shyoon
Well-known
I'm just waiting for the day the D700 starts selling for AUD$1,500.
kehng
Established
I have a Sony A900 (Actually my wife uses this) and the 24+mp with Zeiss lenses is very nice indeed for large format prints
gavinlg
Veteran
I've played with the a900 quite a bit around Tokyo, and I can honestly say it's a lovely camera with fantastic ergos and great build... I really like the way it works - feels so much like a minolta (and basically is).
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
When an Olympus Zuiko is adapted to a Canon, 5D or otherwise, it is a purely manual lens, including aperture. If f-8 is called for, the VF will be f-8 dark, not wide open as with actual Canon lenses. The legacy Canon FD lenses are just as awkward to use as a Zuiko or a Super Takumar.
Nikon provides far more user friendliness with its legacy (manual focus) lenses on their DSLR's, most couple with the TTL meter and function wide open and even provide a menu item to easily designate what manual focus lens is in use which also writes to the EXIF data as well.
In addition to actual Nikkors, old or new, manual focus or AF, there also are Zeiss ZF and Cosina Voigtlander lenses in the F mount that are chipped and thus integrate with the Matrix Metering in the Nikon DSLR's. Again, auto aperture wide open metering, never stopped down darkness.
Some pretty cool offerings there too, such as the superb Zeiss 100mm Macro and the CV Ultron II 40/2.0.
Still, it would be cool to use the Zuiko 21/2.0 on a Nikon DSLR which is possible with the Canon DSLR.
If you are handy with tools you can chip the old Manual focus Nikkors yourself or there is at least one company that will do it for you.
Bob
css9450
Veteran
LOL Post of the month!
css9450
Veteran
And speaking of the "prosumer", "previsualize", etc, debate, I must have missed class the day we started using "legacy glass" to describe older lenses such as Canon's FD and Nikon's manual focus lenses. I first started seeing the "legacy" word used on some other forums where the trendy and hip kids had moved up from shooting with outdated Polaroid film and plastic Holgas to using non-AI Nikkors on their D40s. I found it vaguely amusing because my "legacy" stuff was all bought new.... I guess that makes me old.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I noticed while browsing the Leitax site today that Zuikos can also be chipped for a D700 or similar spec Nikon.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
wentropy
oui mais oui
i am holding you all personally responsible for the sudden, overwhelming GAS attack for either a d700 or 5dmk2... here i thought i had killed dSLR urges with getting into rangefinders....
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Well if anyone's ever regretted buying a D700 I've yet to hear about it!
I'm sure there's a few out there ... somewhere?
j.scooter
Veteran
Another shout out for Sony. I have an a850, what I like most is
I got it for under $2000 USD
The autofocus zeiss lenses, especially the 135 1.8
and in body stabilization
as mentioned before the ergos are just right, it just feels right in my hands and all the buttons and dials are where they need to be. It is not heavily menu dependent either, set it up once and go.
The high iso "problem" is not much of an issue for me, I rarely need to go over 1600 and if I do the noise reduction software in LR3 is really good.
I got it for under $2000 USD
The autofocus zeiss lenses, especially the 135 1.8
and in body stabilization
as mentioned before the ergos are just right, it just feels right in my hands and all the buttons and dials are where they need to be. It is not heavily menu dependent either, set it up once and go.
The high iso "problem" is not much of an issue for me, I rarely need to go over 1600 and if I do the noise reduction software in LR3 is really good.
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
I own the original 5D and LOVE it. I use it with manual focus glass primarily.
That said, I know people who own D700s and 5DMKIIs. I've used both. My observations:
D700 is the better overall camera.
5DMKII has better overall IQ
D700 has better high ISO
5DMKII has more resolution (and it's noticeable)
D700 has the better ergonomics and more buttons on the body (which is good)
5DMKII's HD video KICKS ASS
5DMKII can take old manual focus glass for lots of other manufacturers (which is awesome)
So yes....I'd say the D700 is the better overall camera as a whole, but the 5DMKII has some features that the Nikon can't touch.
Both are amazing cameras.
That said, I know people who own D700s and 5DMKIIs. I've used both. My observations:
D700 is the better overall camera.
5DMKII has better overall IQ
D700 has better high ISO
5DMKII has more resolution (and it's noticeable)
D700 has the better ergonomics and more buttons on the body (which is good)
5DMKII's HD video KICKS ASS
5DMKII can take old manual focus glass for lots of other manufacturers (which is awesome)
So yes....I'd say the D700 is the better overall camera as a whole, but the 5DMKII has some features that the Nikon can't touch.
Both are amazing cameras.
Last edited:
css9450
Veteran
I'm confused. Can't the D700?
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
Sorry, I meant to say that the 5DMKII can take old manual focus glass from other manufacturers. The Nikon can take it's own manual focus glass, but not others (for the most part).
Post edited.
Fraser
Well-known
5Dmk11 because I have two of them.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Sob, Sob...
Sob, Sob...
I have an Olympus E-500 and am wondering how it is that I manage to get decent prints out of the thing. Worse still, my wife usually carries an elderly, repaired, µ-300 in her handbag and gets pictures taken with it published, still.
But then people don't believe I can be serious when I take out the FED 1 or the Leica Standard.
So it's clear that there's some criteria I'm missing all these years. And I thought the acid test was the picture in its frame.
Regards, David
Sob, Sob...
I have an Olympus E-500 and am wondering how it is that I manage to get decent prints out of the thing. Worse still, my wife usually carries an elderly, repaired, µ-300 in her handbag and gets pictures taken with it published, still.
But then people don't believe I can be serious when I take out the FED 1 or the Leica Standard.
So it's clear that there's some criteria I'm missing all these years. And I thought the acid test was the picture in its frame.
Regards, David
gavinlg
Veteran
Everyone has different needs for their photographic gear. An e-500 would put me at a large disadvantage in my job, in which I use a 5d. As soon as I have the means, I'll be shooting medium format digital. The practical benefits for my purposes are huge, despite the monstrous initial cost (which will be made back swiftly).
Different strokes and all that... :angel:
jaredangle
Photojournalist
My vote goes for the D700. Not to bash the 5D, which is equally capable, but I prefer the ergonomics and ability to use manual focus lenses on my D700.
Then again, the 5D's shorter flange distance lets you use Contax and Leica slr lenses with an adapter, among others.
Then again, the 5D's shorter flange distance lets you use Contax and Leica slr lenses with an adapter, among others.
daneman
Newbie
I'm going for the D700 simply because I've used Nikon from the beginning
This is despite the fact that I'm currently evaluating Canon 5D Mk.1 while I wait until I can afford D700
The Nikon is so much more intuitive (having used Nikon D300 before). I've come to appreciate the ease of use of Nikon, something that I took for granted, after I started to use 5D. It's like Canon made it deliberately difficult to change the settings of the camera (ISO, AF/AE lock, image file type/quality, AF zone). I've sort of got used to it after using 5D for 3 months, but I still have to read the labels of the buttons from time to time (especially the buttons on the top bezel; light, af/wb, drive/iso, metering/flash comp), something I've never had to do with Nikon.
I do like 5D's IQ though. Just don't know how it would compare with D700.
This is despite the fact that I'm currently evaluating Canon 5D Mk.1 while I wait until I can afford D700
The Nikon is so much more intuitive (having used Nikon D300 before). I've come to appreciate the ease of use of Nikon, something that I took for granted, after I started to use 5D. It's like Canon made it deliberately difficult to change the settings of the camera (ISO, AF/AE lock, image file type/quality, AF zone). I've sort of got used to it after using 5D for 3 months, but I still have to read the labels of the buttons from time to time (especially the buttons on the top bezel; light, af/wb, drive/iso, metering/flash comp), something I've never had to do with Nikon.
I do like 5D's IQ though. Just don't know how it would compare with D700.
Last edited: