hubsand wrote:
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.
Do you refer to the central AF point performance or to the outer ones as well?
Yakim Peled wrote:
Do you refer to the central AF point performance or to the outer ones as well?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
I'm guessing centre AF point only. As hubsand's observations would jell with my experience on the D300 in that case. The outer AF performance of the D300 was significantly better than any of the non-45 point Canon's in lower light in my experience.
If you want really good centre-point AF in low light, try a Sony A900 or A700.
The D700 AF points, all of them are more sensitive than the center point on the 5D. You can generally focus on anything you can take a picture of and the focus is dead on.
All of you have been very informative and helpful. Thank you. Really.
After reading the info here, I checked and rechecked stats and tests galore on a few of the current full frame bodies. I doubted my choice a few times and this made me do some more research. I am very intrigued by the 5D2.
But I'm still quite sure the D700 has what I need. The snappy(enough) focus algorithms, the full-screen focus-point distribution, and the incredible 3D tracking abilities are still the best out there and that is what I need more than anything else. I can do without the awesome resolving power of the 5D2 or the A900. (I don't even like storing and working with my 10MP RAW files, never mind the monsters that would come from those cameras.) As for which brand has the lenses I need. It doesn't matter. They're all great.
I've decided.
Now here's the funny thing. For the first while, I will only be able to afford the body plus one lens, depending on how cheaply I can acquire this body. I'm thinking the standard 50mm 1.4 is a place to start. Haha. It's a great lens, but do you guys think I could get by shooting portraits, engagement sessions and grad photos with only that?
Now here's the funny thing. For the first while, I will only be able to afford the body plus one lens, depending on how cheaply I can acquire this body. I'm thinking the standard 50mm 1.4 is a place to start. Haha. It's a great lens, but do you guys think I could get by shooting portraits, engagement sessions and grad photos with only that?
Am I crazy?
You're not crazy. Limiting to one lens will let your immagination and creativity wonder instead of instantly wanting to change lenses. Both the 50/1.4D and 50/1.4G are nice, but if you can swing it I'd go with the G because it is much sharper.
If high ISO noise is the most important thing in this world, buy a D700, it's a great camera. But remember that:
1. Most Nikon lenses (and the camera) will be bigger, heavier and more expensive than the corresponding Pentax ones, the body likewise.
2. For the price of the D700 and a couple of decent lenses, you can buy a K-7 and more or less any Pentax lens you want, plus some more.
If it was me, I wouldn't do it, but then, I'm a Nikon user considering buying a K-7 and a couple of Limited lenses because no other body/lens combination will give me such high quality gear, particularly with regards to primes, in a compact package and for a decent price.
Ugh. It's posts like that which jam a branch in the spokes of my mental bicycle.
My employee discount with Pentax is ridiculously great. I can buy the K7 for $880 and any of the lenses brand new for below manufacturing cost.
Using the $3000 I have saved, I could get that ultra small and sleek weather-sealed body plus the spectacular and famous pancake 77mm f1.8 limited, the 35mm macro limited, and with a bit more saving have the cash for a (Sigma) fast super zoom to reach farther than my 50-135 does. I'd be completely set.
But Pentax's focusing is primitive, unreliable and frustrating. And the K7 is reportedly as noisy or noisier(!) than the K20, which itself was worse than the K10. EDIT: "Noise", aka grain.
As he said, the Canon shot samples were underexposed, they all look darker than the Nikon ones. I'd imagine that would make the noise more obvious.
You might want to check the in depth comparison. Nikon on the left and Canon on the right. I don't know about you but Canon ones look better and there's a colour cast to the Nikon samples.
Sound advice.
A small, quiet, weather-sealed camera, with in-body stabilization sounds very attractive. I'd like to see for myself how bad the focusing is, and how poor the high ISO ability is. If you can get one in your hands, I'd try that first before spending $3000+ on a D700.
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
I'm surprised about what you say about noise btw. My impression was that the K7 is quieter than the K20D, but maybe that was only the shutter...
