D700 vs 5DII vs A900

Started Nov 4, 2008 | Discussions
fudgebrown Senior Member • Posts: 2,640
Re: D700 vs 5DII vs A900

The jury is still out on the true high ISO performance of the 5D Mark II. No doubt it is an exciting new camera. The D700 is a refined, sharp, superb cam with features that will blow your mind... you really need to study all the options you have available and not base it solely on mega pixels...

harold1968 wrote:

I could live with 12mp.

But the exytra detail and cropping potential at double the pixels is
appealing, particularly at similar price levels.

The quid-pro-quo is the magical ISO performance of the D700, which is
great for inside hand-held.

I don't want to get two cameras here.

-- hide signature --

'Procrastinate now, don't put it off.'

'Vista is the ME of our generation.' - John C. Dvorak

 fudgebrown's gear list:fudgebrown's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Nikon D810 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM +5 more
GiovanniB Contributing Member • Posts: 985
Sony primes are excellent! Particularly their Zeiss ZA series.

harold1968 wrote:

Once i have chosen the body i am stuck with the system. To be honest,
the Nikon and Canon primes wipe the floor with Sony's. Although the
Sony does stabilise Sigma and Tamron primes which are pretty good.

Harold,

sorry but I think this can't be left uncommented.

The Sony Zeiss ZA series primes are amongst the very best out there and themselves the only reason to buy an Alpha DSLR for many. They are expensive though.

Also, talking about Macro lenses, the Sony 100/2.8 AF Macro, a design taken over from Minolta, is regarded as probably the best 100 mm class macro of any brand. However, in this class there isn't much between them; a Tamron 90/2.8 Macro will usually do its job just as good.

In any case, it sounds a bit weird to me that you claim the Sony primes to be inferior and in the next sentence declare Sigma (!!) and Tamron to be pretty good. Have you ever tried a Minolta or Sony prime?

Regards,

Johannes

GiovanniB Contributing Member • Posts: 985
Primes vs. zooms

harold1968 wrote:

but a good quality prime is cheaper then a zoom and usually sharper.

Not necessarily cheaper, but usually sharper and with less distortion.

So I can still get the quality but sacrifice the flexibility for
later.

Lenses tend to be cheaper if they are mass products. Buying a "mainstream" lens that is produced in large quantities should give you a better deal than something exotic, be it a prime or zoom.

Once i have chosen the body i am stuck with the system. To be honest,
the Nikon and Canon primes wipe the floor with Sony's. Although the
Sony does stabilise Sigma and Tamron primes which are pretty good.

Just a small addition to my above posting:

Sony primes are great, but IMO except the 35/1.4 G. Also, there's a large number of very good used Minolta lenses available which fit the Alpha 900, with the oldest designs usually being amongst the best ones.

Johannes

harold1968
OP harold1968 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,687
Re: Sony primes are excellent! Particularly their Zeiss ZA series.

true, I forgot about the zeiss primes...
although they are zoom money ...

GiovanniB wrote:

harold1968 wrote:

Once i have chosen the body i am stuck with the system. To be honest,
the Nikon and Canon primes wipe the floor with Sony's. Although the
Sony does stabilise Sigma and Tamron primes which are pretty good.

Harold,

sorry but I think this can't be left uncommented.

The Sony Zeiss ZA series primes are amongst the very best out there
and themselves the only reason to buy an Alpha DSLR for many. They
are expensive though.

Also, talking about Macro lenses, the Sony 100/2.8 AF Macro, a design
taken over from Minolta, is regarded as probably the best 100 mm
class macro of any brand. However, in this class there isn't much
between them; a Tamron 90/2.8 Macro will usually do its job just as
good.

In any case, it sounds a bit weird to me that you claim the Sony
primes to be inferior and in the next sentence declare Sigma (!!) and
Tamron to be pretty good. Have you ever tried a Minolta or Sony prime?

Regards,

Johannes

 harold1968's gear list:harold1968's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS30 Sony RX1R Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +1 more
burnymeister
burnymeister Senior Member • Posts: 1,564
Yep - that's true...

I (like many others) didn't realize how much of a difference v4 update made to the a700 - it's a great camera too.

I got the a900 for $2340USD (Canadian dollar was very low) so that's why I made the decision to buy it when I did.
--
Vern Dewit
Calgary, Alberta Canada
http://www.fresh-oxygen.com
http://verndewit.com/

 burnymeister's gear list:burnymeister's gear list
Sony a7R III Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS Sony FE 50mm F1.8 +2 more
Skip M Veteran Member • Posts: 7,174
Why not 5D mkI?

