Please convince me! Canon 5D2 or Nikon D700

Poe wrote in post #7036634
If anything, a person should only be replying if they've had experience with both cameras instead of trying to add snippy comments as can me seen on the first page. I don't think it's lazy to get feedback from users.

And the one link I found on luminous landscapes, the author of that article ends up prefering the Sony A900 better than either the 5D2 or the D700. Now I won't go with Sony because their lens selection as well as the 3rd party lens maker selection is severly lacking compared to Canon or Nikon (I know because my brother has an A350 and I was looking to buy him a lens this past Christmas).

It's unrealistic to expect only someone with experience with both camera's to reply. Just because that's the nature of the Internet.

I work in the IT field, which sometimes in this forum I am embarrassed about as it appears all photographers are desk folks looking to express themselves with a camera.

But working in that field I have learned that no one can answer anything better than the Internet, and forums can be beneficial after a certain amount of research has already been done.

Most questions can most certainly be answered by googling.

Your original post was not specific, so I think had you done some research and then posted more specific questions, you would restrict replies to specific answers you are looking for.

RandyMN wrote in post #7036680
It's unrealistic to expect only someone with experience with both camera's to reply. Just because that's the nature of the Internet.

I work in the IT field, which sometimes in this forum I am embarrassed about as it appears all photographers are desk folks looking to express themselves with a camera.

But working in that field I have learned that no one can answer anything better than the Internet, and forums can be beneficial after a certain amount of research has already been done.

Most questions can most certainly be answered by googling.

Your original post was not specific, so I think had you done some research and then posted more specific questions, you would restrict replies to specific answers you are looking for.

Randy, I had already conducted research/read reviews/blogs/articles before I posted here today. This was not my first stop.

The point of my post was to be convinced which necessitates some form of argument to pursade. There have only been a few with reasonable arguments with the exceptional one from A.C.

Fair enough. You missed my point though about being specific in your research and what exactly you wanted answered.

RandyMN wrote in post #7036723
Fair enough. You missed my point though about being specific in your research and what exactly you wanted answered.

True, but I think it allows for all angles of an argument to be discussed.

A.C. wrote in post #7036598
14-24 is an outstanding lens. I got a chance to use one a few times. But the range is very limited, and I see it only as a special purpose lens. On full frame, 24mm is standard wide. 24mm on a Full Frame is like 15mm on your XT, quite wide. Both Canon and Nikon make great lenses. I just find that the Canon line-up is a bit more versatile than the Nikon. As far as primes are concerned, I'll be honest and say that I haven't had enough experience with Nikon primes to give a valid opinion on how they compare with Canon.

Poe, I've been asking myself exactly the same question for about 3 months now. I signed up here to get a feel for the canon stuff, and I have read just about every review of the d700 and 5dii I can find. I have also read every review of the lens lineups I can find too. I've gone out and had a bit of a play with the store floor copies to get a feel for them, too.

I am *still* not decided. Fortunately, my funding won't come through for another month, so I still have some time up my sleeve. What I can tell you is that I am leaning very heavily towards the 5dII just now.

The advantages of the Canon that I like are the 21meg files (I will print very big occaisionally, but I am also a bit of a detail whore). I like the native 100ISO, too. 3.9 fps is a little on the low side for what I would like, but I know that realistically I won't be in a situation where I will need faster fps than that. The lack of many focal points might be an issue, but I know they've improved the performance of them in the newer body at least. I coudn't care at all about the video capability. I do really like teh feel of the canon in my hands.

I like the nikon's fps though that shouldn't matter. I really like its bracketing. It also feels good, but not quite as good. And the menu on it isn't very naturally intuitive for me. After looking at them side by side I was still only just leaning to the canon. And it was a line ball.

But one thing I did realize over the past couple of months: My choice isn't really about the body. In 2 years time I am going to be looking for a new body. This camera I get now will become a backup, or even be sold off. Or given away to a deserving party. I will still be left with my lenses.

What I plan to shoot is a bunch of studio stuff, with the odd citywalk, zoo walk or maybe a day at a sporting event thrown in. Plus I will shoot a heap of macro stuff. For what I want, the canon lens lineup is likely to be the deciding factor for me. I will start out with the 85L, and get stuff as budget allows and need demands. Nikon do have some great lenses, but nothing that can compare to things like the 85L, the MP-E 65mm Macro or the other primes I hope to acquire. It wasn't until I figured out that the lens lineup will be more important that my decision started to become clearer. I might be picking up a zoom or two for the walkarounds, and Nikon do make better zooms. But they're not so much better that I would give up the awesome optics the L primes deliver to get a slightly better walkaround zoom.

Figure out what you're going to shoot most. Figure out what lenses you think will give you the best results for those purposes. See if one lens lineup is better for you in that space. Then go back and look at the cameras again.

Edit: There is one other thing, too. I haven't found a nikon community that I felt at home in like I have here.

A.C. wrote in post #7036598
14-24 is an outstanding lens. I got a chance to use one a few times. But the range is very limited, and I see it only as a special purpose lens. On full frame, 24mm is standard wide. 24mm on a Full Frame is like 15mm on your XT, quite wide. Both Canon and Nikon make great lenses. I just find that the Canon line-up is a bit more versatile than the Nikon. As far as primes are concerned, I'll be honest and say that I haven't had enough experience with Nikon primes to give a valid opinion on how they compare with Canon.

Poe, I've been asking myself exactly the same question for about 3 months now. I signed up here to get a feel for the canon stuff, and I have read just about every review of the d700 and 5dii I can find. I have also read every review of the lens lineups I can find too. I've gone out and had a bit of a play with the store floor copies to get a feel for them, too.

I am *still* not decided. Fortunately, my funding won't come through for another month, so I still have some time up my sleeve. What I can tell you is that I am leaning very heavily towards the 5dII just now.

The advantages of the Canon that I like are the 21meg files (I will print very big occaisionally, but I am also a bit of a detail whore). I like the native 100ISO, too. 3.9 fps is a little on the low side for what I would like, but I know that realistically I won't be in a situation where I will need faster fps than that. The lack of many focal points might be an issue, but I know they've improved the performance of them in the newer body at least. I coudn't care at all about the video capability. I do really like teh feel of the canon in my hands.

I like the nikon's fps though that shouldn't matter. I really like its bracketing. It also feels good, but not quite as good. And the menu on it isn't very naturally intuitive for me. After looking at them side by side I was still only just leaning to the canon. And it was a line ball.

But one thing I did realize over the past couple of months: My choice isn't really about the body. In 2 years time I am going to be looking for a new body. This camera I get now will become a backup, or even be sold off. Or given away to a deserving party. I will still be left with my lenses.

What I plan to shoot is a bunch of studio stuff, with the odd citywalk, zoo walk or maybe a day at a sporting event thrown in. Plus I will shoot a heap of macro stuff. For what I want, the canon lens lineup is likely to be the deciding factor for me. I will start out with the 85L, and get stuff as budget allows and need demands. Nikon do have some great lenses, but nothing that can compare to things like the 85L, the MP-E 65mm Macro or the other primes I hope to acquire. It wasn't until I figured out that the lens lineup will be more important that my decision started to become clearer. I might be picking up a zoom or two for the walkarounds, and Nikon do make better zooms. But they're not so much better that I would give up the awesome optics the L primes deliver to get a slightly better walkaround zoom.

Figure out what you're going to shoot most. Figure out what lenses you think will give you the best results for those purposes. See if one lens lineup is better for you in that space. Then go back and look at the cameras again.

One last thing... I haven't found a tog community that I've liked as much as POTN.

nuffi wrote in post #7036790
Poe, I've been asking myself exactly the same question for about 3 months now. I signed up here to get a feel for the canon stuff, and I have read just about every review of the d700 and 5dii I can find. I have also read every review of the lens lineups I can find too. I've gone out and had a bit of a play with the store floor copies to get a feel for them, too.

I am *still* not decided. Fortunately, my funding won't come through for another month, so I still have some time up my sleeve. What I can tell you is that I am leaning very heavily towards the 5dII just now.

The advantages of the Canon that I like are the 21meg files (I will print very big occaisionally, but I am also a bit of a detail whore). I like the native 100ISO, too. 3.9 fps is a little on the low side for what I would like, but I know that realistically I won't be in a situation where I will need faster fps than that. The lack of many focal points might be an issue, but I know they've improved the performance of them in the newer body at least. I coudn't care at all about the video capability. I do really like teh feel of the canon in my hands.

I like the nikon's fps though that shouldn't matter. I really like its bracketing. It also feels good, but not quite as good. And the menu on it isn't very naturally intuitive for me. After looking at them side by side I was still only just leaning to the canon. And it was a line ball.

But one thing I did realize over the past couple of months: My choice isn't really about the body. In 2 years time I am going to be looking for a new body. This camera I get now will become a backup, or even be sold off. Or given away to a deserving party. I will still be left with my lenses.

What I plan to shoot is a bunch of studio stuff, with the odd citywalk, zoo walk or maybe a day at a sporting event thrown in. Plus I will shoot a heap of macro stuff. For what I want, the canon lens lineup is likely to be the deciding factor for me. I will start out with the 85L, and get stuff as budget allows and need demands. Nikon do have some great lenses, but nothing that can compare to things like the 85L, the MP-E 65mm Macro or the other primes I hope to acquire. It wasn't until I figured out that the lens lineup will be more important that my decision started to become clearer. I might be picking up a zoom or two for the walkarounds, and Nikon do make better zooms. But they're not so much better that I would give up the awesome optics the L primes deliver to get a slightly better walkaround zoom.

