Board index Equipment Digital Cameras Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Digital Cameras

Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

zipperfoot
 
Posts: 7

Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:11 am


I practice fashion photography (plan on going to school for it [photography] in fall of this year).
I have been considering either the Nikon D700 or the Canon EOS 5D Mk II, however, as there must always be, I have small issues with both cameras. (Keep in mind I have extremely little experience with both brands. I have been using Olympus for the past five years.)

With Nikon, it is that the Nikkor lenses always seem to have a bit of distortion, even if the lens is not wide-angle. Although, this perception could also be due to my lack of experience with them. They also seem to have quite a bit of vignetting. Both of these things, and, just typically the work I've seen done with Nikons (the D700 specifically) seem to be good for portraiture, landscape, and night scenes / architecture, whereas the work I've seen done by Canon (specifically, the 5D II) seems to be more up my alley in terms of processing and in terms of how the lenses and sensor are built.

However, I have seen / heard quite a few complaints about the 5D II, mainly that it is almost incapable of taking a truly sharp image, which greatly concerns me. I have viewed a lot of work done with this camera and seen the same thing as well.

A little help via opinions of people who have used both or either camera would be greatly appreciated, and extra points for links / examples. c:
Last edited by zipperfoot on Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

bug322
 
Posts: 298

Re: Best idea for fashion camera?

Post Thu Jan 07, 2010 4:39 pm


6 years studie in photography and still don't know??
It is remarkable.
:roll:

zipperfoot
 
Posts: 7

Re: Best idea for fashion camera?

Post Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:44 am


I should say, not formally studying. Just doing my own stuff. I've been using Olympus the whole time.
I also have very little experience with the Nikon or Canon brand, and to anyone going to post in this thread, I'd appreciate actually helpful comments. :)

mikelong
 
Posts: 670

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:02 am


All I can say it that I really like my D700 and have no complaints except for the size and weight, but I don't do any fashion photography so that shouldn't be an issue for you. I shoot with the 70-200 f/2.8 VR, 50mm f/1.4 and 17-35mm (all Nikon) and have had no issues with distortion or vignetting during the past 14 months that I've used this system. I know of several successful wedding/fashion photographers including Scott Kelby who use Nikon (D700 and D3x).

If you can't find the answers you're looking for here on pbase then you most certainly can find them by searching the internet.

sthuman
 
Posts: 97

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:21 pm


This is a real tough question. Keep in mind that I shoot Nikon and don't do fashion photography.

In the past, and probably still today, the fashion world loves lots of pixels. A large percentage of fashion work is done with Hassleblad or Phase One medium format digital backs. They like those 35 to 50 mp images. I think the argument could be made that the D700 produces better images than the 5D Mark II. But in large part that would be splitting hairs. The D700 without doubt does better at high ISO, but that's not a factor for fashion. The Nikon Creative Lighting System is as good as it gets. That could be a factor as well. But overall I think either of those cameras would be fine. But here's the point I wanted to make. As the fashion world has been pixel counters in the past, you might find some resistance when trying to sell 12 megapixel images. Image quality aside, there are just people who think more is better and would possibly not even consider taking a look at someone's work if not done at a very high pixel count. That might give the advantage to the Canon in this case, though it may also be too low for that type of pixel counter to consider. Old thinking dies slowly, and either camera will make perfectly good images.

zipperfoot
 
Posts: 7

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:48 pm


sthuman wrote:This is a real tough question. Keep in mind that I shoot Nikon and don't do fashion photography.

In the past, and probably still today, the fashion world loves lots of pixels. A large percentage of fashion work is done with Hassleblad or Phase One medium format digital backs. They like those 35 to 50 mp images. I think the argument could be made that the D700 produces better images than the 5D Mark II. But in large part that would be splitting hairs. The D700 without doubt does better at high ISO, but that's not a factor for fashion. The Nikon Creative Lighting System is as good as it gets. That could be a factor as well. But overall I think either of those cameras would be fine. But here's the point I wanted to make. As the fashion world has been pixel counters in the past, you might find some resistance when trying to sell 12 megapixel images. Image quality aside, there are just people who think more is better and would possibly not even consider taking a look at someone's work if not done at a very high pixel count. That might give the advantage to the Canon in this case, though it may also be too low for that type of pixel counter to consider. Old thinking dies slowly, and either camera will make perfectly good images.


Thank you very much for your input. c:
Yes, you're right about the high mp images -- however right now, all I'm looking for really is a camera to take with me to school; something to get started on, so I don't need the 30k Hasselblad for right now.

bug322
 
Posts: 298

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:59 pm


A D300 or even lower will probably do.
I guess they dont expect u to come with a D3X with tons of expensive glass.

The Nikon CLS is indeed something to consider also.

mikelong
 
Posts: 670

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:26 pm


Unless you're sold on FX format the d90 would suffice - half the cost of the d300 and three times less than the d700 with no significant difference in image quality.

zipperfoot
 
Posts: 7

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:46 am


Thanks again guys for your help.
I have been wrestling with whether or not I need the full-frame sensor -- if I do it'll probably mean I just need to spend more on better glass to take advantage of that sensor.

What about the Canon 50D?

mikelong
 
Posts: 670

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:16 am


The large sensor makes sense for big landscapes but can't see much point otherwise - the low light ISO capabilities of the D700 are apparently much better. I have both the d700 and a d90, am using the d90 about 80% of the time now.

zipperfoot
 
Posts: 7

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:55 pm


mikelong wrote:The large sensor makes sense for big landscapes but can't see much point otherwise - the low light ISO capabilities of the D700 are apparently much better. I have both the d700 and a d90, am using the d90 about 80% of the time now.

Thanks for the input.

Anyone got any thoughts on the 50D? (I know it's not a full-frame sensor...)

paul_k
 
Posts: 5

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:36 pm


Hi

to begin with, I have no experience with Canon DSLR's

But from what I've read (yes, on the Net) the 50D was a major dissapointment for many Canonites as it was mainly more pixels compared to the 40D, and some minor technical improvements, and worse noise performance then the 40D. The 7D seems the rave at the moment, as Canon seems to have solved the AF problems they had with many (also pro) bodies lately. But, (again) from what I there also seems an QC problem with (for a major brand) too many lenses as members of reputable sites as Fred Miranda and Sportshooter regularly complain of only getting a decent copy on a second, third or even more try.

With Nikon, I'm an over thirty year user, so I lived through the good and the bad times with them (lately times are good again for Nikon, but I do remember the super slow AF of the F4, and disastrous - sorry if I miss-spelled , no native English speaker- career of the D2H).

Reason I switched over to Nikon was initially that when I entered pro photography (like you as a student) they were number one (service, availibilty, rental etc), and shortly after that because Canon dropped the FD/FL mount for the EF one, rendering the older system (which I happened to own also) obsolete with the stroke of a pen .

With Nikon I still can (and do so) use my old lenses, yes also for fashion, on both my F2AS and D3. I guess I have been dumb lucky for many years as I still get my pictures in focus when I put my lenses eg 2/200 or 4/200-400, even the secondhand lenses ones like 4/600, on any camera body I own, ranging from a F2 or FE, through a F90X and F100, to a D70S, D2X and D3, without back or front focus or extensive micro adjustments needed. And I only have had one body die on me, a previously owned (second,third, or more, hand, don't know) D1H I bought when the model was already six years on the market and after that owned for two years myself.

Now for fashion, yes if you go editorial you need pixels (sometimes). But to start with you will have to learn take the pictures. And for that you need a camera which will do what you want it to do, whenever you want it to do, as IMHO fashion is all about shooting mood and atmosphere, and technique comes in later (and can be hired in if neccesary, as shown by the likes of Ritts, Meisel and Leibovitz).

So IMHO as you are starting, you need a body with fast AF (because models are supposed to move, otherwise use mannequins) great high ISO (because you can't always light things out) and great ergonomics (because you should concentrate on taking the picture, not how the camera works)

The D700 has all the above ( as you would expect me to say as a Nikon owner).

But don't write of the 5DII immediately.

It has more pixels, and video.

The ergonomics are something personal, although many of the ex-Canonites who returned to Nikon (admittedly many were former Nikon users) after the introduction of the D3/D700/D300 raved about the superior button driven ergonomics of Nikon vs the menu driven Canons.

AF of the 5DII seems a dissapointment though (same as the six year old predessesor 5D, not famed for use with and tracking fast moving subjects, or low light) and of course more pixels means bigger cards, more storage, faster computer.

So in the end I can't make an absolute statement which one of the two is better.

As a Nikon user, it's clear what I would choose, but it would be the addition to an existing set of equipment.

As a fashion and sportsphotographer, I also prefer Nikon, as it fits my style of shooting.

For you, as a novice, go the the shop and compare them with the bodies in your hands. But keep in mind what you will be using the for, i.e. what is your shooting style and what are the pictures you want to shoot. The technical detals can be bought or rented when it really starts to matter, first go out, take pictures and find out what you demands are based on that, not on specs of a camera.

My two cents

Paul

availablelightimages
 
Posts: 69

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:36 am


Hi all,

I made the switch to Nikon from a long time with Canon last summer, I primarily shoot landscapes, and the extremely brilliant high ISO noise control of the D700 was a primary stimulus in the decision to switch, in addition to the simply superb 14-24/2.8 wide angle lens from Nikkor. We still had a decent selection of Canon glass and my wife decided to hold with Canon. Just a few weeks ago I acquired a used D3x and my wife got a 5D2...

While we still had the D700 I conducted fairly exhaustive tests with all three bodies and published the results here:

http://www.pbase.com/availablelightimag ... _d3x_tests

The password is ALI.

To the claim that the D700 and Nikon lenses suffer from distortion & vignetting, NOT TRUE, these cameras demand the use of good quality glass and in your budget you should factor in buying the best lens you can afford, thankfully for fashion there are some very good options. Nikon lenses have a far better reputation than their Canon equivalents, as is simply reflected in the price, you pay a good deal more for Nikkor lenses. I use the 14-24/2.8 24-70/2.8 and the 300/2.8 and they are all razor sharp.

To the claim the 5DII is not capable of taking a sharp shot, also NOT TRUE. Admittedly, I have only played around with this body for a few weeks, but in the studio it is an extremely sharp camera packing in a huge amount of detail into its 21MP images, second only to the massive 25MP of the Nikon D3x, which is in a resolution class of its own in the DSLR market.

Either of these cameras is a superb studio option, if I was using it for mainstream fashion work I would probably go for the 5D11, as more pixels on the subject is always a bonus, but it depends on your output requirements, do you NEED 21MP, or is 12MP enough, in which case just about any medium priced DSLR in the marketplace will see you ok and invest the difference in some good glass. Bodies depreciate very quickly, a good lens will see you good for the rest of your professional career and will then be used by your grand-kids.

I picked up the little (and cheap) D5000 for playing around in the studio at home and it is capable of producing outstanding results: http://www.pbase.com/availablelightimages/portraits ( Images taken with D700/D5000 and a couple with a Canon 1DsII)

It'll all boil down to your budget, both these cameras may be overkill for you in terms of the financial outlay to back up either with at least one, possibly two good lenses... The AF on the 5DII is not as fast as the D700, but the sensors are very far apart, but for fashion I would say this isn't an issue... The 50D was a disappointment for my needs, but I was shooting birds in flight in poor light. ISO performance above 400 poor, and not that great even at 400. My sister-in-law now uses it in the studio though and at 200 ISO in a well-lit studio produces very fine images indeed. Your specific needs need to be clear in terms of what and where you intend to shoot. Well lit glamor/fashion, or dingy underground hardcore fashion?

Hopes ome of that helps...

best wishes, Alister

prinothcat
 
Posts: 662

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:40 pm


Here's another thought out of left field as it were. But, are you going to school to study photography? It sounds that way. If so check to see IF they even want you to show up with a digital. They may want you to use film. Film is how many places teach the subtleties of exposure and process techniques. Most good schools should be teaching you to be an artist, and film is where artistry is. Everything else is computer science. Just my opinion mind you. But do look into what equipment you are expected to show up with, if you're starting a photography program, before you go and invest in a set up.

availablelightimages
 
Posts: 69

Re: Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Post Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:00 am


prinothcat wrote: Most good schools should be teaching you to be an artist, and film is where artistry is. Everything else is computer science. Just my opinion mind you.


I think if you look at the vast majority of pro photographers these days, the general move has been to digital, and they are most definitely still artists. The principal of exposure theory, composition and art is identical regardless of capture medium. Likewise Photoshop isn't computer science, it too is part of the art, just because we don't use noxious chemicals any more doesn't make it less art.

Of course we all have our opinions and I respect yours.. and agree that the correct use of film is an art, but so is correct use of a DSLR... same same as we say here in Asia :-)

Next

Board index Equipment Digital Cameras Nikon D700 vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron