "features" that they want in the new line becase they need to keep a continuity in their speccing, but from a customer POV, I like it that way.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
So far, at least with the semi-pro type of lines (D700, 5D, 7D), I tend to like the direction Nikon has taken. Feels like Nikon gives you more of its pro line in the semi pro body, where Canon takes a bit more from their "pro-sumer" line. (This is just my own observation).
However when I was compairing the Canon 50D with the Nikon D90 (both are I think prosumer bodies) I favored the Canon.
So knowing that I don't see myself upgrading to a 1D series, nor a D3 series anytime soon, I'm finding my sweet spot in this semi-pro line, and so far, i'm really digging the D700 for that. It feels like a camera that I could just do anything I wanted with, which i great for a learning tool.
Anyway. Thanks for all the responses. My rental continues.....
Oh. P.S. Anybody ever used the Sigma 70-200 on their D700? I've never purchased third party glass before. In fact avoided it like the plague (probably just my own ignorance). However the Sigma price tag on a 70-200 sure is enough to make me stop and think.
Lenses: Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikon 50mm f/1.4
Lighting: SB-910 | SU-800
They don't put it all together even in the highest-end products; the 1D is speed and 1Ds is res. The price goes right down the line: 1-Series, 5-Series, 7-Series, xxD Series, then Rebel Series. I see what you're saying about the AF, but the only exception is the 5D/7D one. The 7D is Canon's D300s and the 5D2 is Canon's D700 (albeit very different). And the 5D2 vs 7D debate just bugs me. It's like, do you want speed or res? Speed, 7D; res, 5D. It's so simple. You shoot both? Well, there's the advantage of the D700. But the 5D2 shouldn't be compared to the 7D; it was meant to be a very different camera, with a targeted audience having very different needs than that of the 7D audience.
I think the best all-around camera in the line is the 1Ds3. It's no D3s, but it can do 21mp FF at 5fps with top-of-the-line AF. The 2nd-best is the 7D, IMHO, at 18mp, it's got res and speed, but not FF.
Good points Qarik. I guess the question then becomes does Nikon cover all Canon's separate bases with one product? Connected with that is another question, when you place products before a market that spends thousands of dollars regularly on gear, is this market mainly a one or two body market?
I can see that Canon might be able, for such a market, to develop specialised bodies meant to make a pair, each of which complements the other, as opposed to a "jack-of-all-trades" unit. If this is the defacto behaviour of that market already, then Canon is responding to it.
Can anyone see far enough into the body tech future at the momnet to know if one body is likely to be able to carry all future features?
So maybe this comes down to a one body versus multiple bodies debate, and consequently to an area of the market defined mainly by $$$ rather than by broader or narrower current specs. Anything beyond the price of one new body, 5DII/D700, is purely hypothetical for me. On that basis I should buy the D700. That settles the argument for me, and for anyone else similarly restricted by spending limit perhaps. Those who have a more generous limit will I suspect go for 2 bodies - which also ends the debate!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
I am still using the same 70-200f2.8 that I had with my film cameras.....it is not as fast as the new ones but I have still caught eagles in flight (and other birds) , deer on the run and so on.......Actually looking at giving up my Nikon 70-200 because with Sigma I will get much closer focus ability.......but I still cannot tell the diff between either of my 70-200's in images...in weight ...oh hell yes the Sigma is much lighter.............
Isn't this forgetting the crop factor aspect (or lack of (full size) with the D700)?
Everything else being the same, a 7D has nearly 4x (384%)the pixels 'on subject, by area' of a D700.
For some people - although not the op as it's a 5D2 v D700 comparison (175% by area in favour of 5D2, btw) - this is relevant.
pp
Flickr
Enjoy your Rental! Smart move too, I might add.
I think you'll find that VR2 version of Nikon's 70-200mm will suit that D700 much better than any other you can plug onto it. I base this on my own observations owning one and looking at your Canon line up, you're used to fine IQ and you get that in spades with Nikon's newest offering. It is just magnificent wide open!
As far as the other thoughts regarding Cameras' inclusive futures, can we really ever have all of the tech in one piece? I say no because sure as shootin, as soon as we get where we have all-the-above-mentioned into one body, there'll be fifteen new tech ideas out on the horizon trying to find their way into one body.
I don't think I am alone in owning both Canon and Nikon's offerings. I find they each have such wonderful features and deliver well upon those intended designs. I also own a Jeep and a Van, they both have their place!
The d3s comes awfully damn close. Put a backlit 16meg FF snsor from the same family as the D7000 and that is pretty much as good as it is going ot get for 5 years.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
Don't you think they decided not to make a D700S to protest the D3S? And how about the D700 needing a battery grip for increased shooting rate. That seems like a cynical move to me. I think they all do this sort of thing. I must say though, I like the way Nikon put 2 SD slots in the D7000, that's a really good feature for a relatively cheap camera, and I hope Canon takes note.
of course, as I said, nikon plays speccing games as well..it's just that nikon speccing schemes are not as convoluted as canons and imo more customer "friendly". There are really aren't the obvious "tradeoffs" you have to make between camera bodies like canon bodies.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
Is the D7000 not considered high res?
And what if like me you choose to buy Canon and Nikon?
Yeah...as long as you add Video!
Good point. I was thinking along the lines of D300/D700 series, but substituting a D7000 in for a 300 or 700 wouldn't be bad idea for some. But still, if you want 20+ mp with Nikon, you're out $6K. (Although 16mp is fine for most people)
This is a nice simple way of thinking of it. How does Canon figure in low light with speed? If you want to say shoot some sports in poor light (indoor gym), does the low light performance of the 7 series hold up against a full frame? Or do you have to go into the 1D series to get that kind of low light + speed performance?
I ask, because as a 5D2 owner, the 7D was my next logical body. Thus started my D700 rental. Before I have to worry about two bodies...what could just 1 do?
Lenses: Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR II | Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 | Nikon 50mm f/1.4
Lighting: SB-910 | SU-800
Yeah...
You want the AF system of the 7D and the image quality of the 5D2. Sounds like two choices.. 1D4 but sacrifices a little image quality or switch to Nikon D700 loose a little resolution.
:uhoh