Anyone here go from Nikon D700 to 5DII?

Some may have noticed that I am struggling with my lens decisions for my 5DII upgrade. Sometimes I wonder if I should just sell my two remaining pieces of Canon hardware (Speedlite 430 and EF 70-200 F4L IS) and try life on the dark side.

If I did make the switch to Nikon, I would do the following:

D700
16-35 F4G VR
24-70 F2.8G
70-300 F4.5-5.6G VR
SB400

vs.

5DII
16-35 F2.8L II
24-105 F4L IS
70-200 F4L IS
85 F1.8 OR 135 F2L
Speedlite 430

The weight of the entire Nikon setup has me concerned. I prefer the size/weight of the 5DII in my hand. And while Nikon has 5-year warranties on its glass, I have heard that Canon's USM is superior to the Nikon equivalent. And speaking of lenses, Nikon's selection cannot compare to that of Canon's.

On the other hand, I would gladly trade the video features of the 5DII for the better AF and electronic level on the D700.

So, who here has gone from the D700 to the 5DII and would like to talk me out of switching to the dark side?

edit: nevermind

What camera are you using now?

WesM wrote in post #10129966
edit: nevermind

What camera are you using now?

Coming from a 20D.

I was recently in a similar position. I was trying to decide between the 5DII and D700.

I ended up going with the 5DII for a few reasons, but the main reason is the lens selection that Canon offers. I don't particularly like the Nikon lineup.

WesM wrote in post #10130016
I was recently in a similar position. I was trying to decide between the 5DII and D700.

I ended up going with the 5DII for a few reasons, but the main reason is the lens selection that Canon offers. I don't particularly like the Nikon lineup.

Yes...and 21MP over 12MP is huge.

... if nikon had primes...

SchnellerGT wrote in post #10130022
Yes...and 21MP over 12MP is huge.

It is a big difference, but don't be fooled. The D700 can hold its own and take amazing pictures. That combined with its superior AF system makes it a great all around camera.

Personally, I am not focusing on fast action photography right now so the AF system on the 5DII should be fine for me.

The way I see it, the 5DII does have some flaws, but the chances of Canon making a bunch of improvement on the 5DIII is far greater than the chances of Nikon releasing a lens lineup that is similar to Canon. I'm thinking about things in a "long run" mentality. If the 5DIII is much nicer than the 5DII, yes, I might upgrade to it - and at least I will have all my nice L glass too.

SchnellerGT wrote in post #10129921
Some may have noticed that I am struggling with my lens decisions for my 5DII upgrade. Sometimes I wonder if I should just sell my two remaining pieces of Canon hardware (Speedlite 430 and EF 70-200 F4L IS) and try life on the dark side.

If I did make the switch to Nikon, I would do the following:

D700
16-35 F4G VR
24-70 F2.8G
70-300 F4.5-5.6G VR
SB400

vs.

5DII
16-35 F2.8L II
24-105 F4L IS
70-200 F4L IS
85 F1.8 OR 135 F2L
Speedlite 430

The weight of the entire Nikon setup has me concerned. I prefer the size/weight of the 5DII in my hand. And while Nikon has 5-year warranties on its glass, I have heard that Canon's USM is superior to the Nikon equivalent. And speaking of lenses, Nikon's selection cannot compare to that of Canon's.

On the other hand, I would gladly trade the video features of the 5DII for the better AF and electronic level on the D700.

So, who here has gone from the D700 to the 5DII and would like to talk me out of switching to the dark side?

If you go Nikon you want a SB600 or SB900 instead of the SB400.

Bob_A wrote in post #10130244
If you go Nikon you want a SB600 or SB900 instead of the SB400.

+1 The SB600 is definitely worth the extra $ over the SB400. The 5DII has more megapixels, but the D700 is better in the AF department and it can shoot 8FPS (with grip) if that matters to you. I also think the D700 might have slightly better high ISO performance, but I'm not really sure.

You really need to try out both cameras before you buy. They are both great and IMO its more of a personal preference and what your needs are.

And also I think the probability of Nikon coming out with a lineup of primes is very high. They just brought out the 24 f1.4 and a new 85 1.4 should be coming soon. I have also heard rumors about a 35 f1.4 and a 50 f1.2, but those are probably going to be a year or 2 or 3.

Yeah, I have more or less tried both in the store and much preferred the 5DII in my hand.

Just like everyone else, I long for a 7D with a FF sensor.

I wouldn't want to give up the image quality of the 5DII for anything.

With the improvement of the 70-200mkII over the mkI, I'm really looking forward to the 24-70mkII whenever that comes and that will keep me with canon for a while.
The central focus point is very good and has been more than I need for running dogs and race cars. The outer focus points worked well at the recent london marathon.

The D700's cross-type focus points are all clumped around the centre of the frame, so it's not the holy grail in terms of outer focus points on FF either.

The D700 is nice, but you cannot crop the images to the same extent as you can with the 5D2. If you already have long lenses this may not be an issue. I prefer the handling of the Canon and don't find the focussing to be an issue.

I went from D700 - 1D3 - 5D2
I was surprised at how much *latitude* the 5D2 files allow you for post processing to get everything just perfect (sharpness was a huge difference in Canon's favor).
I never felt the D700 gave me that freedom as much.

nikon AF is better than the 5D ii AF which is still just an update of the 5D AF, which is using 20D technology. that's a sore spot that no one EVER mentions.

i prefer nikon AF to canon. i just do. it's easier to use and provides consistently better results.

the d700 is outdated, tho. in its current state it doesn't match the mkii's features. since sony just released a 24mp a900, nikon might get that awesome sensor from them and use it for the d700 replacement.