Possibly switching to Nikon

Ive owned a few 5D bodies and I have to say, despite its full frame quality goodness, I know something is always missing in it. The speed and AF is simply not in par with my expectations from my all around camera, especially for that price. I only shoot portraits bfore, but I think that extra AF points and FPS will come in handy as soon as I explore further in the wonderful world of photography. I cant afford a 1Ds, so I guess the only logical choice is to switch to a Nikon D700 with its 51 AF points, 5FPS (8 I heard w/ a grip) and just 12 megapixels appears to be the perfect compromise for me.

Before I finally sell all my gear, are there a few things I will miss with Canon? how is their lens lineup? their flash system? costs?

I want to make sure, Im not jumping into conclusions and assumptions efore I make the switch. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

You are better off asking that question here:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=822524

Bunch of us switched from Canon. I did back in April 2010. (From a 1DMKIV + 5DMKII to a D3 + D700 and now D700 x 2)

Assuming the next logical choice for you in Canon would be the 5D2 since you own the 5DC, IMHO, the only advantage the 5D2 has would be the 21MP and Video. If you do not require those things then the D700 is the better camera, period.

The D700 does have the better AF system. Keep in mind the more accurate crosstype sensors are all bunched up in the center columns so compared to something like the 1DMKIII/1DMKIV, it's not as nicely spread out. But compare to the 5DC/5D2, it's still tons better.

Yes, 8fps with Grip provided you either use an EL-EN4 battery of AA's. The grip is very nice too BTW.

As for lenses, Nikon is playing catch up very quickly. They pretty have filled in all the blanks except maybe the 135L which is kind of a bummer. They are pricier than Canon counterparts and of course you can get "older" Canon lenses, for example 24L MKI vs. 24L MKII, 16-35 MKI vs. 16-35MKII for much cheaper and still have great USM focusing and IQ so that's something to seriously consider.

The Nikon 24-70 is better than Canon's, but it's more expensive. The 70-200VRII is a wash. 14-24 is a nice option as well and of course they recently came out with the 16-35 f4 VR. 105VR Macro is just as good as Canon's version. You've got the 24G, 35G (coming out soon), Sigma 50, 85G all covered too.

That said, if you are on a tight budget, I would think long and hard before switching. I say this over and over again. With Nikon, it's feast or famine. With Canon, you have much granular options. You don't sacrifice too IQ when you buy the "cheaper" f4 lenses or the non-L primes for instance.

Good luck!

Just going off nicksan's great post, I wouldn't switch unless I had the wiggle room for the extra cost of lenses. The D700 looks great and I'd like to try it out sometime with the Nikkor 85 f/1.4. If money were no option, I would probably have the D3x over the 1Ds3.

I might also add that it sounds like you haven't yet tried the AF for what you're interested in expanding on. I was a little worried my first time at the track with the 5Dii after reading all the threads about it having slow AF but it worked way beyond my expectations. It tracked perfectly with bikes going 150+ down the straight and through the curves.

The 5D2 won't have any issues tracking a subject with its center AF point. It's the non-center ones that pretty much suck.

nicksan wrote in post #11218080
The 5D2 won't have any issues tracking a subject with its center AF point. It's the non-center ones that pretty much suck.

I haven't tried the other points on non static subjects yet.. I guess it comes down to the op and what exactly they plan on shooting. If they want a FF for sports and can't afford a 1D then a move to the D700 wouldn't be bad.

The grass is always greener on the other side. I think you will find six months after you switch that there is someting Canon has that you miss.

nicksan wrote in post #11218080
The 5D2 won't have any issues tracking a subject with its center AF point. It's the non-center ones that pretty much suck.

Actually, not to go off subject, but I had lots of problems with the 5DII tracking on a recent autocross shoot. And yes, center only and back button focus.

Was it your first time at the track or was it the first time it's done that? Mine worked flawless and had around 95% keepers. I was using the 70-200 f/4L IS though which has a spot on AF.

I was in a very similar boat. The 5D was great but the AF and the responsiveness just wasn't there for me. So I thought about switching to D700 for a better AF and slightly more responsive camera but really it was too much.

So I went back and got a used 1DsMII. Great responsiveness, slightly faster fps, and a much improved AF system. Even has a vertical grip built in. And it's cheaper than a D700.

Downside is that the user interface is old and the 2inch LCD is a tad smaller than I'd like. But overall a good move. Ideally, I'd like a D700 or a D3s, but waaaaaayyyyyyyy too much for my hobby and selling 7 lenses and all the accessories and buying into a new system seemed more like a headache.

When I get tired of the 1DsMII, I'll probably pick up a used 1DsMIII for less than half the MSRP than when it came out. I don't mind using a generation or two older bodies. Still works fine for me.

Nikon makes great stuff and if I was starting new, I'd probably start with a D700 personally, so I hear you.

Good luck.

BTW, I know a professional photog who mainly uses Medium format but has a D700 for scouting and an occasional wedding. Funny thing is he is waiting for Nikon to make a version of the 5DMII, with more MP's and a HD video. ha ha ha. Yup, grass is always greener on the other side.

I like the grass on the Canon side. The affordability of Canon vs Nikon in pretty even, however, if you are maing the swithch and are one who doenst like to buy used gear...watch out.

Here is a good price and linie up guide. The three links bleow cover other categories of lenses.

A guide from 2009 is VERY outdated since Nikon came out with a whole bunch of much awaited primes and some zooms in 2010.

Didn't know you can buy a 24L MKII for $1100.

I'll say this again. If you are on a tight budget, stick with Canon. If you buy the best that Nikon has to offer, you won't be disappointed.

This looks like an attack of GAS. At the end of the day, after all the costs of switching, the 1Ds will be the cheapest option. And then the 5D3 will come out, with loads more pixels, the 7D's AF system and a much faster frame rate, and you'll want to switch back.

And IMHO, the 5D2's AF is far better than web rumours would have you believe

id try rent a d700 first to give it a try. its an awesome camera thats super sharp but so is the 5d.

nicksan wrote in post #11224528
I'll say this again. If you are on a tight budget, stick with Canon. If you buy the best that Nikon has to offer, you won't be disappointed.

If you buy the best that Canon has to offer you won't be disappointed either though you know?

I'm one of the people who bitched relentlessly when the 5D Mark II was released with the same crappy AF system as the 5D. But I managed to solve that problem with a 1D Mark IV.

But seriously - each camera from these two makers has some good points and bad points. I'm a stills-only photographer and if I was really in the market for what the 5D Mark II and D700 represent I would go with the D700.

But I would not sell off a bunch of Canon gear just to make that switch. Trading systems costs too much in transaction friction.