Toronto Photography Meetup Group

i'm currently using sony a700 and considering upgrading to FF camera.

I'm looking at either the a900 or a nikon equivalent around the same price range (d700, or maybe the d700s when it comes out). I like to do portraits with wireless flash, a bit of landscape/architectural things and possibly expand to some sports photography in the future.

Nikon is very tempting with better auto focus and pretty good high-iso. Should I sell everything and switch?

Nikon hands down.

won't be any D700 replacement this year, possibly something mid to late 2011

I thought the rumor was that Nikon was going to release a D700s or x or something to that effect sometime this year?

not from what I've been told and this was last week

-and Nikon af IS very,very good and although I haven't used it, the D3s can shoot in stupid dark places. D700 is D3 quality, 3200 without blinking.

just wondering if anyone knows about the auto focus speed a900 vs d700 which is better? sometimes i have trouble with the a700 with solid colors and its really annoying.

Center point AF is probably similar however the Nikon has more AF points.

The Sony will produce more pleasing colours, DR, nicer VF and resolution and is an excellent studio camera.

The Nikon will have more fps, built in wireless commander, much better high ISO and better weather sealing.

"rumor" says it all

Damn that rumor... lol

Nikon is expected to launch another mid-range FX body this year. It will almost assuredly not be named as a D700-anything. Expect it for July/August as the Photokina release.

If you shoot landscape and studio/portraiture, the A900 is superior to the D700 in most regards due to the much higher resolution sensor with superior colour response. The D700 is superior for sports and low-light work due to a higher max framerate, better AF and better high ISO capability,

AF performance on the centre sensor is quite similar with equivalent lenses. The D700 in multi-point mode will track far better than the A900 will.

I have to agree with Maws - and I'm married to Nikon.

I'm not sure why would anyone consider anything but a Nikon or Canon.

hmmm. I think for my purposes landscape and portraits are what interest me. So a900 would be the better option.

Because Sony offers some of the best lenses available (both the Zeiss ZA series and the Sony G series), IS with all lenses, the best low-ISO IQ for the dollar and the best viewfinder in class (All in the A900 and A850), along with the cheapest FF option in the A850 and the only high MP option with 5fps for under $6k in the A900.

If you're shooting landscape or studio work and don't want the bulk of a 1Ds or D3x or can't afford one, the Sony's with the 24-70 ZA and 16-35ZA are the best option out there. Note that both of those zooms outperform the comparable Canon L's (particularly the 24-70 ZA which is significantly superior to the L) and match or exceed the equivalent Nikkor's (the 16-35 compares more to the 17-35 than the 14-24 which remains the best zoom in the range but has a less useful range than a 16-35).

135 STF
135/1.8 ZA
stabilized ultrafast primes
only af mirror lens in existence
I can go on...

Please do.. I have am naive to sony .. although I did pick on up in the Sony store the other day (900)

i think you guys have convinced me to stick with sony. Since i really like their ergonomics as well. and the lens selection is sufficient for anything i do.

On another note, what do you guys think of Sigma 24-70 vs zeiss 24-70.
I know zeiss is ultimate most likely, but will i get only marginal improvement in picture? hows the auto focus on these ones? anyone have some experience with both?

Right now I have the tamron 17-50 for the a700 and if i upgrade to FF i would want to change this lens to either those two.
I'm thinking of getting the lens first to use on the a700 while I save up for the body...

The Sigma's quite good assuming you're referring to the new HSM version and not the older non-HSM version (which is mediocre), AF performance should be similar to the Zeiss. The Zeiss will deliver better colour and be sharper at wider apertures. It will also deliver the '3D' look which Zeiss is known for which the Sigma will not.

And not mention the Minolta glass especially the 28-135, 200 HS, 85 LE and so on.

Any personal experience with the 200?

The 85 G D LE, is the lens that arguable I will never see in my lifetime. When did you get to use one?

everybody knows Canon is the way to go!

Nope only had the 28-135 from that list. The rest were in my dream kit and I would have hunted them down if I stayed with Sony.
Sometime last year, there was a BC Craiglist listing for the 85 LE for $750 and it was gone within 4 minutes.

Nikon has a compelling all around package that satisfies what you're looking for.

Nikon has 14-24mm landscape, DC lens portrait and PC lens for architecture.

Their metering and flash are amazing.

The body D700/D3/D3S/D3X handling and sensor performance are fantastic, the 51 point AF system is very good.

I shoot mostly with Canon, but I'm very familiar with the Nikon system and have found it to be a pretty impressive system overall (and very well thought out).

As between Sony and Nikon (and knowing not enough about the Sony system) I'd go with Nikon if only because of the availability of tilt/shift lenses for that system which I think are essential for serious architectural and really can open up all kinds of creative options for other types of photography (including portraiture). That was why I originally picked the Canon system... (Nikon didn't have t/s lenses at the time I don't think)....

.... I'm happily shooting with Canon however....

I am shooting with Canon .... I love it ...
But if i have to start all over ... Nikon would be the way I take....
Ignore the dx Format ...Step into the full frame and imagine you are not going to shift systems ..

Invest on the Good 2.8 Lenses ( 70-200 , 14-24 ) or depending on your choice of photography...
Hope that helps

Cheers
Yeshwanth

I'm well aware of it. I'm trying to remember if a Maxxum 9 film camera was part of the deal.

If I see you at a tpmg social, I'll be sure to show you my 85 GD (not the LE).