Full Frame Glory (Canon or Nikon)

gman

gman

Messages
11,203
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
I've decided to go full-frame but am wondering which would generally be better:

Brand new Nikon D700
Brand new Canon 5D MkII
Second Hand Nikon D3

Would anyone with experience of them be able to help out a little here?

It would be to cover wedding photography, studio photography and also to be able to keep up with my dog in full flight. Photography is just a hobby at the moment but I like to plan for the future also. I prefer the full sized feel of cameras so would get a grip for the first two straight away.

The weatherproofing, full size and high fps of the D3 is definitely giving me food for thought with going second hand for one but is it that much better (or worse) than the other two?

:)
 
Last edited:
From what I gather, the D3 is better for sports, and in turn I would expect it to be better for fast moving animals. I have a D700 and can get 8fps with the grip, and coupled with the 24-70 it really is my dream machine, fantastic in low light and perfect for weddings and studio.
 
aligibbs said:
What lenses do you have now? Will any be comparable? This should affect your decision :)
Click to expand...

No serious investment made with lenses so can go either brand.

The 24-70mm F2.8 is the first lens I'll get whether I go Nikon or Canon!
 
david1701 said:
5d2 - it makes your dick bigger ;)
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you mean the Canon lens mount will break and the 950g lens will fall off and onto your 'one eyed wonder snake' causing severe swelling? Maybe I should change to Nikon after all? :eek:
 
Maybe I asked a silly question?
 
david1701 said:
5d2 - it makes you a bigger dick ;)
Click to expand...

Corrected for accuracy.

As always, try them before you buy them. IIRC, a D700 with grip and a charger for the bigger battery is almost as expensive as a D3.
 
Nod said:
Corrected for accuracy.

As always, try them before you buy them. IIRC, a D700 with grip and a charger for the bigger battery is almost as expensive as a D3.
Click to expand...

Not to mention it's also bigger!
 
Not while Nikon are giving the grips away for free they are not! ;)
 
Result! :)

TBH any of them will do a decent job it all depends where your own personal priorities lie.

5DII has huge resolution (and huge files to deal with) but if you much prefer shooting loose and cropping to suit then that might fit your style. Flash system and AF not in the same league as either Nikon.

D700, pick of the bunch for me. Carrying two all day I appreciate the lighter weight but I also have the option of attaching the grip for the extra battery life (not needed yet but we have winter on the way) and the portrait orientation. Also has built in commander for flash.

D3 bulletproof and had dual card slots for extra backups on the move. Needs flash or SU commander for off camera flash.

So it's all down to your personal priorities.
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
As always, try them before you buy them. IIRC, a D700 with grip and a charger for the bigger battery is almost as expensive as a D3.
Click to expand...

Only if you buy the ridiculously expensive Nikon grip, Nikon battery,Nikon end cap and Nikon charger.

Third party ones are just as good and a damned site cheaper.

I`ll sit back and wait for the OEM only brigade........:)
 
Never looked back since I got the D3 - both bought second hand with very low shutter counts - and at only a few pounds more than a D700 without a grip! I love the full size bodies - much nicer to work with for me anyway. Try before you buy!
 
As I understand it the Canon has better high ISO performance than the D700 or the D3 (though the D3s is better again), I reckon it's a stop better, also those extra MP can be useful. However the Nikons have a better AF system so it comes down to which feature is most important to you.

I have a 5DmkII (I already had Canon lenses so didn't consider changing to Nikon as it would have been too expensive) and love it. Sure the files are huge, but they are lovely to work with and the fact that I can shoot at ISO3200 with no thought of doing any NR is great. I've used mine for weddings, portraits and lifestyle shoots and it performs very well, though the AF does struggle to keep up with my puppy when she's racing round the garden.
 
Unless you buy the grip and run it on AA batteries or the ENEL4a the D700 is 5 FPS

£1700 for a D700 £200 for the grip, when the D3 was £3,500 it seemed like a good deal but while the D3 is still available new for £2,569 it was a price I couldn't ignore and I don't regret it for a second, everything about the D3 feels top spec.

If you buy it you won't regret it, especially if you're worried about getting it wet
 
I agree with you both and would have got two D3 rather than D700, but and it is a big but, I borrowed a D3 before making my mind up and Mrs Frac used it for an evening shoot we did. She found it too heavy and cumbersome for her,as we do weddings together, I opted for the 700 over the 3.
 
Not much coming from the Canon camp and sounds more like a toss up between the D700 and D3. Thanks for the advice so far, I'm still undecided though.
 
I am going to tell you how i see it but others will not agree.

I had the D700 and loved it but moved to Canon as family members had Canon and a vast array of lenses i could use.
I dont do video on my camera as i have a good HD camcorder.

I brought a used 5D MKII and the first thing i noticed was how basic the menus are, how very limited the AF IS and on board options were so limited compared to the D700.

Both the D700 and the 5D MKII take great photos, Canon lenses are cheaper, if you have not had a D700 in your hands a 5D MKII might seem quiet nice, if you have had a D700 in your hands then it will feel like a Dinosaur when it comes to things like features.

If you feel any of these would benefit you or are something you would like on your camera then it has to be a D700.
51 point AF with tracking, on board photo editing, D lighting, virtual horizon on screen and view finder, ability to use DX crop 5mp pics if needed, built in flash, enough menu options to keep you up all night changing them and loads more i cant remember.

The reason there are not many people putting up a serious fight for the 5D MKII is the fact that Nikon have the basic FF camera all sewn up which pains me as i am a Canon man through and through.
I sold my 5D MKII in favour of a 7D which i find to be a far better camera than the 5D MKII my hope is now Canon are so far behind nikon they will come up with a 5D MKIII early next year..
 
postcardcv said:
As I understand it the Canon has better high ISO performance than the D700 or the D3 (though the D3s is better again), I reckon it's a stop better, also those extra MP can be useful. However the Nikons have a better AF system so it comes down to which feature is most important to you.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression the opposite was true, the D700 and D3 cannot be touched at high ISO?
 
Thanks for the detailed post GRECIAN (and others). Pixels have never interested me and I feel 10mp is more than enough. I'm thinking the D3 (as I would like the weatherproofing) is the way forward and perhaps the 1Ds MkIII is more of a comparison - but a hell of a lot more expensive!
 
Being as indecisive as I am, I have had both. For low light and AF, the D700 wins over the 5D mkII. I have shot the D700 for weddings and events at ISO 6400 ambient light and the files are still cleaner than the 5D mkII shooting similar situations at ISO 3200 ambient light. But I prefer the colours from the Canon bodies, nothing that couldn't be tweaked in PP though.
 
I have the D700 (D3 has the same sensor) and it is better than than 5Dmk2 interms of ISO (having shot with a 5Dmk2 user). However, I am really impressed at the files from the 5Dmk2 and the level of detail in them.

I understand the AF is significantly better on the D700/D3 than on the 5Dmk2 which is more aimed at studio, landscape and video rather than action and low light.

Personally if I had to choose I think it would be difficult, I would suggest getting your hands on each of them (the 5Dmk2 and D700 with and without grips) as may depend on your hand size which is better for you (I personally find the canon grips bulky compared to Nikon).
 
Can I just hijack this a bit and ask how the D700 and 5DII compare at low iso?
 
Being a hardened Canon man for a number of years I think I can give you an unbiased opinion. Get a Nikon.

The 5D is/was notorious for failing to focus at critical sharpness. Over the years I've had countless photos which looked fine on the LCD but back at the motel/home/wherever and seen on the big screen, many a time it had missed the focus by a small amount. The 5D II hasn't changed that - it has the same focusing system. That's why I never upgraded my 5D to a II. For my unrepeatable shots I'll take more than one just to make sure, and since I've been checking the lens focusing scale and comparing it to real distances, failures have dropped significantly. The usual problem with mine was failing to focus at infinity or near. The lens travels past infinity and defocuses.

In the studio, it will be a great camera. I'm not sure how it would cope with your dog though. I've had plenty of success shooting jets, but then again a lot of them are manually preset focusing.

I think Nikon would be your safest bet.
 
Dman said:
Not any more, that finished last month. I got in with three days to spare!
Click to expand...

Phottix do a perfectly adequate grip for the D700 (D300s) for about £50 I have two and they've been hammered and faultless. If it ever breaks, which I doubt, I'll buy another.
 
Davie said:
Can I just hijack this a bit and ask how the D700 and 5DII compare at low iso?
Click to expand...

Can't speak for the Canon but the D700 was awesome shooting stained glass window lit interiors of churches in France and Greece this summer. So much so that I set it to auto ISO, min 1/125s and aperture priority and it ranged up to 3200 with fantastic results; A3 prints are fine. Only at 6400 the 'grain' was mildly intrusive but depending on the subject it can add atmosphere anyway. An unbelievably good camera as is the D300s. I shoot with both extensively and do model portfolio's too. Never had reason to feel the Nikon's inadequate vs equivalent Canon cameras. Only my mates Mamiya / Phase One is noticeably better. Other than that its user technique.

Note the native ISO of Nikon is 200 vs the Canon's 100; there's a stop more sensitivity there!

Those 'in the know' buy Nikon, those in the 'show' buy Canon :lol:
 
If you don't mind the size and weight, get a D3.
I've got a D3 and D3x and the 'X' never gets used as the 'Three' is good enough (better than good, in fact) for 99% of my work...

I bought two 2nd-hand D3 bodies when I handed my issued kit back in and I'm seriously considering selling the 'X' to fund a D3s...
 
AliB said:
Not while Nikon are giving the grips away for free they are not! ;)
Click to expand...

Jessops might have stopped but the deal is still on at Jacobs untill the end of August.
 
I shoot a 5D2. Iso noise is figures, in real life there is virtually no difference. Nikon has the better AF. Canon is regarded by many as the best sensor made.

I have shot sports on 5D2, I shoot live music on my 5D2 all the time, and it is fine for me. Video is better on the 5D2 if that is a factor for you?

To me it is 50/50 on which to go for. I was already Canon so stayed Canon.

Basically either will do you well, and are used by several Pro's. Go try both, see which feels better in your hands, and make your decisions based on that.

Both cameras have their Pros and Cons. Maybe hire both if possible and try them over a cpl days take a series of shots with each and then you will be more informed to make your decision.
 
Don't even get me started... I've only just settled on the 5DMKii and I'm flakey as hell so a shopping trip could be on the cards for the smallest of reasons, quick hide my wallet...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top