Nikon D700 12.1mp or Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21.1mp I'm about to purchase my first full frame and I'm debating between the Nikon D700 or Cannon Eos 5D Mark II. It will be used mainly for Portrait, wedding and sporting events. Can those of you who own your own please give me your constructive 2 cents on both, so that I can make a decision? Thanks Nikon D700 12.1mp or Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21.1mp I'm about to purchase my first full frame and I'm debating between the Nikon D700 or Cannon Eos 5D Mark II. It will be used mainly for... » Read More Nikon D700 12.1mp or Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21.1mp I'm about to purchase my first full frame and I'm debating between the Nikon D700 or Cannon Eos 5D Mark II. It will be used mainly for Portrait, wedding and sporting events. Can those of you who own your own please give me your constructive 2 cents on both, so that I can make a decision? Thanks « Show Less
1645972
Damn, I wish I made commission! You're the third person I've convinced in the past few weeks!Good luck with it :)
1645973
Thanks Conway, I was so happy to see your post it gave me the push to order the Nikon D700 today from B&H.; This is my first full frame camera and I just wanted to make sure that I was making the right decision. I was mostly leaning toward the Nikon but had to consider the Mark 2. Thanks again for your help.
1645974
J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon. J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to... » Read More J. Perez --There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse.If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion.Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon. « Show Less
1645975
Sweet...How do you like it so far? I got mine 2 days ago but haven't been able to play as yet. Too busy. But I'll get around to it this week.Enjoy!
1298395
realize that the full frame camera like the 5D is in the $2000 price range, probably caters to a very serious photographer who probably wouldn't buy lenses at this price point anyway. This lens mates well with the typical market segment for the EOS 350D, 400D or 450D.
1669169
I use Nikon d700 with the same 70-200. Works great for me but then all I use it for is sport shooting. I don't get too aggressive with my equipment. Usually stand and shoot. Not really into jumping around or running with it.
542766
I just upgraded to the A99 from my A65 (keeping both, and some of my prime lenses that will work on the A99 also). If you shoot a lot of low light and portrait photography (I do) or serious professional work full frame is a big improvement for noise and a better sensor. If you shoot a lot of daylight subjects and sports type photography, and don't want to carry around a much heavier (and slower) camera, or invest in a group of new lenses (the 24-70 Zeiss zoom cost as much as the camera body) you might want to look at the A77II. FYI a lot of the older Minolta lenses are compatible with the A99 and can be had for much cheaper than the full frame Sony lenses. I just upgraded to the A99 from my A65 (keeping both, and some of my prime lenses that will work on the A99 also). If you shoot a lot of low light and portrait photography (I do) or serious professional work full frame is a big improvement for noise and a better sensor. If you shoot a lot of daylight subjects and sports type photography, and don't want to carry around a much heavier (and slower) camera, or invest in a group of new lenses (the 24-70 Zeiss zoom cost as much as the camera body) you might want to look at the A77II. FYI a lot of the older Minolta lenses are compatible with the... » Read More I just upgraded to the A99 from my A65 (keeping both, and some of my prime lenses that will work on the A99 also). If you shoot a lot of low light and portrait photography (I do) or serious professional work full frame is a big improvement for noise and a better sensor. If you shoot a lot of daylight subjects and sports type photography, and don't want to carry around a much heavier (and slower) camera, or invest in a group of new lenses (the 24-70 Zeiss zoom cost as much as the camera body) you might want to look at the A77II. FYI a lot of the older Minolta lenses are compatible with the A99 and can be had for much cheaper than the full frame Sony lenses. « Show Less
971917
Depending on ur brand, Nikon or Cannon. But me and my went into Best Buy to get an opinion on which camera we should buy. And my wife is also an amateur looking to take sport photos and portrait photos. Which led us to get the Nikon D3200. We decide to buy on amazon because of the price and buddle. I think this camera is a good amateur starter to use.
8521
K. Bennett,Thanks very much for your info about these two cameras. I started with the model 30, had them for a year, sold them and got two 40D's, then last March I sold those and bought two 7D's. I had thought about getting a 5D, but a friend who just bought it said there are a lot of problems with the focusing, he said he gets around 20% out of focus, a number I find unacceptable. He advised me to skip the 5D and go to the Mark IV, and I was not sure if the better and sharper images, especially at high ISOs would be worth the extra $3000 a Mark IV would cost. What I might do is rent a Mark IV body for a weekend and see how I like it.Thanks for taking the time to post your comments. K. Bennett,Thanks very much for your info about these two cameras. I started with the model 30, had them for a year, sold them and got two 40D's, then last March I sold those and bought two 7D's. I had thought about getting a 5D, but a friend who just bought it said there are a lot of problems with the focusing, he said he gets around 20% out of focus, a number I find unacceptable. He advised me to skip the 5D and go to the Mark IV, and I was not sure if the better and sharper images, especially at high ISOs would be worth the extra $3000 a Mark IV would cost. What I might do is rent... » Read More K. Bennett,Thanks very much for your info about these two cameras. I started with the model 30, had them for a year, sold them and got two 40D's, then last March I sold those and bought two 7D's. I had thought about getting a 5D, but a friend who just bought it said there are a lot of problems with the focusing, he said he gets around 20% out of focus, a number I find unacceptable. He advised me to skip the 5D and go to the Mark IV, and I was not sure if the better and sharper images, especially at high ISOs would be worth the extra $3000 a Mark IV would cost. What I might do is rent a Mark IV body for a weekend and see how I like it.Thanks for taking the time to post your comments. « Show Less
1784427
The 24-70 is great for family portraits on the wider end. For individual portraits, and this may sound counter-intuitive, a 70-200 is better for the bokeh and getting in tight on your subject, but that's if you're shooting full frame. If you're using it on a DX body like the D5000, I think the range is ideal. As for the lens, it is an incredibly high image quality optic that can potentially stay with you forever as you upgrade from camera to camera. Good lenses are an investment. Mediocre lenses get replaced as your skills improve, pretty much like dslr bodies. I bought this to replace a Nikon 28-105, which I've happily retired. So, in short, buy this great lens if you plan to stay with Nikon bodies.
97969
I do not have a full frame - A200, A700, A65. DPReview and the Dyxum, forums are your best friend on this one. So far the lens works fine initial pictures are good.
2102118
At the end of the day... its about image quality and flexibility vs. convenience. The G9 is one of the best P&S cameras out there and allows full manual control if you are so inclined. At 12MP it will have a higher on subject pixel density which will allow for cropping. On the other hand a 6mp cropped image (down from the full 12) will not look as good as a full size optically zoomed image (6mp full on the D40) The D40 also gives you 2.5 fps vs the ~1.5 of the G9. The D40 will have better low light (high iso) performance in comparison to the G9 due to its larger photosites. I personally have 4 cameras: Canon SD800IS for when it MUST to fit in my pocket. Canon G9 when weight and size is a factor but I want better image quality and faster response than the SD800 (or external flash). The D40 when I want good low light and the ability to mount a fast lens. I use the 18-200 VR as leave on lens, the 18-55 when I want to travel light and the 24-70 f/2.8 for high image quality (the lens is 3x price of the camera). I usually only take the one lens I intend to use with the D40. I have ordered the Nikon D3 for when there is no alternative than having the best, but at 4+lbs its a massive beast and certainly beyond the scope if this discussion. The G9 is with me at almost all times just in case I come across some shot I just have to take. If it is a really compelling image and I have the opportunity to go back and shoot it again I do so with the D40 and much better glass.
702488
J. Perez -- There is a lot of fanboyism going on at the beginning of this thread... and it's passed off as fact to be worse. If you're looking at these two cameras consider your needs. You already have nice canon glass so you may be better served going with the 5d II. What do you shoot? If it's sports I would definitely say lean to the D700 or look at the 7d (or 1d III as you mentioned). I personally think the 5D II has the best IQ of the bunch, but that is an opinion. Really, the two cameras mentioned here are a different beast. It's like comparing mac laptops to windows desktops. First decide if you use your camera more for sports or portraits then decide if you want the canon or nikon.
1815999
I upgraded from the D90, haven't used the D3100. I'd expect it's a good upgrade as the D3100 has been upgraded twice. I think waiting at least ntil the second upgrade makes sense as the next upgrade is more incremental than revolutionary. I think you'll like the D7100. I find it easier to operate and use thatn my D90 even though I had it 3 years. Have fun shooting with whatever you choose.
1672482
Hi Eric,Thanks for your reply. I've already went ahead and bought the D3100 (got advice from some other people somewhere else on the internets ;)I received it yesterday and it does seem to be a very solid camera with lots of features that have me overwhelmed to say the least since I am a beginner in the world of photography.I do have one question: why is it that everyone recommends those lenses? How vastly different are they from the lens the comes with the camera? For example, what would a 35mm 1.8g do differently or better than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens?~ Dan Hi Eric,Thanks for your reply. I've already went ahead and bought the D3100 (got advice from some other people somewhere else on the internets ;)I received it yesterday and it does seem to be a very solid camera with lots of features that have me overwhelmed to say the least since I am a beginner in the world of photography.I do have one question: why is it that everyone recommends those lenses? How vastly different are they from the lens the comes with the camera? For example, what would a 35mm 1.8g do differently or better than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6... » Read More Hi Eric,Thanks for your reply. I've already went ahead and bought the D3100 (got advice from some other people somewhere else on the internets ;)I received it yesterday and it does seem to be a very solid camera with lots of features that have me overwhelmed to say the least since I am a beginner in the world of photography.I do have one question: why is it that everyone recommends those lenses? How vastly different are they from the lens the comes with the camera? For example, what would a 35mm 1.8g do differently or better than the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens?~ Dan « Show Less
678609
If you shoot weddings, I'd go for the f/2.8. But, if you've been happy with the f/4 and never felt the need for the 2.8, I'd stick with f/4.
1556862
I am a 5D MKIII user and I have picked Canon 2 option. it works fine for me.
861799
What is the size of your image sensor? If it's an APS-C size like EOS 400D, the 70-200 may be a bit long? If it's regular Canon digital like EOS-1D or full frame like the 5D it will be just right. 24-70 is handy if you have two or more or if you shoot your portraits loose. 70-200 if you like to shoot tight. Have you considered the 100mm or 135mm f/2.0 prime lenses (to throw distracting backgrounds out of focus?"
1570384
If you have money to get 6D, don't even look at 7D. 6D is full frame while 7D is crop. While 7D is faster technically, 6D in my opinion will still outperform due to its bigger sensor and better low light capability. 7D could be better to shoot real action sports in good light. For kid's action/sports and low light, 6D is what i would purchase
1816630
This isn't a full-frame camera. It's aps-h, 1.3x crop. And if you're shooting astro photography you should be looking into a Nikon d800 or a 5dmkii. This is a camera with 11-year old sensor technology. I bought one to shoot surfers with here in Hawaii broad daylight and I get noise (by modern standards) past about ISO400-500. This camera is great if you're looking for a cheaper 7d and you don't want video capabilities or a screen you can actually see. Don't get me wrong, it's a great camera, but its age definitely shows. I bought one in perfect shape with 42k actuations for $430 and not 3 months later I bought a 7d for $530. The extra money spent on a more modern camera is well-worth it. This isn't a full-frame camera. It's aps-h, 1.3x crop. And if you're shooting astro photography you should be looking into a Nikon d800 or a 5dmkii. This is a camera with 11-year old sensor technology. I bought one to shoot surfers with here in Hawaii broad daylight and I get noise (by modern standards) past about ISO400-500. This camera is great if you're looking for a cheaper 7d and you don't want video capabilities or a screen you can actually see. Don't get me wrong, it's a great camera, but its age definitely shows. I bought one in perfect shape with 42k actuations for $430 and not 3... » Read More This isn't a full-frame camera. It's aps-h, 1.3x crop. And if you're shooting astro photography you should be looking into a Nikon d800 or a 5dmkii. This is a camera with 11-year old sensor technology. I bought one to shoot surfers with here in Hawaii broad daylight and I get noise (by modern standards) past about ISO400-500. This camera is great if you're looking for a cheaper 7d and you don't want video capabilities or a screen you can actually see. Don't get me wrong, it's a great camera, but its age definitely shows. I bought one in perfect shape with 42k actuations for $430 and not 3 months later I bought a 7d for $530. The extra money spent on a more modern camera is well-worth it. « Show Less