Il Medico wrote:
What;s with all the fascination and drooling over the D700 that is $300 more.
If offers MUCH lower resolution, the old 5D beat it handily in fine detail rendering.
The D700 may be a better sports camera, but that\'s about it. The 5DII will smoke it in everything else and most importantly where it counts- IQ.
No fascination, no drooling, just simple fact that the D700 provides features that Canon does not, in a package that Canon apparently refuses to develop.
10-12MP of resolution is adequate for 90% of what 90% of the people out there do; I certainly don\'t need more than 12-16MP for less than 10% of what I shoot. With 10MP, I can print a fine 13x19\" print, cropping included. I don\'t need 21MP.
What I do need is a compact, weather-sealed pro body with an interface identical to my 1-Series camera. I\'d like it to have a horizon leveling option (yes, I\'m lame). I\'d like it to have LCD-based gridlines that magically show up in the viewfinder when I want them. I\'d like the viewfinder to show the AF points that I have selected, and not show the ones I\'ve not. I\'d like a pop-up flash for my \'backup\' body (I know, boo-hiss!), one that can even control off-camera flash (yay!). I\'d like to see a more intelligent implementation of the 2000+ pixels that the light meter has (\'binning\' them into subsets to be averaged out is an analog approach in a digital world). Perhaps you get the idea.
I didn\'t expect any of that in the 5D successor, and adding 10MP to my images isn\'t going to make them intrinsically better.
-Jeff
Sep 17, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Previous versions of Jeff's message #6179464 « 5D II, hit or miss? »
