cputeq wrote:
Actually, the 5D2 was disappointing on the AF front when it was first released...nobody believed Canon kept the same stupid AF from the 5D (even though they claim it was \'tweaked\'), and I think these \"knee-jerk\" reactions are just bringing up old memories.
So, from day 1, you had the D700\'s overall competence in most-everything (low light, AF, FPS) vs the 5D2 and its more focused approach (pixels and video over AF and FPS). This ticked a lot of people off back then.
The apologists always say \"focus and recompose\" but for a lot of situations that just doesn\'t work and you need fast, reliable outer-point AF performance - something the 5D and 5D2 don\'t deliver. The apologists then says \"Get a 1Dx series\", but that\'s easy to essentially tell someone \"hey, spend $6000 on a camera body just to get FF and decent AF performance, when Nikon gives it to you for $3000\"
From day 1 D700 was a \"we want to have something against 5D at least. For that it was great. It was overcome 8 weeks later when 5D II was announced. Higher resolution instead of a generation behind one, best IQ and low light capabilities (that was why Nikon brought out the D3s) and video (what I do not use). That \"crippled\" Canon camera looks back on a 3 year histury of high success, D700 can not hold on with. Yeah, AF is better over all. It \"feels\" better, to. But it is still just a camera. My keapers with center AF and rearrange on a wedding where higher then my collegues with \"best AF\".
I think D 800 is a phantastic camera. It still just does not fit my needs again. I do not need 75% increase in pixels (or 200 compared to its predecessor), but better IQ in high ISO.
To be honest: AF in 5D II was not what one would expect in a 2009 body. But it was working. My formula: The more whiners , so more successfull the camera seems to be.
For $ 6000 (6800) you do not get a camera body with just FF and decent AF performance. You get even fom Canon the camera with FF in best IQ at highest ISO, very best AF, fastest FPS, best body and seal - just number one for 95% of shooters.
Nikon now offers (first time) a FF in a well build body with good AF, high(est) MP, standard FPS and ISO at $ 3000/3300. That is a step ahead for consumers & pros.
D4 is a great camera that seems to loose in all categories except F 8.0 AF (what is rumored to be fixed) and price. The offered $ 800 difference is nothing that makes a pro shooter think about.
D800 is a new yet not released camera, too. It should not be compared to Canons 3 year old top selling camera. Lets see, what Canon is going to do befor we start to whine with a cause.
Feb 08, 2012 at 10:38 AM
Previous versions of Ralph Conway's message #10323657 « D800, 36mp, af at F8, ect, press release out »
