D700 or 5DMk11

P

Peter

Messages
528
Edit My Images
Yes
I don't want to start the old Nikon v Canon thing again but just want an answer to this question.

For a given final image size do the extra pixels on the 5DMK11 sensor make for a sharper picture compared to a Nikon D700 or for that matter a D3. Any examples would be of interest.

I currently have a D200 and have vowed only to buy FX compatible lenses now but am wondering whether I need to shelve or keep Nikon DX for sports and extra reach but for FF go the Canon route as I cannot see myself ever affording a D3X if that is the natural competition to a 5DMK11.

Anyone else had this dilemma?

Pete :thinking:
 
You might not want to start a Nikon v Canon thing but i bet you do :D
 
Absolutley Pete!

I changed from Canon to Nikon! :)

The D700 IS the competitor to the 5DII

The D3 is the competitor of the 1DIV

The reason I changed was that I could get a total package in the D700 whereas I felt the 5DII was lacking in some of the features that I value.

I did have a 1Ds and a 5D and it was on upgrading the 5D I made the swap. I just could not bring myself to buy a 5DII after trying the D700. I found that the 1Ds with 51 point AF was blindingly good in focusing compared to my 5D and the 5DII was no better. In low light it would hunt all over the place just when I didn't want it to. So if I had upgraded I would have ended up with good focus in one body and good high ISO in the other. Not ideal.

With the D700 I got both in one body. I did some test shots thanks to SimonTALM on here, took them home and printed at A3+, perfect straight out of camera. I find the files from the Nikon are so much "cleaner" I don't have to do much to them at all.

Best thing to do it test it yourself. Take a card to a good camera shop and try the same shots with both, see how you get on.
 
d700 focusses amazingly, 5dII has superior IQ - can be rendered useless by the AF

its a bloody hard one and it winds me up quite often as I have a 1d3 and 5dII
 
Ohhhh tough one, I'd say on just playing with the two that the 5Dmkii does slightly have the edge on IQ but the 51 point AF system on the D700, 300s D3 etc is a peach hence why I opted for the 300s over the slightly noisy 7D. The D700 does not have HD movie mode but the video in Nikon SLR's is lacking compared to the canon and that will remain for some time but personally I don't use it.

IF I had to choose.....

D700, as HD video is not a factor for me and I have the kit to run the body with no extra cost :thumbs:
 
Peter said:
For a given final image size do the extra pixels on the 5DMK11 sensor make for a sharper picture compared to a Nikon D700 or for that matter a D3. Any examples would be of interest.
Click to expand...

To answer that question, a resounding YES!
You'll find plenty of sample images from both cameras (I found a site which linked to full-size flickr photos but I can't find it now!).
I looked at lots of sample images, and I wouldn't want to give up the Canon's image quality now! For landscapes it is unbeatable unless you go for D3X or medium format.

Both cameras lack outer cross-type focus points. For that you need a pro body, or maybe the next revsions of both cameras will fix that.
 
Since you've already got a D200, I would definitely suggest the D700 over the Canon equivalent. Similar menu layout, same batteries and A3 prints are gorgeous! I dare say prints from the Canon are as well - in fact, any of the "prosumer" models from any of the manufacturers should give decent prints at that size.
 
User Name said:
Both cameras lack outer cross-type focus points. For that you need a pro body, or maybe the next revsions of both cameras will fix that.
Click to expand...

Eh? If you mean that the AF point distribution is not spread out enough, then yes, I'd agree - all current full frame DSLR's have a problem with this - its a technical/design issue that cannot be currently solved to do with physical placement of the sensors inside the body. It will be fixed with a hybrid focus system on the D4 - well, thats my best guess anyway, nobody knows for sure yet.

Anyway, ignoring the obscure/impossible.... D700 popup flash = win
 
I've just been through the whole decision process of D700 or 5DMkII

Here's why I bought the D700 (and a grip)

High ISO performance - I don't use it a lot, but it's great knowing it's there

Image quality - The 5D was sharp, but the D700 produced some creamy smooth tones and images to die for.

Rear Curtain Sync - For off camera / studio strobes. I wanted it, I needed it, 5D doesn't have it.

