Nikon FX Vs Canon 1.3+FF

If I could afford a new 1D4 I'd drop my D700 in a heartbeat. The D700 is a great camera but it has it's cons such as the menu system. I prefer Canon's menu layout.

There is one thing that I don't like about Nikon...colors and tones...well that's two . The only two things that made me move to Canon. There's something odd about them.

Im almost sure it was a D700, same top dials as I can tell from pictures online but it could have been an older version, however it took me 5 minutes to figure out how to change the shooting mode to Av, after the person showed me how. Other than that it seemed to shoot really good pictures but I cant imagine it being worlds better than a 5dII or something, again I have no shooting experience with the 5dII and only a few minutes with the D700, if thats even what it was (I know it was a high level nikon, just not sure the specifics, this was well before I was obsessed with knowing cameras:p)

maverick678 wrote in post #9507875
There is one thing that I don't like about Nikon...colors and tones...well that's two . The only two things that made me move to Canon. There's something odd about them.

That too but some will say differently. I'm patiently waiting for the 7D AF to make it into the 5D (or the replacement for it) since it appears the 1D is going to continue to be out of my range.

maverick678 wrote in post #9507875
There is one thing that I don't like about Nikon...colors and tones...well that's two . The only two things that made me move to Canon. There's something odd about them.

imo if u shoot raw, it doesn't really matter. i think it would be hard to tell which pics in my flickr are done by which system.

inzite wrote in post #9508068
imo if u shoot raw, it doesn't really matter. i think it would be hard to tell which pics in my flickr are done by which system.

I have a harder time getting the skin tones to look totally natural on my D700. I can tell quite easily which shots are from which system... especially compared to the 1Ds3, which renders amazingly accurate skin.

It'll be hard to match, it's just the nature of Canon and Nikon imaging is different. I usually lookup FM Nature&Wildlife forum and mostly been able to figure out where the shot(s) are coming from. Canon is just superior on that area...that's my humble opinion.

inzite wrote in post #9508068
imo if u shoot raw, it doesn't really matter. i think it would be hard to tell which pics in my flickr are done by which system.

bachanal,

I played with the new 1D just over a week ago and Canon have still not gone far enough for me. They seem to think that having the "My Menu" list gets round it. For me thats not good enough by a very long way. It's still a list that then requires that I dig around enabling something and once used, going through the same motions to disable it.

The top 3 buttons on the left hand side only have a one "double button press" mode between them. Thats two opportunities missed in my book. The same applies to all the other buttons.

I have to agree that any differences in colour rendition between the two is a simple job in post-processing. Canon traditionally make skin tones an unrealistic pink by overdoing the red. Nikon are not better or worse, just different. But Nikon need to stop softening their RAWs in camera and do some major catching up MP wise.

K6AZ wrote in post #9507806
If I could afford a new 1D4 I'd drop my D700 in a heartbeat. The D700 is a great camera but it has it's cons such as the menu system. I prefer Canon's menu layout.

But how much time do we really spend in the menu? For me, hardly at all.

picturecrazy wrote in post #9508649
I have a harder time getting the skin tones to look totally natural on my D700. I can tell quite easily which shots are from which system... especially compared to the 1Ds3, which renders amazingly accurate skin.

This is one of the argued points from everything I read. A lot of people say the D700 renders more accurate skin tones...

i find nikon body ergonomics better for real world shooting imo. that being said, canon's is not BAD BAD. just not as good as nikon for my needs.

strong rumor in nikons boards that the 700x is coming with 24mp in Feb

Mastamarek wrote in post #9506945
1D4 AF vs D3s AF. canon wins!!
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=vkg7pAxi4gE

Based upon what i saw, I wouldnt put much faith into that review...

ed rader wrote in post #9507727
if i were going 12 mp it would have to be crop.

ed rader

I wonder how those poor Nikon folk only get by on a measly 12mp? Come to think about it, I wonder how I get by with my 5D with only 12.8mp?

Hogloff wrote in post #9510668
I wonder how those poor Nikon folk only get by on a measly 12mp? Come to think about it, I wonder how I get by with my 5D with only 12.8mp?

you don't know any better. i had the 5d too. i have the 1ds mark III now. world of difference.

remember a few years ago the nikonian belief was that FF was a dead format and crop was where it was at.

ed rader

What I want to see from Nikon is a FF with 24MP. After all the 100% crop comparison between the D700 and 5D II, I'd be curious if they can mantain it with D700x/D900/D800 or they go 16MP