Just to swim against the tide. There are still 5Ds on dealers shelves, new, and the price ain't gonna drop much more than it has. If you are considering the cameras you are, it seems 12mp is acceptable and the heavy build quality of the Nikon isn't paramount, either. So, you can get a 12mp FF body which has noise characteristics that match or beat the D700 up to ISO1600 (even Ken Rockwell concedes that!) for around $2000.
Just a thought...
--
Skip M
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
http://www.pbase.com/skipm
'Living in the heart of a dream, in the Promised Land!'
John Stewart

burnymeister
burnymeister Senior Member • Posts: 1,564
Except he mentions landscapes as one of his primary goals...

... and with detailed landscapes you can basically never have too much detail. A camera like the 5DII or the a900 will capture more detail than the D700. If one of his primary objectives was to capture indoor concerts I would say the D700 is the hands-down winner, no doubt about it. My point is that for some applications, more mega pixels work to the photographers advantage. It isn't ALL hype, although for most people it may be.

The fact is that you don't need the AF or the noise-free images at 800 ISO if you're shooting landscapes off a tripod. So I guess it all depends on the balance of usage. The a900 is no slouch at high ISO (I very comfortably shoot at 1600 ISO) and has IS built-in so even lenses like a 50mm f/1.4 are stabilized. You won't find a 50mm f/1.4 with IS from either Canon or Nikon... So if you tend to shoot 80% landscapes and 20% macro and family (like me) than the a900 suddenly looks very attractive compared to the other two.

These cameras are all wonderful though, and for me it came down to the D700 or the a900 and to be perfectly honest, the a900 was much cheaper in Canada at the time so I chose it.
--
Vern Dewit
Calgary, Alberta Canada
http://www.fresh-oxygen.com
http://verndewit.com/

 burnymeister's gear list:burnymeister's gear list
Sony a7R III Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS Sony FE 50mm F1.8 +2 more
harold1968
OP harold1968 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,687
I'm thinking ... (nt)

Skip M wrote:

Just to swim against the tide. There are still 5Ds on dealers
shelves, new, and the price ain't gonna drop much more than it has.
If you are considering the cameras you are, it seems 12mp is
acceptable and the heavy build quality of the Nikon isn't paramount,
either. So, you can get a 12mp FF body which has noise
characteristics that match or beat the D700 up to ISO1600 (even Ken
Rockwell concedes that!) for around $2000.
Just a thought...
--
Skip M
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
http://www.pbase.com/skipm
'Living in the heart of a dream, in the Promised Land!'
John Stewart

 harold1968's gear list:harold1968's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS30 Sony RX1R Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +1 more
Mike Stratil Contributing Member • Posts: 904
Re: As a former 5D owner and new a900 owner...

Do you have a way of posting this photo as a TIF straight from the raw? I would love to pixel peep it with the full info available.
--
Mike S

GiovanniB Contributing Member • Posts: 985
Re: D700 vs 5DII vs A900

fudgebrown wrote:

The D700 is a refined, sharp,

Not quite as sharp as the > 3 years old EOS 5D.

superb cam

Hm. Nicely built. Lots of menu items. Built-in level scale. No quickly accessible custom memories that can override everything. Aperture on most lenses can't be changed during DOF preview. No spot metering while AE-Lock is engaged (only available on the Sony). No manual exposure shifting (again, not on the Canon either, but on the Sony). How do you define "superb"?

with features that will blow your mind...

I'd rather use my mind for taking photos ...

Fact is all of today's cameras will soon look pretty old.

So if you don't need to shine with your latest and greatest gadget it may be wiser to invest in what serves you best NOW instead of trying to get the most expensive body you just barely can afford (except, of course, this is exactly the choice that truly serves you best today).

Btw. I always cover the prism housings and badges of my cameras with black gaffer tape, especially while they are new. A truly multifunctional protection.

pascal b
pascal b Regular Member • Posts: 254
Re: I'm thinking ... (nt)

If I can recommend you, don't forget many other priority features like for example... focus precision.

I will not try to convince you to forget the 5D2 as I did not test it. But I have a BIG feeling as the AF system is exactly the same in the MK2... I have a very very bad experience with 5D. Even if here you will find many people saying 5D focus is perfect I can tell you that Canon focus in general is very disappointing (I deeply test an other 5D and a 1DS2 coming from CPS when mine was under repair and the "famous" problem of front or back focus, especially with lenses like 135L (lens I love), was identical or even worse, yes worse !