8fps - Yep, 8fps at full resolution giggled like a child first time I fired that rate off.

Lens prices - Canon 70-200 2.8 HOW MUCH!!! None of that "L" Glass snobbery either!

Popup Flash - Onboard CLS comander, no need to buy another speedlight.

Nikon let me join their Professional User program, Canon wanted me to buy another body and some more lenses too.

In addition to the above, I looked at all the photographers shooting today that I respect or find inspiring and the vast majority shoot Nikon, and so does Arkady ;)
 
Thanks for you replies. It would seem that image sharpness (whats IQ stand for?) is slightly irrelevant to overall sharpness bearing in mind the difference between the two sensors.

Given that the D700 produces similar results I am more than happy to stay with Nikon as I have come to love the camera. However I must confess not to knowing much about Canon. I suppose it's a bit like Mac versus PC really:whistling:

Pete
(mac owner)
 
Peter said:
Thanks for you replies. It would seem that image sharpness (whats IQ stand for?) is slightly irrelevant to overall sharpness bearing in mind the difference between the two sensors.

Given that the D700 produces similar results I am more than happy to stay with Nikon as I have come to love the camera. However I must confess not to knowing much about Canon. I suppose it's a bit like Mac versus PC really:whistling:

Pete
(mac owner)
Click to expand...

Don't be silly the MAC or "CANON" in this case is very much in the minority and therefore more fonldy thought of and not picked on, hence why the MAC has little viruses :lol:
 
I find it interesting how many people either couldn't read the initial question and understand it, or simply chose to ignore it.
I'm sure that we all know that the D700 has great AF and high ISO capability, but that really wasn't the question asked.
 
Which if you check I did answer when I said I printed a file from the D700 at A3+ and found it perfectly acceptable. I'm no stranger to blowing up the occasional image either. :)
showphoto.php
[/url][/IMG]

That was from the 1Ds. I think it's sharp enough ;)
 
JasonRS said:
....In addition to the above, I looked at all the photographers shooting today that I respect or find inspiring and the vast majority shoot Nikon....
Click to expand...

You sure about that :D

157ddgx.jpg


ev4z0m.jpg


This one especially, all wearing Nikon vests too! :lol:

2ikp8og.jpg
 
Hahaha! That's an awesome set of photos! I bet they were made to wear the Nikon vests by the event organisers. First shot made me laugh!

As for the 5DMkII vs D700 thing: work out what your needs are in a camera and look at which body provides the most (or better) of them ;)
 
Whilst i have appreciated all the responses I do have to agree with MR SUKEBE that my original question in some cases was overlooked. Ignoring all the benefits of one camera over another relating to focus etc.etc. which camera gives the sharper picture for a similar print size. To be more specific if I'm planning on shooting landscapes with a tripod mounted camera and seeking max DoF does one camera score over another or should I bite the bullet and buy a Phase One back for a Blad but I guess that's a whole different issue.:bonk:

I can keep this going for days!! :thumbs:


pete
 
User Name said:
You sure about that :D
Click to expand...

I think if you checked today you'd find that balance had changed ;)

Anyway, like Ali I changed from a substantial canon set up to a Nikon one so I'd only give one answer here, the D700.
 
I would have to say without direct experience of either of these cameras, I can see arguments for both, and as for the IQ side of things, surely this is totally dependant upon the glass put in front of them??
 
No need to apologise Ali. My comment wasn't directed at anyone in particular. At the end of the day I'm sure we could have long discussions about in camera and post camera sharpening etc.

As a current Nikon user I was just getting anxious as to whether to proceed buying FF lenses for the time when I can afford FF. It seems to be a close call and inevitably each brand has its fans.

This is a great forum and I have learnt alot from the many experienced contributors

Pete
(ex broadcast video Cameraman)
 
:) I know where you are Pete, just been through an £8.5K change over so it was not a decision taken lightly, believe me.

I'm a fan of both, virtually all the stuff on my website and all this year's advertising was shot on a Canon and I'll happily turn my hand to an occasional Olympus and my rather scrummy Hassy.

Bearing in mind your former career does the video functionality of the 5DII appeal?
 
