D700 V 5DmkII

Messages
1,919
Edit My Images
No
Anyone know of any test comparisons website reviews directly between these 2 cameras using similar lenses ?
 
They are really quite different cameras IMHO.

5D2 has a higher resolution sensor.

D700 has better high ISO performance, brilliant top spec AF, faster shooting with winder, integral flash.
 
They are really quite different cameras IMHO.

5D2 has a higher resolution sensor.

D700 has better high ISO performance, brilliant top spec AF, faster shooting with winder, integral flash.

The part about high ISO performance is very subjective, so it seems, because depending who you speak to, the Canon is better but others think the Nikon is :shrug:

Probably six of one and half a dozen of the other. Also how big you intend to print will also have a factor, as obviously cropping out of the resolution of the Canon is a lot more viable than the D700,,
 
That might have been a good point you were making markta, but I'm not sure it was necessary to say it thrice!
 
I know someone who bought a 5D MKII (being a Canon shooter), had it for a week and replaced it with a D700, citing the low light/high iso performance as the reason...
 
I had a Canon 5D MKII for a bit, and didn't think there was much in it noise wise.

They is 100% pixel peeping (where the Canon shows more noise) but if you print then there is no difference worth mentioning, and you can certain print larger.

I find my Sony A900 while more noisy at 100%, allows for very good prints as there is a lot more detail. So with that extra detail, you can add some NR, and still get a more detailed print than the D700 at equal print sizes.

Personally I don't think you can answer a vs. question and to my mind, there are very different animals so vs. really makes no sense.
 
Anyone know of any test comparisons website reviews directly between these 2 cameras using similar lenses ?

List what you want from a camera in order of importance, then see which one fits the bill for your primary requirements, Ken Rockwell does have a comparison on his site, which knowing KR will have pictures, he also lists what each is good / bad at.

If for example your top requirement was speed of focus, then build quality / weathersealing you would be looking at the D700, if it was resolution, then lightweight you would be heading towards the 5D.

To be honest I would always be wary of any comparison due to bias, better processing of one cameras image to the others.In my opinion if you took the same image with both and printed them at A3 I doubt that you would be able to see much difference.
 
I know someone who bought a 5D MKII (being a Canon shooter), had it for a week and replaced it with a D700, citing the low light/high iso performance as the reason...

i agree . the D700 low light ISO performance is top notch ... but most of my work is at iso 200 studio / wedding work and printing out at A1 size ..
 
i agree . the D700 low light ISO performance is top notch ... but most of my work is at iso 200 studio / wedding work and printing out at A1 size ..

In that case a Canon 5D MKII, Sony A900 or Nikon D3X are all better choices.
 
Here is a shot I captured at 6400 ISO on the 5DmkII, handheld

Image links to hires version for those that want a closeup.

Exposure: 0.033 sec (1/30)
Aperture: f/2.5
Focal Length: 85 mm
Exposure: -0.69
ISO Speed: 6400
Exposure Bias: 0EV

Had me gobsmacked. To put it into perspective, the guy next to me had to sit his camera on a tripod for 10 seconds to get anything near that.
 
Nice pic :)

I've always thought Canon have got their electronics right.. lovely rich, natural colours. Very pleasing to a film-head like me :D

A.
 
You need to consider the lenses you intend to purchase too. If you then find that using the finest lenses the camera is letting you down, you are probably a professional at the top of their game and could just purchase the other body.

It would be hard at that level to make a 'wrong' choice.

If I was spending that money, I would want to get hold of each and take some photos myself.

Graham
 
but most of my work is at iso 200 studio / wedding work and printing out at A1 size ..

I dunno, they seem like polar opposites to me.
Total control lighting in studio and give us a clue lighting of weddings.
If its mostly total control lighting, it hardly matters what body you use provided it meets res requirements.
 
Here is a shot I captured at 6400 ISO on the 5DmkII, handheld

Image links to hires version for those that want a closeup.


Had me gobsmacked. To put it into perspective, the guy next to me had to sit his camera on a tripod for 10 seconds to get anything near that.

As a D3 owner, that's incredibly noisey even for 6400, and I'm not even pixel peeping. But then that's why I went for the D3, I need it's high ISO performance.

I really don't think that there's any point readin reviews comparing a D700 with a 5DII, they're so different. If you know what you want to shoot and under what condition then you should know which one to go for.

As with the 5D, Canon have concentrated on the sensor with the 5DII so you miss out on other aspects. Nikon have produced a more rounded camera in the D700.

I've always said, that if you shoot landscapes or studio portraiture then the 5DII will probably suit best. If you need better AF or low light performance then the D700 is the right body.
 
Here is a shot I captured at 6400 ISO on the 5DmkII, handheld

Image links to hires version for those that want a closeup.

Exposure: 0.033 sec (1/30)
Aperture: f/2.5
Focal Length: 85 mm
Exposure: -0.69
ISO Speed: 6400
Exposure Bias: 0EV

Had me gobsmacked. To put it into perspective, the guy next to me had to sit his camera on a tripod for 10 seconds to get anything near that.

Looks to me like you may need to clean your sensor, above model's right shoulder, appears like dust bunny/droplet @ f2.5!
 
Back
Top