Going retro FF: 1Ds II, 5D, D700

So I shoot with a D300s at the moment and since going Nikon several years ago have been super happy with the performance of my bodies (D300, D700, D300s). However, since selling the D700 I have missed the undefinable force of nature that is full-frame sensor.

Looking at my options it seems that, without too much outlay over and above what I'd get for the lovely D300s, I could get a 5D and likely have some change. I loved my 5D when I had one, a bit slow, not much fps and pretty basic. But I mainly shoot on city breaks, so street style, these days. Add a 40mm pancake (which I also owned/liked) and street heaven! Shutter actuations at the age of this body could be an issue!

Alternatively, I could get a 1Ds Mk II for an extra £200. I'd get nice big files from the bigger sensor, quality build, but extra weight and ol' school interface. No experience of this body, but have liked the pro Canon bodies I have owned. The accuracy of AF is head and shoulders above the consumer level. More wriggle room on the pro shutter actuations.

Then there's the D700! Still the best camera I've ever owned and I have lots of Nikon stuff that would work with it, like spare batteries, remote, a couple of my existing lenses. Amazin' low light performance, lovely images, great interface, good resale, compact but great build, tho' needs a grip to deliver best fps, and likely £200 on top of the D300s sale.

So, my question is not about brand, I can be happy either way, but about image quality first, that something special, then all round usability.

I am thinking D700, 1Ds Mk II, 5D in that order. But I ain't owned the 1Ds and I guess that's what I'm mainly thinking as a valid alternative approach to FF.

D700 would be my first choice. I had both a 5d and a 1ds (original). Don't get me wrong, they were both great, but the d700 in my opinion does better image quality. I know it is only 12mp (not big deal but comparing to the 16mp 1ds2), but it is fast, better at high iso and has an amazing focus system.

Yeah, I'm kinda thinking that way too but not 100% sure as the 1Ds II is the unknown. Another downer is the larger battery size and charger size, both a PITA and the fact they're not even Lithium. From my ex 1dN MkII experience they do seem to last long enough for a 4-5 day trip tho'. The SD and Cf card combo is good, like my D300s. The 5D CF only is a PITA as most of my cards are SD now. The high ISO on the D700 is amazing and while I don't use it much I wonder if I'd miss it with the Canon options.

How do you find the 17-50mm by the way?

If I had Nikon equipment, and was considering older bodies that were similar in performance, I would probably stay with the same brand, why have the hassle of switching?

1DsII - best ISO 100-400 files I've ever seen (previously owned 1D3, 40D, and now 6D). Yes in my opinion even better than the 6D. Just had this milky film-like quality to it. I'm looking to pick up another in good condition in the coming months actually.

Cheers TeamSpeed, much to be said for that approach.

Fiebru1119 I have heard similar way back in the day when it first came out. I like the Zeiss look, super micro contrast, clean edges and great colours. That's how I also associate the best FF images.

condyk wrote in post #17245133
Yeah, I'm kinda thinking that way too but not 100% sure as the 1Ds II is the unknown. Another downer is the larger battery size and charger size, both a PITA and the fact they're not even Lithium. From my ex 1dN MkII experience they do seem to last long enough for a 4-5 day trip tho'. The SD and Cf card combo is good, like my D300s. The 5D CF only is a PITA as most of my cards are SD now. The high ISO on the D700 is amazing and while I don't use it much I wonder if I'd miss it with the Canon options.

How do you find the 17-50mm by the way?

The 17-50mm is a very good imager but I often wish it focussed a bit faster. Funnily enough when light levels are reasoable I'd rate the 18-105mm up there with the best (zoom) lenses I have used, including some L's

My modern FF is 5Dc.
My retro FF is my family FED-2 .

jaomul wrote in post #17245373
The 17-50mm is a very good imager but I often wish it focussed a bit faster. Funnily enough when light levels are reasoable I'd rate the 18-105mm up there with the best (zoom) lenses I have used, including some L's

Yeah, Nikon are a bit short on decent zooms at a reasonable price for FF. If I wasn't selling the D300s I'd likely look to pick up the Tamron. I'm likely going to pick up a 28-105mm for the D700 and maybe a 35mm or 50mm prime. I've a Tokina 20-35mm, my longest serving lens, to pick up the wide end already tho for me it's a tad big and bulky, given it's a 2.8, for walkaround. Looks like I've settled on the D700. I really respected the abilities of my last one and as TeamSpeed says why go through the hassle of a switch?

condyk wrote in post #17245109
Looking at my options it seems that, without too much outlay over and above what I'd get for the lovely D300s, I could get a 5D and likely have some change. I loved my 5D when I had one, a bit slow, not much fps and pretty basic. But I mainly shoot on city breaks, so street style, these days. Add a 40mm pancake (which I also owned/liked) and street heaven! Shutter actuations at the age of this body could be an issue!