Yes Ali you are right that the current fashion for shooting HD video footage with the 5DMK11 is wetting my appetite in terms of the quality you can get for the money. However it is not a true video camera in the ergonomic sense. The positioning of these FF sensors in traditional video bodies is the way forward. The recent announcement of the 4/3rds video cameras at NAB seems to be a step in the right direction



pete
 
The Nikon users on here seem to be absolutely determined to avoid actually answering the OP has posted.

Here's a thought. I'm guessing that as the resolution of the 5Dmk2 is similar to the D3x, that the IQ is not going to be horrendously different (if you exclude the manufacturers preferences in colour balance).
So maybe the OP should ask, does the D3x have better IQ than a D700?

That way the Nikon users won't have to possibly answer an uncomfortable question that might suggest that something on the market has better IQ than their D3/700.
 
Sukebe,

Define "IQ" and then explain how you measure it?

If you are talking "quid per megapixel" then surely the Sony A900 kicks both into touch - only we all know it doesn't....
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
The Nikon users on here seem to be absolutely determined to avoid actually answering the OP has posted.

Here's a thought. I'm guessing that as the resolution of the 5Dmk2 is similar to the D3x, that the IQ is not going to be horrendously different (if you exclude the manufacturers preferences in colour balance).
So maybe the OP should ask, does the D3x have better IQ than a D700?

That way the Nikon users won't have to possibly answer an uncomfortable question that might suggest that something on the market has better IQ than their D3/700.
Click to expand...

Not really, what's more the case is that no one on here has both a D700 and a 5DMkII with similar glass available at the same time to shoot the same frame under the same lighting conditions with exactly the same settings to give a fair comparison.

When I went through the process of deciding which to go for, I did exactly that, I got both cameras with 24-70 2.8 lenses, stuck them on a tripod and shot the same shots for comparison.

As I said above, the 5D was a little "sharper" but the the D700 has "creamier" tones. Depends what's important in your image as to what counts towards "IQ" (mines 155 btw).

If I wanted big pixel numbers, I'd have bought a Mamiya, which would have cost about the same as a 5D, 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8, and meant I could play with the big kids, and got a crazy 1/1600s sync speed too.. :)
 
Nothing to see here, just another D700 vs 5D II p155ing competion where all the usual suspects pitch up to see if they can be the first to get a shot in. :cuckoo::bang:
 
Trixter I'm sorry you feel like that. I started the thread with a genuine question and not with the intention of furthering a Canon v Nikon war. Maybe I should have asked "what is the cheapest way to get maximum pixels (or specifically sharpness) to the £ without shooting on film".

pete
 
Well, I answered that one in a roundabout tongue in cheek way - the Sony A900.
 
EdinburghGary said:
D700 I reckon, it has a nice non girly body :)
Click to expand...

Flawless Logic here! Love it :D

The D700 is basically everything I wanted in a camera, (including the fact that it DOESN'T have video) and for me, the handling spanks the canon. There are times when I think having more pixels would be nice, but then I remember that I made prints from my D50 (with a little help from genuine fractals) that were 40x60 inches. So res, unless you need the extreme, really doesn't matter.

My decision was helped by the fact that I already had Nikon glass, but even still, it's hard to fault the D700 when actually using it in the real world, and not "spec peeping".

D700 gets my vote.
 
It not an uncomfortable question at all and in response I asked some questions that might help to define the answer.

Like at what size? and define sharp?

You can spend half a lifetime analysing and reading test after test. The truth of the matter is that it depends entirely what you want to do with the output or we'd all be shooting with 60MP Hasselblads!

Now get the bee out of your bonnet about brand loyalty because I have none!
 
I do agree Ali

Now I'm just going to get my calculator out and work out the cost per pixel for that 60MP Hassel. Maybe I shouldn't write it off !!;)

pete
 
The camera does not matter, it really is not about what gear you have ... Just get out and take pictures, make nice images.

I like to spend more time and effort on my photography rather than my gear, of course I am still getting to know it all and undertsand how to use what I have but then I try to forget about it and just enjoy taking pictures.

I doubt very much if most people could really exploit any "real world" differences between the two.

Does resolution really matter when most images are posted 800 pixels wide at 72ppi on internet forums, and the seldom few printed huge from either Canon or Nikon FF sensor cameras are excellent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top