Canon5D low light performance

J

Jan Solo

Messages
131
Edit My Images
Yes
I have made some money recently and am considering a full frame camera. My preferred photography is low light flash free candid/portraits. I have been considering the nikon d700, a Market leader in my price range at this type of photography, with the right lens, apparently showing little or no noise at high ISO.

But how does the 5D compare? I have been Reading all online comparisons, but wanted to hear it from those own it.

I am currently a Canon man, but have 5k to spend so new glass is on my shopping list. I have seen that for all I want, I could go the nikon route for a grand less then the canon, but am concerned about swapping brands.

So comments grow actual owners would be appreciated!
 
Can't tell you about the 5D, but if I could afford to get the D700 with lenses I would go for it without a second thought. However as a Canon man, you may not be familiar/like the way Nikon bodies work so probably best to try it out in a shop and see if you can get a long with it first. I can assure you the D700's low light performance is something worth writting home about! ;)
 
In low light you won't beat the D700 for the money, a 5D will set you back the best part of a grand secondhand so the difference isn't huge now, the limiting factor is lenses, the price of nikon gear has gone through the roof so make sure the lenses you want are in budget before changing
 
I love the 5D and my preferred photography is the same as yours.

People talk about the low light/high ISO performance of cameras and often neglect the lenses. Canon have some fantastic low light lenses, the 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8 is an absolute belter for the money. :)

I've shot in low light up to ISO1600 and I would recommend you have a look at http://www.duncankerridge.co.uk/

Duncan recently upgraded to the MkII but most of the last two years work was on the 5D.
 
Low light ability is a 5D USP, or was for me at least.

Think it's safe to say Canon prices too have 'gone through the roof', as well as Nikon.
 
When shooting at a wedding I don't even look at the lcd after cecking the histogram on the first shot in a venue, it drains the battery and I don't have time. I check the first shot for exposure and switch it off.

My six year old stepdaughter keeps looking at the back of my medium format for a screen. lol
 
5d is a great camera - used with a 85mm f1.2, it gives really great portrait results.

However I own the D700 as it is just more versatile:

1. Add a grip and you can get to 8fps.
2. Better AF (IMO).
3. Built in flash can come in handy for fill in.
4. Better low light capability.
5. Better build quality (again IMO).

I shoot some action, some portraits and some landscapes and the D700 just gives me more options. If you just wanted portrait and landscape the 5D would still do a top job with the right glass.

Neither camera would be a disaster and in the end like all of these threads..........

It depends what you want from the camera;)
 
I am swinging nikon. For the difference of a grand it should be a no brainer. I forgot to mention it is a 5D Mark II. I am sure that I can pick up the controls of the nikon, I have heard that electronic equipment comes with instructions, never seen them myself, but my wife has told me about them.

I am going to have a look at them tomorrow.
 
The 5D is currently the best value for money camera out there. No question. I love the 5D, brilliant camera.

It's not as good as the D700 by a long way, but you can pick up a 2nd hand 5D for around £700. I got both of mine for that much and they are both in 'as new' condition.
 
As a Canon stalwart and owner of the 5D I have to admit that it's blown away by the D700 under low light.

The Nikon auto ISO feature makes low light shooting a breeze.

If I was just entering the market for a fully featured dSLR, Nikon would be getting my money right now.
 
I've covered this before but there's no harm going over it in a thread as relevent as this....seems we're talking 5D2 now and not 5D.

Canon and Nikon's sensors are very very similar in the signal to noise ratio and the more simple read noise parameter. It's how they have decided to present the results in the final output file that differs.

To reduce the final perceived noise output, then clipping of the bottom end of the dynamic range is undertaken....typically the luminance areas where the noise manifests itself. Nikon raise the baseline more than Canon and will therefore look cleaner out of the camera. This means that Nikon are sacrificing a little more dynamic range than Canon....throwing away a little more data that may be contaminated.

Choice of what is suitable really comes down to how much PP you find acceptable. Canon will require a little more noise correction but have the benefit of potentially more detail in the shadows whilst Nikon files have already discarded the data leaving less work and detail.

If you want more time shooting and less in PP then Nikon does the job for you. If maximum detail is your thing and you've got time on dark winter evenings then Canon might be the way to go.

Bob
 
Jan Solo said:
As I am doubtful to go beyond ISO 1600, is it safe to say both cameras will be noise free?
Click to expand...

It will depend on whether you need to increase the exposure time to compensate for keeping the Iso down. Increasing the sensor gain (raising the Iso) increases noise...as does having longer exposure times. It's pretty safe to say that doubling the time is a cleaner option than doubling the Iso whichever body you choose. Faster glass will reduce the need to pick either speed or Iso ;)

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
Faster glass will reduce the need to pick either speed or Iso ;)

Bob
Click to expand...

Which is one reason why I'd much rather invest in good fast glass than upgrade a body before I really need to. :thumbs: The glass will still be there when the body is beyond depreciation.
 
Been to have a play and I am none the wiser! I very much liked the Nikon, although at first impression found the buttons to be awkward, but it is something I will get used to. The LCD screen was excellent.

The canon, well it's a Canon and all of their cameras are the same build etc. I think I will go the Nikon route due to cost and that it is a good all rounder. The high ISO capabilities are always held in high regard.
 
been canon man al my life just moved to d700 and added a 50mm 1.4 G for same price a body only 5d.

all i can say is outstanding landscape and also portraits at 3200 no worries no flash.
the last picture shadows on my porfolio is taken ysterday with itthe iq is outstanding.

feels tons better than the 5d as well, more like a camera doesnt feel like a lump of plastic

amazing piece of equipment well worth the price, and with 5k the lens available are stunning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top