Alternatively, I could get a 1Ds Mk II for an extra £200. I'd get nice big files from the bigger sensor, quality build, but extra weight and ol' school interface. No experience of this body, but have liked the pro Canon bodies I have owned. The accuracy of AF is head and shoulders above the consumer level. More wriggle room on the pro shutter actuation

So, my question is not about brand, I can be happy either way, but about image quality first, that something special, then all round usability..

I agree, if image quality is your priority then the Canon 6D (refurbished at $1,300) and large aperture primes like the 40mm pancake are good choices

Yeah, that would be a very nice, practical combo. In the end seems I've bagged a D700, battery grip and 50mm 1.8 G well within budget. Good street combo and the grip will give me a very handy 8 fps when I'm on safari!

I'm still shooting a D700 Dave, and I think I switched from Canon to Nikon just after you did. It's a great camera.

I have a 70-200 f/2.8VR for shooting indoor sports, but also have the 70-300 VR for when I want to pack light. It's a really great lens for the $, and if I'm not mistaken you are the one that recommended I try it out when I was complaining about Nikon's lack of a 70-200 f/4 at the time. That turned out to be excellent advice. A tiny bit soft at 300, but from 70-200 not much different than my old "L".

So far I have zero desire to upgrade despite the significant improvements to the sensors Nikon has been using. The D750 is close, but misses with it's small buffer, no AF-ON button, only 1/4000s SS and only 1/200 sync. The D810 is close but the fps is lower than I want for shooting my daughter's swimming.

The D700 ... for me ... still has the specs that work for what I'm shooting. Maybe in a year or two they'll have something I'm interested in

I'm 100% with you all the way Bobster ... bagged a 80k super-mint ex-studio pro D700 for truly great price last week and the equally awesome (but different) D300s is on eBay now - so am expecting the upgrade to only cost me around £100. Shame to let it go but the D700 has all the sweetness you could ever want in the current market and I'm mainly street/city break shooting these days. Shame I have a collection of SD cards from the D300s and I'm back to CF on the D700!

The 70-300mm VR is great bang for your buck, but I've a Tamron 70-300 just for a change currently. Hardly used it since I did my first few tests. Is a good lens tho. Would happily take it on safari as my closer to lens. On par with the Nikon I'd say. Maybe better VR but not quite the build quality (is very close). I'd say the two tie, with the Canon next - didn't like the Canon build quality much.

I think with the D700 I'm not interested in upgrading now either. Knowing the 100-400 IS is getting a new incarnation helped push me a tad towards the 1Ds II or maybe 5D again but handling wise the D700 is hands down a winner.

I've hired the Sigma 50mm 1.4 ART lens for a Paris trip over Christmas and in combo with a D700 'feel' it should be super sweet. Heard so many good things about the Sigma - several folks saying it's the best 50mm around, and images look great, tho' maybe Zeiss might have something to say about that! Wasn't impressed with the previous Sigma 50mm 1.4 - too much fringing and way soft wide open.

Congrats, condyk! The D700 and D3 are hands-down the sweetest FF cameras for the price right now. Love the viewfinder, and disagree as others may, the D750 isn't the exact replacement for it (for some people) as Bob mentioned. I would say that Nikon's greatest pitfall is that their old bodies are too good to replace in the near future! 12 megapixels on a full frame sensor is a good thing!

Condyk, can you let me know how well the Sigma 50 f/1.4 Art focuses for you wide open on your D700? I'm wondering if I want mine in Nikon or Canon mount. I've had much better luck with the 41 cross type points focusing wide open, but never gave it enough of a try on Nikon's 51/15 cross type system.

Yeah, will do! I have it for 3 weeks on a mega special deal (3 weeks for the rpice of 1) so before I go away I'll have time to test properly. I don't shoot wide open that much but I will as a test. That's a great collection of gear you have - nicely picked out. I am also happy shooting either brand and have done on safari a few times. I struggle to understand the 'my brand is bigger/better than yours gang!'