andrewd01 wrote:
Interesting to see you prefer the 5D over 1Ds mk II. I don't have the 1Ds mk II, but have seen a lot if images from this camera that have the "wow factor". What are your favourite lenses on 5D?
I could have gone either way on this, really; the images from the two cameras are more similar than different. In the end, it was a question of cost (used 1Ds II's are still over-priced) - and features (the 5D is smaller, lighter, and has a somewhat usable rear LCD).
The lenses I most like the "look" of are the 135 f2L, 85 f1.2L, and 24 f1.4L (if you can find a good one).
Quite surprisingly, my last copy (out of 4 or 5) of the 24-105 f4L delivered crisper landscape images on the 5D than my Nikkor 24-70 f2.8G could muster on either the D300 or D700... but sadly Canon has nothing that comes even remotely close to the Nikkon 14-24 f2.8G.
Thanks for the info. I have never owned more than one copy of a given lens so don't know if mine are good copies. Its probably fair to say I have been a little disappointed with the 24-105L. I have the 24L but haven't used it that much on 5D. My 24mm of choice for the D700 is the f2.8 AIS version. One day I'll take both 5D and D700 on a shoot for a fairer comparison.
molson, since you mention that Nikon lenses are too sharp/contrasty (I've noticed that difference in Canon and Nikon pictures before, but couldn't put my finger on it), I wonder if the solution lies in older lenses... maybe they'll provide that "romance" that some of us strive for.
molson wrote:
I doubt it will contribute much to the debate, but I guess I'll throw my two cents' worth in anyways...
The last four significant cameras I've owned were the D300, D700, 1Ds Mark II, and the 5D. Out of all of those, the only one I'm still using is the 5D. The D700 is a very nice camera, but the images I was able to make with it just didn't satisfy me. I switched back to Canon for one thing - sharpness.
Now, allow me to elaborate a bit on this point... the sharpness difference I'm talking about has two components - lens and sensor. I didn't care for the Nikon lenses, because quite frankly, they're too sharp - at least the way they draw or render the scene was unpleasing to my eye. I suspect the real culprit here is actually contrast, but most people would express the way they feel about this sort of image detail in terms of sharpness. The Canon lenses seem to sacrifice a noticeable amount of fine image detail, but the trade-off is a much more pleasing rendering of the subject - at least to my eyes.
With regard to the sensor component, the Nikon cameras are handicapped by anti-aliasing filters that are simply too strong. Probably the best Nikon for rendering fine detail in landscapes was the D2X, and if I were to go back to Nikon right now, that's the camera I would pick. However, I would have to rate the EOS 5D, despite all of its other shortcomings, as delivering the best per-pixel detail (in a full-frame sensor) of any camera I've used to date. Again, this is a somewhat subjective point, but at the end of the day, I'm the one I most want to please with my images, so that's what I've decided to do... and now that used 5D's are relatively cheap and plentiful, it was an easy decision to switch back; I picked up a body and all three Canon TS-E lenses for not a whole lot more than the cost of new D700 body alone.
Now, I'll just have to learn to live with all of the other compromises that come with Canon ownership... and start ignoring all the infantile DP Review forum chatter, moronic Ken Rockwell comments, and the whining of all the blind measurebators out there... ...Show more →
The difference you see in sharpness is related on how you process the image.
I own canon and have tried d3 d700 and believe me I can take any canon or nikon picture and make it look like the other one you would not be able to tell the diff.
molson wrote:
Now, I'll just have to learn to live with all of the other compromises that come with Canon ownership... and start ignoring all the infantile DP Review forum chatter, moronic Ken Rockwell comments, and the whining of all the blind measurebators out there...
Yeah, the 5D is great for IQ. It's still my favorite body for this reason; I prefer it to the D700 and 1Ds II on this count. I'm not sure about the lens assessment, though... Canon lenses can be incredibly sharp. Perhaps it is more of a bokeh issue? Certain Canon lenses seem to have a "fingerprint" that is pleasing to the eye (e.g., Canon 35L, 50L, 85L, 24-70L, most longer glass).
The thing that Nikon has right now that Canon does not, IMHO, is at least 3 professional cameras that can be considered "all-rounders"--meaning you can can shoot nearly everthing with them, from sports to fashion to studio work. Canon's lineup remains locked into "studio/portrait" and "sports/action" models, and any individual model has some tradeoffs. (Arguably, the 1DsIII is a "do-everything" camera if you can live with 5fps, but at a price point that makes it hard to justify owning more than one of them.)
