Moving to Dark Side

pretty well i would say, from any tests I've seen it's not far behind the D800, if not as good.
 
gman said:
I think there's too many different types of photography to cover with the specs you require and with a budget of £2K.
Click to expand...

http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/us...lenses/nikon-af-s-70-200mm-f/2.8g-if-ed-vr-1/ £835

http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/us...fit-lenses/nikon-af-s-28-70mm-f/2.8d-if-ed-1/ 599

http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/us...used-nikon-digital-slr-cameras/nikon-d7000-1/ 529

£37 quid left

okay so its a compromise on the body , but imo its better to get decent glass and a cheaper body , than vice versa

you can cover potraits with a combination of the 28-7- and the short end of the 80-200 , until you can afford another few hundred quid to get either a 50mm or 85mm f1.8 (nikon dont seem to offer an equivalent of the supercheap nifty fifty found in the canon range)
 
Last edited:
gman said:
How does the D7000 ISO performance stack up against the full frames though? On paper there's quite a jump, but I've never compared the two myself. The D7000 does look like a good option though, especially as someone has mentioned it does ok in the weather.
Click to expand...

I think it's about 1-1.5 stops behind the D700 if my memory of these things serves me right.... at 6400 it's still very good although you get the obvious decrease in dynamic range (not sure how many stops). No doubt there will be countless comparisons somewhere on the web...

EDIT: this might help http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond7000/20
 
Last edited:
If just were in the ops position I'd probably get a D600, 28-300 and also a 50mm f1.8g

That would cover just about everything and there is DX mode at a very reasonable MP for those times when further reach is required. I'm sure the D600's ISO performance is good enough for most situations with a slower lens and for those other times / DOF stuff there would be the 50mm.

I can't think of many situations where the D7000's AF isn't good enough and they share the same system.

I would be thinking D700 / D3 but if I were getting a FF it would have to have a large number of pixels for cropping or DX mode which I'm sure would save money on longer lenses short term.

D800 is slightly restricted on advised lenses.

I don't think there's anything wrong with going down the D7k route but longer term there is more flexibility in the D600...
 
gman said:
How does the D7000 ISO performance stack up against the full frames though? On paper there's quite a jump, but I've never compared the two myself. The D7000 does look like a good option though, especially as someone has mentioned it does ok in the weather.
Click to expand...

Not too far away from a D3/D700 in terms of measurable test data though I've always thought that the full frame examples looked cleaner some how. My own comparison was a D5100 vs a D700 which in sensor terms is the same as D7000 vs D3. Either way though the D7000 does very nicely in low light.
 
gman said:
How does the D7000 ISO performance stack up against the full frames though? On paper there's quite a jump, but I've never compared the two myself. The D7000 does look like a good option though, especially as someone has mentioned it does ok in the weather.
Click to expand...

It's certainly good enough...I've had mine in the rain and as many know will use the whole of it's ISO spectrum... but the D600 is almost 2 stops better and the more MP is a tasty option.

Landscapes aren't a problem for dx lenses, look at the sigma 8-16 and of course there are plenty of other fantastic ultrawide lenses.
 
just to mention theres a damn near mint (14K) activations D3 in the classifieds (cheng) where he wants no less than £1250

it could be an option to get this and the 80-200 i linked to above and leave the other lenses until you can afford them , then save up for something at the short end

it depends what you do most of - if its predominantly airshows and nature that could be an option

( I must admit that although i'm prettty wedded to canon, because of the ammount of glass ive got - when the D3 first came out I very nearly made the jump. Had the head gasket and gearbox not gone pop on my car i'd probably be shooting nikon now)
 
big soft moose said:
(nikon dont seem to offer an equivalent of the supercheap nifty fifty found in the canon range)
Click to expand...

The D7000 has an AF motor in the body so can use any Nikon fit AF lens, including the older, cheaper (and arguably better) pre AF-S lenses which are cheap as chips 2nd hand.
 
Andy77 said:
Ok guys im selling all of my canon gear and going to try out the dark side me thinks, ill have a budget of £1500 for body a couple of lens, want a good body capable of good iso performance, fast fps ect, type of photography i do is portraits, landscapes, wildlife, airshows ect, so looking for 2 pieces of lass to cover these types of shooting if possible.

Advice would be greatly apprieciated

Thanks Andy
Click to expand...

This thread seems like a car crash at the moment and the OP has fled the scene :puke: :D

A radical alternative solution. The 5D MKII hits good ISO performance and is ideal for portrait and landscapes. Keep that camera and buy a second body like the 1D MKIII or 7D for his wildlife and aviation photography. Just a thought?

Would help if the OP wasn't AWOL :D :shrug: :thinking: :wave:
 
pete.rush said:
A radical alternative solution. The 5D MKII hits good ISO performance and is ideal for portrait and landscapes. Keep that camera and buy a second body like the 1D MKIII or 7D for his wildlife and aviation photography. Just a thought?
Click to expand...

Not that radical. The 7D was suggested at about post #30 or so and I repeated the second body option a bit later.

According to some we aren't allowed to air ideas like that though!

I honestly don't understand the idea of chopping in some very good lenses, and a decent body, to finance what at best would be a very compromised solution when a second body could fulfil the requirement.

I fully understand the D700 & D7000 suggestions, but they don't offer much above the combination of a 5D2 and 7D solution.

Unless there's some input from Andy, then no-one is likely to be any the wiser either.
 
flog it all and get a sony rx1. ff dslr's are bulky over rated pinholes compared to that.




;)
 
Sell the 300mm and bag a 400mm L ... I switched from Canon to Nikon but nothing at a reasonable price will beat the 400mm. The rest of the gear is nice, beautiful with a 5D so you won't benefit much from a change IQ wise. Nothing in Nikon stable will beat it enough to bother switching ... as so many have said ;-) if it's as much about stayin' interested sell the 24-70 and bag a nice Zeiss prime. Enjoy a leap in quality and usability, tho MF only.
 
As cute and fluffy as Ewoks are, Stormtroopers rule! lol
 
twist said:
...... but Darth Vader rules the Stormtroopers ;)
Click to expand...

And the Dark Side rules Darth Vader, so if Nikon is the Dark Side we can conclude that Nikon rules the Universe? Ahhhh...it's so nice when you come across the simple laws of physics.
 
gman said:
And the Dark Side rules Darth Vader, so if Nikon is the Dark Side we can conclude that Nikon rules the Universe? Ahhhh...it's so nice when you come across the simple laws of physics.
Click to expand...

Precisely
 
gman said:
And the Dark Side rules Darth Vader, so if Nikon is the Dark Side we can conclude that Nikon rules the Universe? Ahhhh...it's so nice when you come across the simple laws of physics.
Click to expand...

Which in turn would imply that Canon cameras are the preferred weapon of the Jedi, who...if I may remind you... comprehensively whooped the 'Darkside's' booty...


...eventually...

...after six films and still counting...

...oh God, there's more of them...
 
I suppose technically the Dark Side were comprehensively whooped bootywise after just 3 films - the 3 prequels came later! ;)
 
So when ones sells up all of their Canon gear and moves over to Nikon, can we now refer to this as 'doing an Anakin'? :)
 
Last edited:
DemiLion said:
Which in turn would imply that Canon cameras are the preferred weapon of the Jedi, who...if I may remind you... comprehensively whooped the 'Darkside's' booty...


...eventually...

...after six films and still counting...

...oh God, there's more of them...
Click to expand...

When we the Nikon whoop them :D
 
You'll have to wait until the 7th film produced by Disney :D by then, the seven drawfs, snow white, mary poppins and the rest of the gang will be on the darkside, until then its 6 : 0 Canon OK 5 : 1 (I'll give you Empire Strikes Back) :D :wacky: :nono: :LOL: :dummy:

As for the OP, he seems to have gone missing, perhaps he's Homeward Bound :LOL: or gone to Find Nemo :D
 
Last edited:
DemiLion said:
Which in turn would imply that Canon cameras are the preferred weapon of the Jedi, who...if I may remind you... comprehensively whooped the 'Darkside's' booty...


...eventually...

...after six films and still counting...

...oh God, there's more of them...
Click to expand...

And of course, Luke does technically turn to the dark side in the novellas set after ROTJ....
 
wtf? Traitor!!!!

110122_5a.jpg
 
Jesus christ what the hell has happened here talk about ranting and raving lol, ive been very busy recently and only had time to pop on here and there for a few mins at a time. Just to put things right my camera bag has not been updated for awhile so things have changed alot, yes i still have the 5d mk2, canon 50mm 1.8, canon 85mm 1.8, canon 40d with genuine grip, canon 430ex flashgun. I'm looking into nikon just to try something different really, and i didnt say i was defo making the swap as i put ( try out the dark side ME THINKS)... Dont get me wrong i love the 5d mk2 but the AF is not the best in my honest opinion, yes i have the 40d also which has better FPS but lacks the ISO performance and cropping capabilities. Do i go to nikon (i dont know).I have no long lens for aviation/wildlife anymore, nothing wide for landscapes ect. All of this is due to been out of work for awile now and had to sell off some gear to make way as such. So this is how it is...so do i sell all the canon gear and make a move to nikon or sell some of the canon gear and buy some used glass for my needs e.g aviation/wildlife/landscapes/portraits. do i sell all the gear and go for a different body if staying with canon or keep the 5d mk2/40d. Before i even posted this thread i was thinking of a 7d but heard so many bad comments about noise and high iso performance, but the AF is supposed to be superb.

So guys stop all the squabbling between yourselves as it aint worth it.

Hope im not going to start another riat with this post :confused:.
 
7d has great AF. Noise is same as other crop canons. 8 fps should do nicely :)
 
With that being said Andy,

I don't think you have a real reason to swap...if you had your heart set on trying a different brand then different story - but it just seems like you want a little better performance. I'm sure you can either get this in a Canon range right now or wait a couple of months and I'm sure the next body (whatever it is) will meet your requirements.

The thing that is on Canon's side is the 100-400mm. Nikon have the 80-400mm which is pretty good but if you're talking about AF speed and performance, you'll not be very impressed.
 
Rather than swapping systems outright, why not hire a Nikon alternative for a few days to see if it offers what you want/need? You might be able to strike up a deal with the rental compny (if they also do sales) whereby they give you the rental costs back if you buy the rented kit from them.
 
Both manufacturers have great cameras, canons latest offerings are great as are nikons.
No reason to change i'd say
 
Nod said:
Rather than swapping systems outright, why not hire a Nikon alternative for a few days to see if it offers what you want/need? You might be able to strike up a deal with the rental compny (if they also do sales) whereby they give you the rental costs back if you buy the rented kit from them.
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea..... At least that would give you some experience of a Nikon body. If you did move to Nikon, personally I would probably concentrate on your portrait and landscape lenses with the body and look at getting a aviation / wildlife lens at a later date. Suggestions of a 70-200mm as aviation / wildlife lens just doesn't cut the mustard. Most airshows even with the crop factor you need 400mm and with wildlife (depending on your subject matter) more like 500mm.

Another idea is although we all know the 5D MKII has issues with its autofocus system, however, there has been many people that have worked with this and used this camera with success to take action photography. It's all down to working within the cameras limitations. Forget fps, is a bit of a hit and miss for anything but the pro bodies (1D series), all to do with shutter lag and dedicated autofocus systems as part of the sensor, where as all the entry / intermediate / semi pro bodies don't. You would be better off changing the way you take action images than just buying a camera for fps.

As for your current set up, your lacking a landscape lens and long zoom, personally I might look at getting a lens(es) rather than changing systems because I think you can work with your current bodies with just a change in the way you take your action photographs.
 
I'd sell your current bodies - which will net you about 1200-1300 quid, and get either a 60D or a 7D you should have about £500 quid left which is enough (just) to get a long lens like the sigma 150-500, or a sigma 70-200 f2.8 and a TC

if you only shoot landscapes occasionally you can pick up a second hand 18-55 kit lens for peanuts (or get one thrown in with the body when you buy it)

If landscapes are more important to you than action you could use the left over 500 quid to get a 10-20 instead (in fact those are generally about 300 s/h , leaving you 200 for wine, women, and song)
 
big soft moose said:
I'd sell your current bodies - which will net you about 1200-1300 quid, and get either a 60D or a 7D you should have about £500 quid left which is enough (just) to get a long lens like the sigma 150-500, or a sigma 70-200 f2.8 and a TC

if you only shoot landscapes occasionally you can pick up a second hand 18-55 kit lens for peanuts (or get one thrown in with the body when you buy it)

If landscapes are more important to you than action you could use the left over 500 quid to get a 10-20 instead (in fact those are generally about 300 s/h , leaving you 200 for wine, women, and song)
Click to expand...

How is 60D going to help with AF, and how is 18-55 good for landscapes? He might as well buy nikon rather than the kit from this list.

IMHO, 7D or 1D are the minimum bodies for OP considering 5DII doesn't get the job done.
 
daugirdas said:
How is 60D going to help with AF, and how is 18-55 good for landscapes? He might as well buy nikon rather than the kit from this list.

IMHO, 7D or 1D are the minimum bodies for OP considering 5DII doesn't get the job done.
Click to expand...

because the 60D has decent AF , and because the 18 -55 is wide enough for landscapes :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top