No, I was talking about grain, not audible noise. The K7 shutter is beautifully silent and swift.
jabog6 wrote:
If you can get one in your hands, I'd try that first before spending $3000+ on a D700.
I work in a camera shop. I play with all of these cameras all day long. I am already familiar with all of these machines.
Ok. Fine. The sensible thing to do would be to hold off switching to a more expensive platform until my income can support it. Everything about Nikon and everything about FF is more expensive. I do not make enough to switch to FF right now.
Can you rent a Canon system for a day? You might want to look into this if you live in a big city with a pro level camera store with a rental counter. You might want to try both the Canon and Nikon and see how they perform against your Pentax gear.
Max
PS: I am a former Pentax LX user. Owned some wonderful glass: 20/2.8A, 28/2.8A, 50/1.4A, 85/1.4A*, 200/2.8A* ED, 300/4, 400/2.8 A* ED. The 85/1.4 was probably one of the best lenses I have ever owned. I switched years ago for the Canon EF auto focus. The new Pentax line really does not do much for me other than the Limited lenses.
Just to add another dimension....I have a 1 series camera and a 40D. The 1 series has the better focusing system...which means I have to work harder with the 40D. Consequently, I don't get many out of focus images.....and when I do, it was because I was sloppy.
Ironically. when I use manual focus bodies ( I still use my T90 ) I rarely get a poorly focused pic!
What I am saying is make sure it really is the camera that's at fault!
PhotoMaximum wrote:
Can you rent a Canon system for a day?
No need. I work in a camera shop.
anthonygh wrote:
What I am saying is make sure it really is the camera that's at fault!
That's a very valid point to bring up. But I know that it's the camera screwing up, not me. I regularly push that K10 very hard and I can get lots out of it, but it is limiting me.
(I'm not the best photographer out there, but I really do know my stuff. Click my www to see.)
DubiousDrewski wrote:
Ok. Fine. The sensible thing to do would be to hold off switching to a more expensive platform until my income can support it. Everything about Nikon and everything about FF is more expensive. I do not make enough to switch to FF right now.
Thanks everyone for your help.
Well, how about getting a 35/2 and 85/1.8 or even just a 50/1.8 and some AIS glass? For example, the 105/2.5 would be nice for portraits...
DubiousDrewski wrote:
Ugh. It's posts like that which jam a branch in the spokes of my mental bicycle.
My employee discount with Pentax is ridiculously great. I can buy the K7 for $880 and any of the lenses brand new for below manufacturing cost.
Using the $3000 I have saved, I could get that ultra small and sleek weather-sealed body plus the spectacular and famous pancake 77mm f1.8 limited, the 35mm macro limited, and with a bit more saving have the cash for a (Sigma) fast super zoom to reach farther than my 50-135 does. I'd be completely set.
But Pentax's focusing is primitive, unreliable and frustrating. And the K7 is reportedly as noisy or noisier(!) than the K20, which itself was worse than the K10. EDIT: "Noise", aka grain.
I see everybody giving great advice on your camera and lens decisions. I happen to be a Pentax user (K20D) but by no means a "Pentaxian". I happen to believe you must go with the equipment you yourself feel comfortable with and that brand loyalty is an invention by marketeers.
Whatever you choose, whether is is the awesome Nikon or the amazing Canon, the folks around here seem perfectly equipped to support and advise you on your choice. I cannot hope to add to that, but I just wanted to remark that I had a look at your website and I was awestruck by the images! They are absolutely amazing, one by one and I did not want to leave that unsaid here.
Is the $880 you can buy K-7 for in Canadian or US Dollars?
Personally I find it impossible to leave one brand for another thesedays. So I own Canon, Nikon & Pentax. Though if I had to cut it down to two brands I'd cash out of the Pentax. The K20D stays primarily because I've got a couple wonderful macro prime lenses and I enjoy using inbody shake reduction with them:
