hubsand
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #9 · Massive jump-ship. What to do? | |
It would be a grave mistake to presume the low-light ability of the D700 is better than the 5D II. The Canon's far greater file size goes a long way to mitigate its slightly inferior per-pixel signal-to-noise ratio. Scale to the same size either way, and the files are almost identical in terms of low-light performance, but the Canon files are hugely superior sub-ISO-800 by virtue of its major resolution advantage.
Also, with regard to AF performance, I may be able to help clarify your expectations of both: I shoot the 5D II and D700 side by side. Initially, I swapped some Canon kit for the D700 because I was tired of missing shots with the 5D and was under the impression that the Nikon's AF was the top gun for all missions. I quickly found I was wrong.
In fact, the only reason to keep the D700 is that it tracks fast-moving subjects a little better, and Nikon's 85mm f1.4 is a smarter tool for real-world wide aperture work than the 5D II/85L. Ironically, in this specific scenario, I would be better off with the Sony and the Zeiss 85/135 lenses, but the ability to swap all the Nikon lenses between both cameras is a real budget-saver. And when Nikon gets round to putting the D3X sensor in a D700-class body, the sheer wondrousness of the Nikon 14-24 might pull me back to Nikon.
Regardless, you should know that in really low light, the Canon's AF is significantly swifter and more accurate than the D700. And if the camera is moving (ie, for a quick-fire grab shot), there's little to choose between them. Only if the camera is static or slow moving, and there is a need to track rapidly moving objects within the frame, does the Nikon AF prove superior in use. If you load the grip with appropriate power, it also has a few extra FPS, but these advantages have quite specific, limited application. The Nikon's ability to find eyes rather than noses is endearing, though.
The Nikon also shines in low-light wide angle scenarios that require AF - again, a pretty small situation sub-set. The 14-24G is much better than anything Canon has and the 85/1.4 is a sweet combination of speed and quality; on the flip side, Canon's 85/1.8 is very fine, and just as rapid; and the 85L is optically better and 'faster' in light gathering (though no other) terms - plus their 70-200/4 IS cannot be beaten. Both are clear steps up from the Pentax.
The fact that your FF lenses can be adapted to the Canon might swing it . . .
|
Yes, some of you will roll your eyes at that, but my photography is currently being limited by the bodies I'm using. When they nail the focus, my lenses are great and sharp, but it happens too rarely. I throw away half of my photos to missed focus and ugly noise.
) because simply as one who could has not got one single Pentax lens, I didn't want to go through that expensive part. But pentax with the K7 seemed exactly what I was looking for. I wound up with the Rebel xsi because I have a 70-200 f 4.0 is and my daugher liked the rebel. The rebel suited her because she is left eye dominant and likes to use the back button for focus.