Toronto Photography Meetup Group

So Im debating selling my 300s and going ff eventually now I'm stuck in a dilemma do I want to switch to the darkside? I know there's a huge amount of canon shooters on here I know a lot about the 700 but the 5d not so much it seems to be the benchmark camera for studio stuff. I'm looking to more focus on studio shooting aswell as location stuff with strobes. I'm not deeply invested I n glass so the switch wouldn't be as rough. Any opinions? Why would the5d be better/worse for my needs ? I'm nit trying to spark a brand war more so then the better camera for my needs. Thanks. - Tyler

If you're using it for studio work and landscape, the 5D2 would be perfect.
But if you need the fps, faster AF and weather sealing, then the D700 is the camera for you.

Sorry for the bad typing this iPhone is a pain I mention 5d I never use my 7fps as it is on my 300s. Now 21 mp as opposed to 12 on the same size sensor. Big difference?

i've had this debate with myself, and as much as i absolutely love canon's much larger selection of pro-grade L lenses (as they are more numerous and much less expensive relative to their pro-grade nikon counterparts for those pro-grade counterparts which nikon even does have), i can still never get over how uncomfortable it is to hold a canon.

what i'm saying is keep it in mind that canon (currently) has a wider range of pro-grade lenses (until nikon releases more), for cheaper (until nikon prices drop), but canon cameras are less comfortable to hold.

You get used to different ergonomics overtime Im not too worried about that

Yes, the ergonomics is highly subjective to each individual.

I love my 5D Mk2 but I can't say anything about the D700 because I've never used one.

I am biased. I say D700, because I have one and love it. But otherwise you, and only you, can really tell if you want to jump over.

There are always trade offs. Do you want high ISO performance, then D700, but if you think pixels count then 5D2. Video important? Then 5D2 since D700 does not have video.

If you have experience with a D300s the transition to the D700 will be almost unnoticed as they are almost identical in controls and menus.

Also, this year there will be a replacement for the D700. What it will be or its capabilities are open to speculation. A D3S sensor (D700s), something like the D3X sensor (D700x) or something else (D900) are all options. The only thing that is reasonably certain is there will be something this year, probably before or in the early summer. It might be worth waiting.

DG

PS: The dark side is, always was, and always will be Nikon. Canon is light, but remember the light at the end of the tunnel is often a train.

ISO performance by the D700 and 5D2 to my eyes are similar.
The D700 is maybe 1/3 stop better ISO 6400 onwards.

But it is often perceived that less/bigger pixels are better for low noise.

I believe that Nikon just didn't have a choice since they themselves don't make their own sensors so they have to kinda hype up the sensors their bodies sport. Plus they seem to have mastered the magic if NR.

Not that I'm saying that the D3s doesn't look better than the 1D4, I'm just saying that if the difference in noise is so small, I would rather pick the sensor with the higher resolution and/or DR.

I know people say that resolution isn't everything.....but I doubt that someone using a 12MP crop or FF body will throw theirs away and settle for a 6MP body and say this is enough.

The Nikon has a killer AF going for it. As well as a PUF that acts as a wireless commander as well.

The 5D2 is pure resolution and the video mode is awesome as well if you are into it.

I was reading in the other forum that you had gotten into Humber for the photography program. I graduated from the same program last April and the program is based on Nikon cameras. All the lenses that they rent out are Nikon and I am not sure if things have changed, but in my first year every student had to shoot with a nikon camera, even those who had Canons. Those with Canons were told to either rent Nikons or pretty much get out of the program.

Come 2nd year, you are able to use whatever brand you wanted.

Keep in mind too, once you're in 2nd year, Humber has about 23 Hasselblads for you to use in studio.

If you do decide to switch systems, I would say wait until you're in 2nd year so you don't have to shell out extra money on a rental.

you just got me super excited for the program lmao. I appreciate all the info. I guess I have to do some reading and decide as too which will be better suited for my needs

Something else to consider is the whole Nikon Creative Lighting System. That seems to be a benefit.

DG

I cant stand Cls, Id much rather use 602s. but It is a benefit.. Now having double the megapixels on the same size sensor does this ultimately mean you can blow it up larger? or crop it more? What else would that mean? Sharper?

Just to muddy your waters, word is Canon will announce the 1Ds Mk IV on Tuesday and rumors say it is 32 MP.

DG

Yes, double the megapixels will allow you to print larger and crop more. I tend to be a heavy cropper .. and 21 megapixels would be ideal for me. Also better high iso performance is another great to have. Having movie mode is just icing on top of the cake.

That's funny, I used to crop quite a bit with my 20D. With my 5DMk2 I haven't needed to crop too many shots. Maybe this might change once I start shooting outside again.

It's cropping for creative edits rather than for fixing initial compositional elements.

12mp vs. 21mp should not be your deciding factor. If that is all you are basing your decision on - then you sound like the rest of the gear heads out there. honestly, I can't tell you which camera to go for - ultimately that has to be your decision. I chose the D700 for a number of reasons, including price point for a full frame camera, hi ISO capabilities which are stunning, and professional build, in a smaller body. All were very attractive to me. Never did I consider that I would be at a disadvantage with only 12mp vs more. The pixel pitch and dynamic range of the D700's sensor render very nice images, and I can say nothing but good things about the prints I have produced from the D700 No complaints.

Now, If i ever get a digital back for the Mamiya.... well that's a different story, but for now, the D700 has served me well.

no no, I wasn't basing my decision on mp I was just wondering what the difference was in terms of the two being on the same size sensor.

that's a good thing! personally, I am bias towards the D700 as well, and I like the handling and layout of Nikon camera's in general. I've owned a number of Nikon bodies from pro to joe!

Canon 5D Mark II has more lens choice. But D700 has good AF system.

There are three main things I did when deciding between the 5D Mark II and the D700 last year:

• make a comparative list of specifications that are important to you (sensor size, noise levels, pixel resolution, AF performance, lens selection, etc.) without judging one to be "better" than the other... list just the facts
• consider how important each specification is to your style of shooting; stay as objective and as unemotional as possible
• try out both cameras on shoots; borrow or rent as needed

You may find that there are certain specs and features that are deal makers or breakers. For example, many Canon shooters stick with that brand because they shoot heavily with fast, wide primes or with tilt-shift lenses. Nikon doesn't really have a good lineup in that area. In my case, I went from shooting mostly primes to shooting mostly zooms, and the combination of Nikon's pro-level AF and zoom lenses easily beat their Canon counterparts.

I don't really need video, so that did not count as a benefit of owning a 5D2. But I don't need 8 fps either, so I ignored that feature of the D700. I did need the best high ISO handling and AF performance in that brand's class. With Canon, that meant (at the time) going up from the 5D2 to either the 1D3 @ $4500 or 1Ds3 @ $8000. With Nikon, the D700 had both in one package for $3000.

Once all the facts were in, it turned out that the D700 had the best combination of features in one package for the way I shoot. The 5D2 had full-frame and great high ISO, but not the best AF. The 1D3 had great high ISO and the best AF, but lacked FF. The 1Ds3 had full-frame, great high ISO and the best AF... but with two bodies would have cost me $16000 vs. $6000 for D700 x 2. So you really should gather up all the specs first, then place a value on each spec and feature, and consider things as objectively as possible.

Then, once you have a good idea of how both cameras will perform on paper, you need to go out and shoot with both bodies as much as you can. And I don't mean just showing up to a TPMG social and handling a camera there. Take one out for an extended shoot to see how it handles and to discover any quirks it might have (especially if you are switching from one brand to another). I was lucky enough to get a loaner D700 kit from NPS for five days, and I know a few folks willing to lend me their 5D2's. Setup a couple of shoots, second-shot a couple weddings, got together with some other photographers in the studio to play around with the gear, etc.

It was a big investment for me, so I wanted to be 100% sure it was the right thing to do.

You spoiled the surprise on the Hasselblads. (j/k) But seriously, having Nikon available in campus is a very compelling reason to hang on to your D300s.

when i was in for my interview just after yours i got to talking with my interviewer and he said the cameras they are giving as rentals are D300's so your D300s is already just above the requirement and the move to D700, which is what i will also be making, is even better. I would say stick with your D300s for now and if you want to switch during the year do it then after you see what else comes out to replace the D700.

Get a Canon 5D MkIII.

Forgot to ask, is there any particular reason for thinking to switch to 35mm full frame?

Mainly the lower light capabilities.. Wider angles. BetterQuality lenses (without using the wierd crop sensor conversion if I used the ff lenses on my 300) I dont want to invest in crop glass if I would like to eventually go ff

Tyler, I don't have anything against you. But this is my thinking process for large ticket purchase... always trying to contradict yourself...

lower light capabilities. - "I'm looking to more focus on studio shooting aswell as location stuff with strobes", you shouldn't be looking at lower light capabilities in studio and using strobes most of the time. Better IQ maybe, but not low light capabilities.

BetterQuality lenses (without using the wierd crop sensor conversion if I used the ff lenses on my 300) - a 50mm DX lens and a 50mm FX lens will give you the same angle of view and DOF on a DX body. It doesn't matter what lens you put on, the crop factor is always there on a DX body. I personally use FX lens on DX body all the time. Unless you shoot extensively 35mm full frame before, there shouldn't be anything weird, just something different than a 35mm full frame user would normally experienced in angle of view and the expected depth of field.

Wider angles - I'll give you that, I'm still waiting for a DX lens that goes F2.8 on 8-10mm range (that will give you a 12-15mm 35mm equivalent on a Nikon DX body). F3.5 is currently what is available.

I'm not against 35mm FF, as a matter of fact, I'm saving up for one. But I want one for my no flash / available light shoot.

Sorry I am contradicting myself ofcourse.. I mean I am focusing on studio/location strobe shooting. I also don't want to be held back at the same time when I don't do that because I love so many different types of photography.

What I ment by wierd crop factor is Say I use a 70-200 fx on my dx its not a true 70-200 its what 105-280? IM bad at math .. Ie 24-70 = 35- 105 or something .. If I use the true fx lenses on my dx it wont give me the actual focul length I want no? Like tehres the 17-55 2.8 but then Im stuck with the dx lens. And IQ is always a good thing ofcourse .. .. Im going to guess since im only a year into photography people will say get used to what you like in the photog world and focus on the regions that I mainly enjoy .. Maybe Im jumping the gun a bit? I was more speaking for future refernce. Then again who knows what will be a good ff in the future .. I appreciate your honesty though I do need to make sure I find What I need in a camera that will suit my shooting needs

i think there is nothing that can cover completely the scenarios you want to make sure your camera can be used for...in the end, it's a preference...there is no fail safe way of making sure what you invest today can give you the best mileage unless you have decided at a really specific kind of photography you want to focus your energies into...up until you are very much defined in that, both cameras would give you a deadlock in your pros and cons list.

and in case you are curious, i own a 5D MKII