And I can add that I just met 2 weeks ago a pro sport photographer in Paris who explained me that after a long time fighting against a very poor AF result with 1D2 and 1D3 (yes also 1D2), he decided to sell everything from Canon to buy a D3 + D300 for his job.

Here is a pdf which clearly explain the Canon focus limit (I will not say any more “problem” because Canon DON’T want te recognize it as a problem). You will see some very good focus results but also MANY VERY bad photos taken during the same day in the same place with the same guys etc.
http://www.pascalbarreiro.com/ftp/eos5d_autofocus/5d_135L.pdf

You need to trust your tool especially when you try to reach beautiful bokeh…

I was a BIG Canon supporter from my first Digital camera (D30). But now it‘s OVER.

Good luck in you decision and don’t forget one last thing, it’s more or less like a marriage, it’s always painful to divorce from a Camera brand.

 pascal b's gear list:pascal b's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +6 more
harold1968
OP harold1968 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,687
Re: I'm thinking ... (nt)

ugg! pretty bad stuff
did you try different 5Ds (i.e. take yours back) ?

pascal b wrote:

If I can recommend you, don't forget many other priority features
like for example... focus precision.
I will not try to convince you to forget the 5D2 as I did not test
it. But I have a BIG feeling as the AF system is exactly the same in
the MK2... I have a very very bad experience with 5D. Even if here
you will find many people saying 5D focus is perfect I can tell you
that Canon focus in general is very disappointing (I deeply test an
other 5D and a 1DS2 coming from CPS when mine was under repair and
the "famous" problem of front or back focus, especially with lenses
like 135L (lens I love), was identical or even worse, yes worse !
And I can add that I just met 2 weeks ago a pro sport photographer in
Paris who explained me that after a long time fighting against a very
poor AF result with 1D2 and 1D3 (yes also 1D2), he decided to sell
everything from Canon to buy a D3 + D300 for his job.
Here is a pdf which clearly explain the Canon focus limit (I will not
say any more “problem” because Canon DON’T want te recognize it as a
problem). You will see some very good focus results but also MANY
VERY bad photos taken during the same day in the same place with the
same guys etc.
http://www.pascalbarreiro.com/ftp/eos5d_autofocus/5d_135L.pdf

You need to trust your tool especially when you try to reach
beautiful bokeh…

I was a BIG Canon supporter from my first Digital camera (D30). But
now it‘s OVER.
Good luck in you decision and don’t forget one last thing, it’s more
or less like a marriage, it’s always painful to divorce from a Camera
brand.

 harold1968's gear list:harold1968's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS30 Sony RX1R Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +1 more
iTanas Regular Member • Posts: 298
I have exactly same experience with 5D as above

As 5D owner my experience is pretty much exactly like in the link posted above (PDF). Non-center points sometimes nail the focus, sometimes just dont. No operator error here (and there).

pascal b wrote:

If I can recommend you, don't forget many other priority features
like for example... focus precision.
I will not try to convince you to forget the 5D2 as I did not test
it. But I have a BIG feeling as the AF system is exactly the same in
the MK2... I have a very very bad experience with 5D. Even if here
you will find many people saying 5D focus is perfect I can tell you
that Canon focus in general is very disappointing (I deeply test an
other 5D and a 1DS2 coming from CPS when mine was under repair and
the "famous" problem of front or back focus, especially with lenses
like 135L (lens I love), was identical or even worse, yes worse !
And I can add that I just met 2 weeks ago a pro sport photographer in
Paris who explained me that after a long time fighting against a very
poor AF result with 1D2 and 1D3 (yes also 1D2), he decided to sell
everything from Canon to buy a D3 + D300 for his job.
Here is a pdf which clearly explain the Canon focus limit (I will not
say any more “problem” because Canon DON’T want te recognize it as a
problem). You will see some very good focus results but also MANY
VERY bad photos taken during the same day in the same place with the
same guys etc.
http://www.pascalbarreiro.com/ftp/eos5d_autofocus/5d_135L.pdf

You need to trust your tool especially when you try to reach
beautiful bokeh…

I was a BIG Canon supporter from my first Digital camera (D30). But
now it‘s OVER.
Good luck in you decision and don’t forget one last thing, it’s more
or less like a marriage, it’s always painful to divorce from a Camera
brand.

