Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Nikon D700 - v - Canon 5d/50d


Munro 6 39 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 2:20PM
Just looking for some advice.

I am about to upgrade my 350d and am hoping to progress to full frame, however I am slightly put off by the 5D mkii asking price and am seeking "guidance" on the opinions of users of the D700 as this this seems to be more within reach of my finances. I do appreciate this will mean changing my lens collection, but I will live with this as whatever choice I make now in terms of manufactureer is one I will likely stick with for the future. I am also an owner of a Nikon F801 from a number of year ago and am curious if any life could be extracted from the Nikon lenses I have for this camera?

Any help welcomed.

Mark

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

cameracat 11 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
16 Oct 2008 2:39PM
First up the Nikon D700 is a fantastic camera, You really need to see what it turns out, To fully appreciate just how good it is....Smile

Your older Nikon lens will in almost all cases work with the D700, Although I would advise caution regarding Old lens that may have dust inside them, Not a great idea to fill your DSLR up with this, Despite the on-board cleaning system, Also if the older lens have not been used for a while, You may find things like the aperture blades have become stuck or stiff.......Sad Or worse...!

The D700 will find any flaws in older less expensive lens too, And you will not be doing the D700 any favours unless you use decent glass.....!

That said, And noting that you are using Canon now, Just how much have you got invested in Canon kit.....?

The 5D Canon is still a seriously capable camera, And it's cheaper than the Nikon D700, If you can live without some of the Nikons Toy's, The Canon 5D would be a very shrewd investment, At the right price, BUT be quick before any existing stock leaves the shelves.

Or WAIT until the 5D Mk II comes down in price a little, My guess is it will be under 2000 by the new year......!

Choice is yours though........Smile
strawman 11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 2:42PM
Mark my role is that of Devils advacado so here goes. (BTW the D700 is a nice camera). But before you splash out on a D700 can I ask you to check whether a 5D MKI or even a 50D or D300 will not suit you just as well.

You do a lot of landscapes, and from what I can see use low ISO, with perhaps some long exposures. Under these conditions the 5D and D700 look to be equal, with advantage to the D700 for weatherproofing and live view, but advantage to 5D for cost. In terms of image quality, little in it from what I have seen.

If you were to shoot sports or wildlife making use of the high ISO capabilities then step forward the D700 with its more advanced AF module and better high ISO performance and frame rate etc...

But if low ISO big landscapes are your thing, will you regret in the future not hanging on a bit to see how the 5D MKII fares.

Just pointing out the alternatives, its your money, spend how you like. And yes the D700 is a nice camera.
Munro 6 39 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 2:46PM
My existing Canon lenses are mostly EF-S mounts and therefore of no value in either of the 5d models. The reason for the price restriction on the camera body is I want to begin investment in more pro quality lenses ie Canon L mount or Nikon equivalent. I may as well try and get the best out of whichever camera I end up buying.
cameracat 11 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
16 Oct 2008 2:52PM

Quote:ie Canon L mount or Nikon equivalent.


Speaking as a Nikon shooter, In my opinion Canon have a broader range of high quality lens avaialble, And in many cases they are more affordable than the Nikon equivalents......( Bitter experience speaking )......LOL....Smile

So you might want to look at what lens options are open to you, Dependant on what brand you end up with.....!

Smile
EDIT: I'm thinking 5D Mk I, And a nice " L " lens for the same price as a D700 body..........Smile Makes more sense to me, Unless you really do need the Nikons new toy's, And by the way the D700 is fab on landscapes, Believe me, If some of the reviewers where to spend more time learning how to use the D700 properly, They might realise this.......Sad
strawman 11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 3:31PM
I think I agree with the above post. From what I have seen at low ISO's the D700 and 5D both look good, just each needs a little bit different processing.

Anyway, for value a 5D plus 17-40L is about the same price as a D700 body. Add a 70-200 F4 and if you are keen a 24-70 (or 24 to 105) and its an impressive Landscape set up. That entire set up is probably about the same as a D700 plus Nikon's well received 14-24. @ 2,700 for the 5D plus 3 lenses, 2,537 for the one lens plus Nikon.
elowes 10 2.8k United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 4:50PM
The 5D is great but you need L lenses to make the best of it. It will show up any weaknesses in lenses as will the Nikon.

The 5DII will be an improved version with 21mp, though pixels are not the be all. It has some weather sealing, the new digi 4 processor and true HD video should you want it. Possibly the noise control will be even better than the 5D. It will come down in price as soon as it is released and by the spring I hope it will be about 1,600.

I know little of Nikon lenses except they can be very expensive, as can Canon L. Nikon have now, after many years of lagging one step behind, produced some hard to beat cameras.

Rock and a hard place for you in some ways.

The 50D with your existing lenses may be the cheapest option. I personally really like full frame and will go for the 5DII. I may well have chosen differently if I didn't have the Canon lenses already.

I use the 17-40L, 24-105 L and the 70-200 F4L with a 5D. All good lenses but the 17-40L is the bargain of the bunch. Oh, and if you use UV filters make sure the quality is the best.
ghibby e2
9 100 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 6:09PM
A tough decision for sure. Personally I am poised and ready to take the plunge and go for the 5D mk2 as I already have a few L series lenses and have become very accostomed to the Canon EOS system. However if I was in the market for a new system then chosing between Canon and Nikon would be a tough call.

The main reason for Nikon IMHO is the superb 14-24 lens which is about the best on the market and beatrs most primes in its focal length range, Canon simply do not have an answer to this lens. But I do think the 12Mp of the full frame Nikons is a little low in todays market but to be honest unless you intend to make prints of A2 or more then its really not an issue.

Maybe what you need to do is have a play with both and see which suits you best, the way the camera comes to hand and how good the ergonomics are is very important. But for the money, if you are about to spend 2000 on a camera is it really worth compromising for tha sake of an extra 500 which is all the likely difference in price will be?

From what I have seen of the 5D mk2 samples the lake of noise is staggering. If the tests that appear online in the next few weeks show it to have as low noise as the nikon but at nearly twice the resolution then I would say the decision is pretty simple! Afterall in 2 years of so we will be at 35 - 40MP on full frame camera by which time the 12Mp Nikon is going to look decidely out of date.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
16 Oct 2008 8:06PM

Quote:I am about to upgrade my 350d and am hoping to progress to full frame, however I am slightly put off by the 5D mkii asking price and am seeking "guidance" on the opinions of users of the D700 as this this seems to be more within reach of my finances


Firstly do you really think your going to benefit from full frame. Cropped sensors do have there advantages, an often forgotten one is about a one stop advantage when working in low light compared to full frame.

Then there`s the cost of the bodies, lenses are more important. If it was me, I`d drop Canon in favour of a D90 or D300 without hesitation your not heavily invested in Canon anyway.
elowes 10 2.8k United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 8:38PM
Don't be fooled by the pixel race. We are close to the point where the resolution power of the camera is more than the lenses can cope with. Perhaps 40mp may be possible in a 35mm style body or even more but the design of lenses needs to keep pace.

The quality of an image is less reliant on pixels than many other things.


Quote:is about a one stop advantage when working in low light compared to full frame.


I have not heard of this. Can you explain how this advantage comes about?
strawman 11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 10:26PM
I sort of see it both ways.

I did some sum's to work out equivalency in cameras. Lets take a standard type landscape where I have a 28mm lens on a full frame camera. The DoF charts will tell you to get everything sharp from 1m to infinity you need f11 on a 5D and f8 on a crop camera (17mm lens for same field of view.) And yes my numbers are approximate.

So I guess you can argue the smaller sensor camera delivering the same field of view will have a higher shutter speed. So in some hand held situations you can argue you can run the crop camera at 1 stop lower ISO and have the same shutter speed and depth of field, but a different focal length and f stop.

But if I have understood diffraction correctly, the crop camera at f8 will start to hit diffraction issues at 13mp, while the full frame camera will be capable of over 30mp at f11 before it hits the same level of diffraction.

So for ultimate sharpness and resolution potential, the full frame camera has the greater development potential, which is why many have postulated that crop cameras get little by going past 10 to 12mp, but 35mm full frame can go on to @ 30mp. And yes it all matters what ISO range and f-stop you are going to use.

For landscape workers who like a lot of DoF and who want big resolution there is a logic in going full frame. But a crop camera with @ 12mp will put in a very good performance and be comparable to a 35mm film camera in terms of quality.

and for a 12mp camera, where you are running at low ISO, there is an argument that there is little difference between the crop and full frame sensor, apart from dynamic range. So I would expect at ISO100 or 200, a Canon 5D, or a Canon 50D will turn in similar end results after processing, just as results from the D700 or D300 will probably be close after processing (advantage in terms of dynamic range should go to the full frame cameras, along with the better high ISO performance.)

Returning to the OP, I think the 5D, or the 40/50D will represent a good upgrade for his portfolio subjects as I saw them. I think given the current 50D price, I would pick the 5D over it. Re the D700 it is a good camera but for low ISO landscape type work I think the price is harder to justify. For sports, wildlife etc I think its price is much fairer, but its my view.

Given lens prices, I think it will be possible to kit out a 5D MKII with a few lenses as I mentioned for the same price as a D700 and the equivalent Nikon lenses, mainly due to the lower price of the F4 L series. Go the F2.8 lenses and that argument may fall apart. But are the existing lenses good enough for the 5D MKII? Given the price parity, the end result should at least equal the resolution the 5D MKI produced.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
16 Oct 2008 10:54PM

Quote:I have not heard of this. Can you explain how this advantage comes about


John`s beaten me to it Smile

Going Nikon your older lenses will still work, a little magic in processing would be needed, older glass does not seem as contrasty with digital sensors, easily rectified though.

I use 4/3 for reasons of the 2x crop, suits my way of working for low light and action. Never been a real fan boy of any system, was very tempted by the D300 recently.
Snapper 9 3.8k 3 United States Outlying Islands
16 Oct 2008 11:24PM

Quote:
Going Nikon your older lenses will still work, a little magic in processing would be needed, older glass does not seem as contrasty with digital sensors, easily rectified though.



Therefore Nikon follows/encourages sustainable development principles while other brands (no names!) seem to prefer that you junked their previous efforts and bought new every few years! Mind you, I think Nikon may be starting to follow this trend as well. Sad
strawman 11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
16 Oct 2008 11:30PM
Mutters something about DX lenses but forgets what his point is Wink

Lets face it they all want your money, a camera is not enough, you need to also get the lenses. Smile
mattw 11 5.2k 10 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2008 5:22AM

Quote:I did some sum's to work out equivalency in cameras. Lets take a standard type landscape where I have a 28mm lens on a full frame camera. The DoF charts will tell you to get everything sharp from 1m to infinity you need f11 on a 5D and f8 on a crop camera (17mm lens for same field of view.) And yes my numbers are approximate.

So I guess you can argue the smaller sensor camera delivering the same field of view will have a higher shutter speed. So in some hand held situations you can argue you can run the crop camera at 1 stop lower ISO and have the same shutter speed and depth of field, but a different focal length and f stop.

But if I have understood diffraction correctly, the crop camera at f8 will start to hit diffraction issues at 13mp, while the full frame camera will be capable of over 30mp at f11 before it hits the same level of diffraction.


John... you need to get out more. Wink


Quote:I am about to upgrade my 350d and am hoping to progress to full frame, however I am slightly put off by the 5D mkii asking price and am seeking "guidance" on the opinions of users of the D700 as this this seems to be more within reach of my finances
What IS your budget? If money is limited, then the orignal 5D (plus L lenses) would be a good buy. Give it a couple of months, and the price of the 5D2 will not be that far away from the D700 after all.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.