Figure out what you're going to shoot most. Figure out what lenses you think will give you the best results for those purposes. See if one lens lineup is better for you in that space. Then go back and look at the cameras again.

One last thing... I haven't found a tog community that I've liked as much as POTN.

POTN has been great. I am registered on FredMiranda and Nikonians but it just doesn't feel as nice as POTN does.

What I'm also waiting for is more reviews, particularly from Photozone on the new glass from Nikon as well as if they ever get around to testing more of the Zeiss stuff too. Nikon just released all these G series lenses but there is hardly anything on them at this time. I like to compare glass as I do agree that glass is more important than the camera body. From what I've gathered is that Nikon has done better in the wide angles than Canon and Canon has done better than Nikon in the telephoto range. There doesn't seem to be a clear winner in the middle.

The only chance I've had to play with some of these cameras was when I was in a city that's over an hour and a half drive from where I live. The local camera shop here told me they wouldn't let me touch the cameras because "the pro's don't want someone to have touched their camera". I don't go to that camera store any more. So I have to rely on users in the forum to recount their experiences and look over lots of photos.

With the black dots and vertical banding issues, it seems like the 5D2 is a tarnished product that was rushed to market before it was thorougly worked out. I haven't read anything about such problems of the D700. Also, the more I read comparisons between the 5D2 and the D700, it seems that the D700 never leaves a lasting impression over the 5D2 megapixel wow factor. It seemed to me that the D700 was more feature rich than the megapixel/video rich 5D2.

Part of me wants to wait for the 5D3 (or whatever it may be) as I'm not entirely convinced by the 5D2 to even upgrade from my XT as well as hassle with selling my canon stuff and switch to Nikon.

Your decision. I'd say whatever lenses you currently have, get the body for those lenses. BEing a member here for 3 years, you already know that.

I have no experience of the 5D2 but was contemplating the exact same choice about a month back. In a way my choice was made easier 'cos there were no 5D2's available anyway

I went with the D700 and have not regretted it for an instant. Low-light performance is in a totally different league to what I'm used to with the 50D. Ergonomics of the D700 are light years ahead of any Canon I've used (admittedly I've not experienced the 1D line) and the auto-focus is incredible. Don't get me wrong, I love my Canon lenses and will not be abandoning my Canons, but I'm a very happy user of the D700 and looking forward to experiencing the 14-24.

im not sure how relevant my contribution will be, since i own a 20D and D300, but i can give a bit of insight with regards to the handling differences between canon and nikon, since their crop and FF cameras handle fairly similarly.

for my personal style of shooting, the nikon system is better. i'll go out on a limb and say FAR better. much prefer hard buttons and switches when making changes for AF mode, AF coverage and metering.

AF is much more customizable on D300. really appreciate the bigger multi-controller button as well. it usually took a couple of tries on my 20D to get the exact AF point that i wanted. much easier to navigate with the D300. one use i found for the 51 points: when tripod mounted and shooting a subject, no recomposition is needed to get an Af point onto your subject...with 51 points, one of them is bound to be right over your subject! useful for artsy shots with very narrow DOF and focus-recompose is not ideal.

the Fn button, DOF button and AEL buttons are all customizable to a set number of different functions, depending on whether its just a button press OR a button press combined with a dial scroll. what does that mean?? 6 different custom functions available to you instantly. mine are set to perform on-the-fly spot metering, AEL, dynamic AF range groupings, number of bracket shots and EV range of bracket shots. and im not sure about the D700, but the D300 can take upto 9 bracketing shots...my 20D was able to only do 3. that would be fairly useful for HDR.

another item people have brought up before is the auto-ISO. if you shoot in environments where lighting can change abruptly, this feature is VERY handy. this has saved me numerous shots that i would have under/overexposed. excellent feature when used in conjunction with Manual mode.

again most of the things i've mentioned have to be experienced to be appreciated. like you, i painstakingly researched everything i could about my next camera purchase. this was also the case since i dont buy cameras very frequently (as evidenced by m previous camera being a 20D!), and wanted my next camera to be my last crop body. it needed to deliver, and it needs to deliver for years to come.

i gotta tell ya, my first hand experience using the D300 for 1 weekend was able to tell me FAR more than a million hours of internet research. i say go borrow a 5DII and D700 from someone and go nuts for a weekend. good luck!!

Thanks for all the feedback!

Hope it helps - good luck with the selection. Either way, enjoy your picture taking .

Poe wrote in post #7039100
Thanks for all the feedback!

In this forum, what answer do you expect?

If I had the choice between the 2, I'd get the D700.

I'm with Nick, the D700 is sweet.

But I would base my decision on lens selection - I'm still with Canon because of their fast, short USM primes.