# 5D Mark II vs D700



## molested_cow (Feb 14, 2011)

Okok this is like a century old topic so please bear with me a bit.

I've held onto my SLR when every friend is betting on when I will move on to digital. So far they've been losing. It's not that I am reluctant to migrate to digital. I'd LOVE to, but I want to be able to use my Nikon lens on a full frame camera body.

With this requirement, I am limited to D700 (D3S is way out of my league). I have not gotten a D700 because I want something with video too, so I am hoping that its replacement will have HD video. Then I waited, and waited and waited... Now I am starting to think if I should just go with Canon instead.

The lens I have that I want to migrate to digital are:
Nikkor AiS F1.2 50mm
Nikkor AiS F2.8 20mm
Nikkor EF AF F4~5.6 70~300mm

Granted that they are not SUPER awesome lens, but they are definitely more than worth holding on to. I'd hate to give them up. ( I don't like to trade stuff, so I will probably keep them for good).

Obviously I can find all the spec comparison between the 5D Mark II and D700, and that they cost roughly the same (5D looks like a better deal), what is the real difference?

By "real" difference, I mean, from owner's user experience, what you like about yours and what you wish yours have? How do the low light capabilities compare between the two?  What issues do you have that you find challenging to resolve/work around?


If I stick with Nikon, I will continue to use my lens and upgrade later. If I go with Canon, I will have to reinvest in everything. What else should I be aware about as a part of the consideration?


----------



## Derrel (Feb 14, 2011)

Canon 5D-II. $389 EOS Elan film body heritage body with a crap AF system pulled from the EOS 30D crop-body, colr-blind ambinet light metering, color-blind flash metering,no flash commander, slow mirror return, slow shutter lag time, no pop-up flash, $2,000 worth of sensor and electronics. The 5D is "slow" compared with a D700, or a D1 or D2 or D3 Nikon. The EOS ELAN 3 is the parent of the 5D.

Nikon D700 $1,299 body with 51-point professional AF system, color-aware light metering, accurate flash metering WITH color aware metering, fast mirror and fast shutter lag times, fast frame rate, $1499 worth of sensor and electronics.

IOW, the Canon is a cheap body with an excellent sensor. The Nikon is a professional-level body with a very good sensor. The D700 body is much more akin to the D1 and D2 series professional bodies in terms of the speed of its subsystems, and the body features, like color-aware metering, and a wider-area AF system than the 5D has.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 14, 2011)

Where can I find the $1299 D700 body? Every reputable site I've gone to price it at around $2350. I am talking about brand new of course.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 14, 2011)

Stay with Nikon.

The 5DmkII is so lacking, it's a wonder anyone can take pictures with it.


----------



## CNCO (Feb 14, 2011)

Exactly where can you get a D700 for that price?


----------



## zoogirlbc (Feb 14, 2011)

molested_cow said:


> Where can I find the $1299 D700 body? Every reputable site I've gone to price it at around $2350. I am talking about brand new of course.



What he meant was the value of body of the camera. Not the total cost of buying the camera. 

I'd say go for the D700 also. I love mine although I have no real use for video most of the time and when I do I use our camcorder. Just go to the store with a memory card and try both. You should have a better sense after using each of them personally.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 14, 2011)

..Add the 1400 and 1300=general price of D700's..


Stick with the Nikon unless you need a buttload of resolution and cannot live without video. The D700 is superior in pretty much every way besides those two things. 

Also if you're into working with primes, the new 24, 35, and 50mm Nikkors are optically better than than the Canon versions.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 15, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Stay with Nikon.
> 
> The 5DmkII is so lacking, it's a wonder anyone can take pictures with it.



Canon users who have never owned, or even used a professional-grade Nikon camera often defend the 5D and its crap sub-systems. I own a 5D...it cannot even reliably focus primary school kids running toward the camera with the 24-105mm f/4-L zoom lens in BRIGHT sunshine...the AF system is very weak, and prone to subtle mis-focusing with any f/4 lens. The pro Nikons will NAIL focus indoors, in dim light because they have PROFESSIONAL-level AF modules, and are color-aware in terms of autofocus and subject tracking. With consumer-grade lenses, with slower apertures, the professional level Nikon AF modules give you reliable AF, in poor light, under tough conditons.

The 5D's AF system is color-blind, cannot track as well as a pro Nikon with slow-aperture lenses, and works well ONLY with high-speed primes like the 135/2, 85/1.8, and 70-200/2.8,and the 50/1.4. At f/4, the 5D's primitive AF system is quite weak; it requires f/2.8 for double precision AF performance...

THe professional Nikon bodies with PRO-level autofocusing systems, are much faster-reacting cameras. Faster shutter lag times. Faster mirror up, Faster mirror down. Faster FPS. FASTER handling, in all ways.

But, you'll find that Canon shooters who have a 5D and have never used a pro Nikon body will defend the 5D...out their rears...all day long...and make smart-ass comments about how great the 5D is compared to.....what? The $389 EOS Elan it was derived from??? The EOS 30D from which its AF system was lifted and transplanted?

One is a Porsche...the other is a VW microbus. Both are automobiles.


----------



## cfusionpm (Feb 15, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Nikon D700 $1,299 body


Say whaaaat?


----------



## Derrel (Feb 15, 2011)

cfusionpm said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon D700 $1,299 body
> ...



Are you really that dense Matty?

The EOS 5D was derived from a low-cost EOS ELAN film body....with sub-systems borrowed from low-cost,low-specification camera bodies.

The D700 is built upon an entirely new, high-end digital SLR body--something in the $1,300 price/specification range, like say a Nikon F5.

Canon EOS 5D Mark II Review: 40. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

"pedestrian"


Nikon D700 Review: 32. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

"class-leading"

THe body and sub-systems of the 5D are described by dPreview as "pedestrian" because the CAMERA, the guts, the machine, the AF, the metering, the viewfinder, the mirror system, etc, are EOS ELAN-level...the Nikon D700 on the other hand, is a camera body, subsystems, metering, etc,etc, much more akin to a Nikon F5 than an EOS ELAN...


----------



## cfusionpm (Feb 15, 2011)

Derrel said:


> cfusionpm said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...


Not really. I'm just feeding your trolling posts. I actually don't really like the 5D myself either, for mostly the same reasons.

I'm curious why you have one though... If you hate it so much, why not just buy and use a D700?


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Feb 15, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Stay with Nikon.
> ...


5D Mark II is the best camera out there. Gosh what were you thinking...


----------



## gsgary (Feb 15, 2011)

Derrel said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Stay with Nikon.
> ...



I don't get many out of focus shots with my 5Dmk1 i could show some of my indoor dog shots


----------



## Village Idiot (Feb 15, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Stay with Nikon.
> 
> The 5DmkII is so lacking, it's a wonder anyone can take pictures with it.


 
I don't know how I manage. I must be some kind of miracle working by being to use such a piece of **** camera.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 15, 2011)

I don't mean to feed, but the last wedding i was shooting, my good friend and assistant was shooting with a 5DII with the 50 1.4 and 70-200IS. Almost all of his images were a little bit out of focus. Having 500 or so images from my 2nd shooter that are borderline deliverable because of AF issues was not a good feeling. I had to resize the pictures down to 6 MP until they looked sharp enough where i could hide most of the softness with sharpening. He hates the camera. He usually shoots with 1D's but his personal camera has been a 5DII and he said that he just cannot rely on the AF system.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 15, 2011)

Sw1tchFX said:


> I don't mean to feed, but the last wedding i was shooting, my good friend and assistant was shooting with a 5DII with the 50 1.4 and 70-200IS. Almost all of his images were a little bit out of focus. Having 500 or so images from my 2nd shooter that are borderline deliverable because of AF issues was not a good feeling. I had to resize the pictures down to 6 MP until they looked sharp enough where i could hide most of the softness with sharpening. He hates the camera. He usually shoots with 1D's but his personal camera has been a 5DII and he said that he just cannot rely on the AF system.



He does not know how to use it, have a guess what this photographer uses 
http://www.jerryghionisphotography.com/


----------



## cfusionpm (Feb 15, 2011)

Derrel said:


> One is a Porsche...the other is a VW microbus. Both are automobiles.


I think a better analogy would be that one is a Porsche 911 and the other is an old VW Beetle with a supercharged LS9 Corvette motor. :thumbup:


----------



## gsgary (Feb 15, 2011)

cfusionpm said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > One is a Porsche...the other is a VW microbus. Both are automobiles.
> ...



To me they are totally different tools for different jobs


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 15, 2011)

gsgary said:


> Sw1tchFX said:
> 
> 
> > I don't mean to feed, but the last wedding i was shooting, my good friend and assistant was shooting with a 5DII with the 50 1.4 and 70-200IS. Almost all of his images were a little bit out of focus. Having 500 or so images from my 2nd shooter that are borderline deliverable because of AF issues was not a good feeling. I had to resize the pictures down to 6 MP until they looked sharp enough where i could hide most of the softness with sharpening. He hates the camera. He usually shoots with 1D's but his personal camera has been a 5DII and he said that he just cannot rely on the AF system.
> ...



Like i said, he usually shoots with 1D's. My friend who assisted me normally makes 6 figures shooting for Nike. He just helped me out because it was one of my first weddings and he's a really good friend.


----------



## Overread (Feb 15, 2011)

Sw1tchFX said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Sw1tchFX said:
> ...



You sure its not just a case of a 5DII with a set of lenses that are slightly out of sync with each other if every single shot was slightly out of focus (trusting that those OOF parts were always either back/forward focused each time).


----------



## gsgary (Feb 15, 2011)

Sw1tchFX said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Sw1tchFX said:
> ...




Why didn't he use his 1DS, or switch to manual focus, what lenses was he using ?


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 15, 2011)

gsgary said:


> Sw1tchFX said:
> 
> 
> > gsgary said:
> ...


Again like i said, the 5D is his personal camera, and he was shooting the 50mm f/1.4 and 70-200 f/2.8 IS. I don't know what his focusing technique was because i was too busy shooting to watch him. We both knew that the 5D is nowhere close to a D700 in the focusing dept. but I didn't know how bad it really was till i got home that night. 

I interned at a big studio herein portland for a while and all the photographers echoed pretty much the same thing. If it's stationary, shoot it with the 5DII or H2D-22, if it moves or portraits, better take out the 1D's.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 15, 2011)

Well post pics to prove your point, if you want.

Any idea when D700 replacement will be out? I am sick of waiting without knowing.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 15, 2011)

well i'm not going to post 500ish client images just to prove a point, and i understand internet law states "screenshot or it didn't happen", but it's pretty common knowledge that the 5D's focus system isn't very good compared to any current Nikon body higher end than a D90. When you're talking about AF, the only Canon bodies which compete with the D7000, 300, 700, and 3-series bodies are the ones with 45 focus points.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 15, 2011)

molested_cow said:


> Well post pics to prove your point, if you want.
> 
> Any idea when D700 replacement will be out? I am sick of waiting without knowing.



5D mk1


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 15, 2011)

Clearly your images would be better if you shot them with a Nikon. :er:


----------



## Buckster (Feb 15, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Clearly your images would be better if you shot them with a Nikon. :er:


Indeed.  Note how the background is completely out of focus, due to the sucky AF.


----------



## Moe (Feb 15, 2011)

I'm curious if on the dog shot (and the horse, too) your camera was tracking the dog the whole time, or if you had pre-focused on the railing he's jumping over. The horse shot wouldn't be that tricky of an autofocus, but a dog sprinting straight toward the camera is a difficult task for many cameras and/or lenses.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 16, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Clearly your images would be better if you shot them with a Nikon. :er:



I won't be buying Nikon


----------



## gsgary (Feb 16, 2011)

Buckster said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly your images would be better if you shot them with a Nikon. :er:
> ...



And it have one of Canons worst focusing lenses the 300mmF2.8L


----------



## gsgary (Feb 16, 2011)

Moe said:


> I'm curious if on the dog shot (and the horse, too) your camera was tracking the dog the whole time, or if you had pre-focused on the railing he's jumping over. The horse shot wouldn't be that tricky of an autofocus, but a dog sprinting straight toward the camera is a difficult task for many cameras and/or lenses.



The horse was definately tracking not sure about the dog i usually use 1Dmk2's but had to shoot the dogs at ISO3200 so used the 5Dmk1 and was printing on site, but it does not mater what camera you have it's how you use it you have to work with it's strengths and weaknesses, i used to use a 10D for sports and have got some fantastic shots with it


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 16, 2011)

gsgary said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly your images would be better if you shot them with a Nikon. :er:
> ...


Me neither. I have too much invested in overpriced, poor quality gear, that barely makes acceptable images, to make the change to the only brand that does it right. 

Oh, well, I guess I'll never make a dime in this field.


----------



## Formatted (Feb 16, 2011)

This is a Canon vs Nikon question in sheeps clothing.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Feb 16, 2011)

But there is no question.
Nikon!


----------



## gsgary (Feb 16, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Bitter Jeweler said:
> ...



A good tradesman doesn't blame his tools, you should know that


----------



## gsgary (Feb 16, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> But there is no question.
> Nikon!




Shooting sports i would put my 1Dmk2's against any Nikon up to iso1600


----------



## Formatted (Feb 16, 2011)

> Shooting sports i would put my 1Dmk2's against any Nikon up to iso1600



And above 1600 ISO?


----------



## gsgary (Feb 16, 2011)

Formatted said:


> > Shooting sports i would put my 1Dmk2's against any Nikon up to iso1600
> 
> 
> And above 1600 ISO?



I shoot at ISO3200 and print them on site no problem with them
I think we should set up a contest between Nikon shooters and Canon shooters


----------



## bentcountershaft (Feb 16, 2011)

gsgary said:


> I think we should set up a contest between Nikon shooters and Canon shooters


 
For me there's no need for a contest.  I can take equally bad photos with any Nikon as I can with my Rebel.


----------



## DirtyDFeckers (Feb 16, 2011)

The bottom line is that both companies make incredible cameras.  If that weren't the case, then these arguments wouldn't exist.  As for me, I would go for the D700, just for the low light performance.  It's common sense really... you have 2 full frame sensors, one of which you are putting 12mp of data onto, and the other, 21mp of data.  For most images, you will never need a resolution greater that 12mp anyways.  I also prefer the D700 because of its faster fps (up to 8fps with battery grip vs 3.9fps with the Canon).  However, for portrait photography and other still shots, I think one would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other in the image quality department.  In the end, it all really boils down to brand loyalty.  Nikon people will say Canon sucks, and Canon people will say the same of Nikon.  Both are industry leaders, both make fantastic products, period.


----------



## Village Idiot (Feb 17, 2011)

DirtyDFeckers said:


> The bottom line is that both companies make incredible cameras. If that weren't the case, then these arguments wouldn't exist. As for me, I would go for the D700, just for the low light performance. It's common sense really... you have 2 full frame sensors, one of which you are putting 12mp of data onto, and the other, 21mp of data. For most images, you will never need a resolution greater that 12mp anyways. I also prefer the D700 because of its faster fps (up to 8fps with battery grip vs 3.9fps with the Canon). However, for portrait photography and other still shots, I think one would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other in the image quality department. In the end, it all really boils down to brand loyalty. Nikon people will say Canon sucks, and Canon people will say the same of Nikon. Both are industry leaders, both make fantastic products, period.


 
Oh my, Hasselblad, Pentax, and any other digital medium format camera maker must not have been told. They must shut down immediately lest the go bankrupt. Nikon, please stop selling the D3s, I implore you! It shall be your downfall! It's just common sense!

My 5D MKII must be a rebranded D700. It takes excellent high ISO shots. I have usable concert photos at 6400 ISO. I guess the photos being in focus means it's not a 5D MKII either. And shooting at 4 fps has to be incredibly limiting since all the Nikon shooters say so, I must be shooting at 8fps since I'm able to get the shots I want. Oh, and I crop it down to 12mp for a teensy weensy file right off the bat so I don't have a large image to work with in post. That would be absolutely horrible to have a 21mp or larger image.


----------



## DirtyDFeckers (Feb 17, 2011)

Village Idiot said:


> DirtyDFeckers said:
> 
> 
> > The bottom line is that both companies make incredible cameras. If that weren't the case, then these arguments wouldn't exist. As for me, I would go for the D700, just for the low light performance. It's common sense really... you have 2 full frame sensors, one of which you are putting 12mp of data onto, and the other, 21mp of data. For most images, you will never need a resolution greater that 12mp anyways. I also prefer the D700 because of its faster fps (up to 8fps with battery grip vs 3.9fps with the Canon). However, for portrait photography and other still shots, I think one would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other in the image quality department. In the end, it all really boils down to brand loyalty. Nikon people will say Canon sucks, and Canon people will say the same of Nikon. Both are industry leaders, both make fantastic products, period.
> ...




Dude, relax.  Don't get all offended and start whining like someone made a personal attack on you.  I brought up the fps of the 2 cameras simply because I am a sports photographer for a local newspaper, and 3.9fps simply wouldn't cut it for me.  I never said the 5d2 took bad photos.  If you could read, you would actually see that I did nothing but give credit to both companies.


----------



## Village Idiot (Feb 17, 2011)

DirtyDFeckers said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > DirtyDFeckers said:
> ...


 
Dude, get a clue. If you can't handle the sarcasm, get out of the obviously sarcastic thread.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 17, 2011)

The people that can't get sharp photos with a 5D shouldn't be using a man's camera


----------



## Formatted (Feb 17, 2011)

> obviously sarcastic thread.



Lock incoming!


----------



## shaunly (Feb 17, 2011)

Not another d700 vs 5dmk2 threads!!!! It's very simple here.... one is for speed, the other is for resolution. Pick what's more important to you. That's it!


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 17, 2011)

Do you mind posting(or link) a photo that you took with D700+ AiS F2.8 20mm? Color please!


----------



## shaunly (Feb 17, 2011)

molested_cow said:


> Do you mind posting(or link) a photo that you took with D700+ AiS F2.8 20mm? Color please!



It's the only one I have at the moment (stuck at work) =/


----------



## shaunly (Feb 17, 2011)

not sure why it's downsize here, but here's the link
All sizes | _VNV6967 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


----------



## TylerV85 (Mar 9, 2011)

I own a 5d Mark II. I like the images it produces when it hits (like your images above). What mine has trouble with is when an object is moving towards the camera, but changes direction at a 45 degree angle. So that the object is still moving toward you but is shifting from left to right. (Like when a basketball player jukes his defender and sprints to the left or right of him). Other than that I can hit shots like this (when the object is coming straight towards you and you are anticipating where it will be.)

Good stuff here btw!


----------

