migtex
Don't eXchange Freedom!
Nikon D700.
I can pickup the Nikon F and the Nikon D700 and your hand and brain just found the things where they should be.
Simply amazing.. but then ..all D/SLR I have are Nippon Kogaku (if you don't count the Soviet Kiev 19 with a .. F mount!).
Last time I pick a Canon it felt weird.. very weird.
Nothing against it.. but you have to "think" to use it, not a second nature like the Nikon.
Of course your mileage may differ... ;-)
I can pickup the Nikon F and the Nikon D700 and your hand and brain just found the things where they should be.
Simply amazing.. but then ..all D/SLR I have are Nippon Kogaku (if you don't count the Soviet Kiev 19 with a .. F mount!).
Last time I pick a Canon it felt weird.. very weird.
Nothing against it.. but you have to "think" to use it, not a second nature like the Nikon.
Of course your mileage may differ... ;-)
faris
Well-known
D700.
Old habits die hard. Been with Nikon for 35 years. Not changing now.
Reasons: Ergonomics, AF, low light capability.
That's all I need.
p.s did I mention the IQ?
Old habits die hard. Been with Nikon for 35 years. Not changing now.
Reasons: Ergonomics, AF, low light capability.
That's all I need.
p.s did I mention the IQ?
Last edited:
huddy
Well-known
I would speculate that the strobist movement has contributed to the stable price on the D70. I think the prices have actually gone back up some in the last 6 months. High speed flash sync is impossible on the newer DSLR's.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Thanks. I think the real problem is that we are getting so many niches created for reasons that escape me (apart from sales, sales and even more sales but this forum is about photography) and so people are ending up buying over specified cameras that they don't need and, at the other end of the market, we / they are wondering why they bother with a pro camera. At my age I'm out of the rat race but wonder about things when talking to other pro's & amateurs. (F'instance, where do they get the wall space from? Or don't they ever use what the thing can turn out? I've only one or two prints bigger than A3+ on show.)
Talking to people in various labs I've concluded that 99% of prints are mostly 6" x 4" or, now and then, 5" x 7". And for the occasional 5" x 7" most people ought to be happy with a 3 mega pixel camera with a reasonable lens on it. Then I'd expect a jump to the pro's cameras with something in the middle that's not made for such a hard or long life for the enthusiasts.
Instead I find pro's buying a new camera every 3 months and selling on after 6 months (so it's "still under guarantee" ) and, apart from a few, ignoring MF. And a lot of pro's seem to take a million pictures in the hopes that one or two will be OK.
Please bear in mind that at my age I imagine I could still do a wedding with a TLR, tripod and two rolls of 120 and 3 weddings with 4 rolls... The idea of spending a day or two on a wedding and then delivering thousands of photo's on a DVD worries/baffles me. As I see it, you think a bit and finally squeeze the button and that's usually it. Unless I'm testing a camera or doing a shot for ebay, of course. ;-)
Regards, David
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
I thoroughly tested the **** out of my friend's 5D MKII while I was tossing it up against the D700. In the end, I went with the D700 because I felt the build quality was on a different level to the Canon, I was familiar with the controls due to my D70 / D200 past and I was very, very into high ISO performance at the time.
Do I still have my D700? Nope. Do I regret selling it? Nope. Too big, too clunky, attracted too much attention and I hated how little I thought about light and the technical side of exposing a photo properly. Both cameras are excellent and are worthy of possession. Perhaps one day I'll return to digital, just not for a while yet...
Do I still have my D700? Nope. Do I regret selling it? Nope. Too big, too clunky, attracted too much attention and I hated how little I thought about light and the technical side of exposing a photo properly. Both cameras are excellent and are worthy of possession. Perhaps one day I'll return to digital, just not for a while yet...
gavinlg
Veteran
What you say is certainly true - most people don't even print in DSLR world. But there's other factors to consider like dynamic range and high iso performance for instance. When I shoot interiors I can usually pull back 2-3 stops of highlight information if I expose well with my 5d. With an olympus e-410 (for example), it comparatively has less highlight range to begin with, and you can only recover about 1/3 of a stop of blown highlight before the color channel clips. As you can imagine when dealing with dark interiors on massively bright Australian days, the extra room in the files is a HUGE help to me. Same goes with shadow detail - I can reliably push the shadows at ISO 50 with my 5d about 4 stops without degrading quality too much (no banding, very little noise), when as with the e-410 I can only push it about 1.5 stops before noise muddies up the darks. Big difference.
And then there's lenses for systems - I routinely shoot at iso3200, at 1.2 and 1.4 with my 5d in super low light and get great images out of it. Again not possible with a 4/3 camera.
My point is it's just so dependent on what you're actually using them for, but my view is that there is definitely room for expensive gear, and there are definitely people who need the certain advantages it gives.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Shower-proof is what I'm looking at mostly! High DR doesn't come into it; although I've noticed I get clouds and blues in the sky and a lot of people just get it a washed out bright grey sky. I suppose it's a matter of technique and remembering that film is still available and that Ilford's FP4+ is a fast film to some of us...
Regards, David
Shower-proof is what I'm looking at mostly! High DR doesn't come into it; although I've noticed I get clouds and blues in the sky and a lot of people just get it a washed out bright grey sky. I suppose it's a matter of technique and remembering that film is still available and that Ilford's FP4+ is a fast film to some of us...
Regards, David
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Gavin, your first paragraph made me laugh, because that's probably what will happen.
But FF is still (and will be) the de facto standard for professional cameras.
If Olympus was serious about that market, they should have one FF camera. That does not invalidate the 4/3rd platform at all, it would just put 4/3rd squarely against APS, and the FF camera will be compared to 5D, D700, and whatever that one is called (from Sony).
Two different markets to go after, really.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
dmc
Bessa Driver
The two prosumer full frame DSLRs that seem to get talked about most at RFF are the 5D (mkl or mkll) and the D700. I'm amazed at how many members seem to have D700s ... Nikon must have sold a lot of these.
And I've frequently heard mention from contented M8 and M9 owners that they have a D700 or 5D mkll lurking in the background ... obviously for those times when only the best will do!
I really like my D700 and my only regret is that It can't do what the Canon does and readily accept a diverse range of other manufacturers lenses with an adapter ... I nearly bought the Canon because of this but the praise for the Nikon's low light performance was so vocal at the time it was hard to go against the flow.
I realise there are other unRF choices out there but if you're looking for a full frame DSLR for a couple of grand there really only seems to be two in the offering when you get down to it. I aplogise to any Sony fans but the A850/900 doesn't seem to be that pouplar around here and as highly as the new K-5 Penatx's praises have been sung, it's not full frame.
So which one then ... Canon or Nikon and why?
No need to apologize to us Sony users, Keith. If you owed one you wouldn't need this poll. Too bad you didn't include the 850/900 as a choice though . . .