-- hide signature --
 iTanas's gear list:iTanas's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Special Edition
harold1968
OP harold1968 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,687
is the centre point accurate ? (nt)

iTanas wrote:
As 5D owner my experience is pretty much exactly like in the link
posted above (PDF). Non-center points sometimes nail the focus,
sometimes just dont. No operator error here (and there).

pascal b wrote:

If I can recommend you, don't forget many other priority features
like for example... focus precision.
I will not try to convince you to forget the 5D2 as I did not test
it. But I have a BIG feeling as the AF system is exactly the same in
the MK2... I have a very very bad experience with 5D. Even if here
you will find many people saying 5D focus is perfect I can tell you
that Canon focus in general is very disappointing (I deeply test an
other 5D and a 1DS2 coming from CPS when mine was under repair and
the "famous" problem of front or back focus, especially with lenses
like 135L (lens I love), was identical or even worse, yes worse !
And I can add that I just met 2 weeks ago a pro sport photographer in
Paris who explained me that after a long time fighting against a very
poor AF result with 1D2 and 1D3 (yes also 1D2), he decided to sell
everything from Canon to buy a D3 + D300 for his job.
Here is a pdf which clearly explain the Canon focus limit (I will not
say any more “problem” because Canon DON’T want te recognize it as a
problem). You will see some very good focus results but also MANY
VERY bad photos taken during the same day in the same place with the
same guys etc.
http://www.pascalbarreiro.com/ftp/eos5d_autofocus/5d_135L.pdf

You need to trust your tool especially when you try to reach
beautiful bokeh…

I was a BIG Canon supporter from my first Digital camera (D30). But
now it‘s OVER.
Good luck in you decision and don’t forget one last thing, it’s more
or less like a marriage, it’s always painful to divorce from a Camera
brand.

 harold1968's gear list:harold1968's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS30 Sony RX1R Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +1 more
iTanas Regular Member • Posts: 298
Re: is the centre point accurate ? (nt)

Yes it is very accurate, but unfortunately I'm forced to use focus-recompose whch ends up resulting in slightly out-of-focus shots in the end.

I have 5D + 24-70L btw.

 iTanas's gear list:iTanas's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Special Edition
Steven Noyes Forum Pro • Posts: 12,372
Spoken like someone stuck at 12MP as options.

Really, this is serious.

fudgebrown wrote:

What are you doing that warrants more than 12MP? Really ask yourself
that question. 21MP files will only take up more space and hard

And give better large prints? Did you even think that is another thing 21MP offers?

drives. 12MP was plenty - and now suddenly it's too small? If you are
doing insane cropping then perhaps that warrants 21MP...

Or even if you don't crop. The differences between 12MP and 21MP is EASILY visible even at 12"X18".

So let me ask you, Why would you 21MP?

Steven

Necip
Necip Contributing Member • Posts: 962
Re: D700 vs 5DII vs A900

I can sell you my 5D it's excellent just what you need I dont use it much my 1dmk3 is all I need these days.
--
http://www.neciphoto.co.uk

http://photo.net/photos/Neciphoto

 Necip's gear list:Necip's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Nikon D7100 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II +2 more
barolo Regular Member • Posts: 106
Re: Why not simply the first-generation 5D ?

Hi Harold

sorry... but your idea that the right price for the A900 is about 1000 pounds or a little more is... irrealistic to say the least! It is a 24 megapixel camera and if you have a look at Sony forum you will see that it compares rather well with a Hasselblad with a 30 megapixel back... which cost almost ten times as much!!

I have difficulties to understand where you can get the idea that the price of the Sony should be much lower than the price of the new Canon 5D... Are you sure you checked the specifications and have you had a look at the pics it produces...??

all the best with your choice!

alessandro

Tacksharp Senior Member • Posts: 1,664
5D II

For low light indoor shots, it will be hard to beat the D700, since it has such huge pixels. But, something in the processing of the D700 doesn't match the D3. We don't know yet if the 21 MP 5D II can match the low light performance of the D700, but I doubt it. It could be very very close, though. However, it won't be close at all for landscape shots. The 21 MP of the 5D II trounces the D700, since it will produce much more detail (hypothetically). Add to this, the 5D II is cheaper and you already have some Canon glass, and it is a no brainer.

-Tacksharp

Teosax Senior Member • Posts: 1,466
Re: Read This
-- hide signature --

wow those sony shots look SICK!!!!!
damn it, amazing

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads