Nikon D700 vs Canon 5D Mark II Feature Comparison

"Harout S. Hedeshian" wrote in message
...

I am in the market for a new DSLR within the next 18 months or so in
preparation for a big trip. I am by no means a professional
photographer, as such I am well aware that these are not consumer
DSLRs. Here comes the dilemma: I've grown up on Nikon cameras, I own
an FG and an F3 film camera which I've "inherited" from my father. I
don't mind shooting film, but it can be troublesome going overseas. I
own a Samsung NV11 for my point and shoot purposes, which I really
like. I was dead set on the Nikon D700 (I'll go into why in a little
bit) until I saw that the 5D Mark II can record video in 1080P. This
video recording feature strikes the consumer chord in me and now might
make the 5DMII a serious consideration.

As others have pointed out, shooting even HD video with a still
camera is not the best way to go. Lack of AF and AE will drive
you nuts with video (unless you don't move the camera and your
subjects don't move around, but then you would still be better
off with shooting stills since they will be sharper). Then, there is
the miserable sound... BTW, stills shot on (or transferred to)
memory cards can look GREAT on a 1080p TV! If you want top
quality 1080 HD, the superb $600 Canon HV30 can produce
it (see my review of it he
http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/Canon_HV20-HV30.htm).

In any case, I like the D700 because it has a full frame sensor. This
means I don't need to relearn my focal ranges. (**shudder it's like
teaching an American the metric system**).

This is definitely nice, especially if you like using wide angles (but
if not, it doesn't make much difference - and the smaller sensor
gives you more "tele"...;-).

Low light is an issue
because I tend to shoot indoors without a flash. The D700's noise
reduction appears to be superior especially at high ISOs which is
important to me. Furthermore, as a consumer, I'm finding that the
pricing on the D700 in the long run will cost me about $1000 to $1500
less than a 5DMII.

A good point. Also remember that for traveling, a D700 is HEAVY,
a D300 is fairly heavy, and a D90 isn't very bad at all for weight...

Besides those practical points, the only other thing holding be to
Nikon is familiarity with Nikon, and Nikkor lenses. I don't plan on
reusing my existing lenses because they are manual focus; they may not
even mount on the D700 for all I know.

If they all mounted on the FG, they will all mount on the current
bodies mentioned here. You can use the viewfinder for focusing,
or *MAYBE* the focus indicators (I've never been much of a fan
of this method, though). Both the D300 and D700 can meter with
manual focus lenses. Depending on what you have now in lenses,
you may already have some fine lenses (and there is a widespread
feeling that with a few notable exceptions on both sides, that short
to medium-long Nikkors tend to be at least slightly better than the
equivalent Canons, sometimes spectacularly so, as with the Nikkor
14-24mm f2.8 and 17-35mm f2.8 lenses (and the 35-70mm f2.8,
28-70mm f2.8, and 24-70mm f2.8 Nikkors are also excellent if
you have the money and the strength to buy and carry these ;-). For
more on some Nikkors you may have now, see my evaluation list,
at - http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/slemn.html.

So here is what I want to ask the camera gurus:
Is the HD video capture on the 5DMII really worth it? I imagine the
image performance on the 5DMII is much better than a $500 consumer
camcorder.Does the 5DMII have a mic, or an option for an external
mic?

Unless you really don't care about getting the best results, I wouldn't
go this way... The little Canon HV30 camcorder is really wonderful.
BTW, DO NOT BE TEMPTED BY MEMORY CARD OR HARD
DRIVE BASED CAMCORDERS! The ones with lower data rates
(most) produce inferior picture quality, and the recent few just out
that have a higher data rate and can look almost as good as HDV
tape types are VERY, VERY hard to deal with when editing.

It also seems that the lenses for Canon are quite expensive. I would
like to buy a wide angle prime with a large aperture for the low light
conditions as well as a general 25~100mm ish zoom.

I have a good Nikkor 35mm f2 AIS MF FS that is excellent FF wide
open, but there is little else out there that is good wider than maybe f4,
or shorter than this except the super wide Nikkor zooms mentioned
above, and the excellent Canon 24mm f1.4 (plus the Zeiss 21mm f2.8).
There are a few others here and there that are also good, but.........;-)

Note: megapixels, or "bling", is not an issue for me. The pictures
just need to be sharp and clear. I don't intend to make giant (greater
than 11x17) prints out of these. Even 11x17 is pushing it.

I would think that the Nikon D90/D300/D700 could all do that
well enough...

Since I am not very familiar with Canon in general, how would people
say Canon line of lenses compare to Nikkor in durability and
longevity? I am hoping this camera will last me as long as the FG and
F3 have lasted me and my father (i.e. measured in decades).

To think that I regarded the Nikon FG and FA as "plastic
pieces of crap" when they first came out, and now I really like
both of mine! ;-) And they both "wore" well and still look like new.

That said, I've seen consumer CCD based cameras start developing stuck
pixels after ~4 to 5 years. In point: my Olympus C3000 (which is a
turn-of-the-millennium i.e. ~9 year old camera) has several bright
green spots that appear on every picture and low light conditions have
gotten so bad that shooting indoors without a flash looks like someone
used the color noise filter on Photoshop, I mean severe noise, messes
with your head to look at. It wasn't this bad when new. I know CCD
technology has improved significantly over the past decade but I'm not
too sure how age affects modern CMOS sensors in the D700 and 5DMII or
if the degradation experienced in CCDs is applicable to CMOS sensors.

All feedback is appreciated.

Harout Hedeshian

On the last, I'm interested in comments, too. I will say that with my
Sony 1 and 3 CCD video cameras, I always had to accept some
bright pixels at maximum gain and 1/15th shutter speed (so long as
they disappeared at 1/30th). With the little Canon camcorder, the
CMOS chip shows no bright pixels under any conditions. Also, I know
someone who went through three D80s and had to settle for a few
bright pixels on the CCDs with three second exposures with the lens
cap on, but a friend's new D700 with a CMOS chip shows no bright
pixels under the same conditions. Keeping a sensor clean is also a
consideration with digital cameras, which makes some of us wary
of using non-zooms, even though most perform noticeably better than
most zooms. Another consideration with CMOS chips is "rolling
shutter distortion", but it is not often seen...;-)
--David Ruether
www.donferrario.com/ruether

On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, "Harout S. Hedeshian" wrote:

The other
kind of shots I frequently take is marcos. I use my 50mm in
conjunction with extender tubes and if I want really close, I toss a
doubler in there. Do you know if I can use my extender tubes with an
AF-S lense? I know I would lose the AF functionality, the tubes don't
have the contacts necessary to drive the AF motors. Macro lenses are
pretty much out of consideration for cost reasons.

You can use all of your existing lens and tubes. For macro work do you
really need auto focus?

Don www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom).

"Harout S. Hedeshian" wrote in message
...
David Ruether blabbed...

Thanks everyone for your thoughts, it's pretty much helped me confirm
what I was originally thinking.

As others have pointed out, shooting even HD video with a still
camera is not the best way to go. Lack of AF and AE will drive
you nuts with video (unless you don't move the camera and your
subjects don't move around, but then you would still be better
off with shooting stills since they will be sharper). Then, there is
the miserable sound... BTW, stills shot on (or transferred to)
memory cards can look GREAT on a 1080p TV! If you want top
quality 1080 HD, the superb $600 Canon HV30 can produce it
(see my review of it he
http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/Canon_HV20-HV30.htm).

This is pretty much the answer I was looking for. I don't see my self
shooting HD video very often.

--If you have a good 1080 HDTV and saw the output from that
cheap little Canon HV30, you might change your mind! It is really
amazing - and I'm tempted to take it on the next trip (as I did the
last one) and leave the still gear at home).

As such, I was thinking that the HD
video feature on the 5D2 would be more like a bonus, and that if it
worked better than a $500 camcorder, then it might just have been
worth it. I fully understand the point everyone is trying to make,
that buying a still camera for HD video doesn't make sense, but that
wasn't the intention. I guess I came off like a complete noob hehe

--Nope - just like someone asking a question, for which several
of us had an answer...;-)

This is definitely nice, especially if you like using wide angles (but
if not, it doesn't make much difference - and the smaller sensor
gives you more "tele"...;-).

And I do! My favorite lense by far is my 35mm focal length. In
retrospect it seems I overuse it. In any case, if I got the D300 with
the smaller CCD, I would effectively be losing the wide angle, no?

--There are good wider lenses that with the 1.5X magnification
effect would be good, at least stopped down a bit - but the crop
factor may effectively remove the areas that are sub-standard at
wide stops.

Which means I'd have to spring for a 25mm, anything less than that
and I'm in the fisheye category which I definitely don't want.

--Both the 20mm f2.8 and 24mm f2.8 Nikkors are very nice on
FF by f5.6 - and on a cropped frame, they should be nice by f4,
and usable at f2.8. The equivalent FLs would be 30mm and 36mm,
of course, on a crop sensor... 'Course, if you've got the bucks, the
14-24mm f2.8 is excellent on FF even at f2.8, giving a 21-36mm
equivalent high quality zoom on the cropped sensor. It does appear
that if you use your old lenses, the D300 would be a good choice
if WA is less important than lower weight/price/size, and both will
meter (but not AF) with your older lenses.

The other
kind of shots I frequently take is marcos. I use my 50mm in
conjunction with extender tubes and if I want really close, I toss a
doubler in there. Do you know if I can use my extender tubes with an
AF-S lense? I know I would lose the AF functionality, the tubes don't
have the contacts necessary to drive the AF motors. Macro lenses are
pretty much out of consideration for cost reasons.

--This should work, but it will work better with the 50mm f2/1.8
rather than the f1.4, and you will still need to stop down quite a bit
for best performance. Less magnification, but consider looking
for a Nikon TC14A or a newer one with glass that still clears your
lens' rear elements (some won't). If you stop down, front achromats
can also work very well and are about $40.

A good point. Also remember that for traveling, a D700 is HEAVY,
a D300 is fairly heavy, and a D90 isn't very bad at all for weight...

Compared to the FG, I'd say the F3 with the motor drive is pretty
heavy... No problems in this department

--Um, try hoisting a D3 with a fast zoom on it...! ;-) I had an F3
and often used it with a motor, and (maybe 'cuz I'm weaker now)
the new cameras, from the D200 on, seem much heavier and they
are too heavy for me to use easily.

I would think that the Nikon D90/D300/D700 could all do that
well enough...

Agreed, especially in the pixel count department. I was considering
the D300, it has the complete feature set I am looking for, just not
full frame sensor. I figure for the price difference, since the D300
is already a fairly expensive camera, I'll eat ramen for a month and
grab the full frame sensor D700.

-- 8^) It may be worth it...;-)

To think that I regarded the Nikon FG and FA as "plastic
pieces of crap" when they first came out, and now I really like
both of mine! ;-) And they both "wore" well and still look like new.

The only problem I've had with my FG is that the latch for the door
got loose. I've lost a roll, and a half of a different roll by the
door accidentally opening. It's quite annoying. A pair of needle nose
pliers fixed that!

--I used to buy a lot of used gear, and sometimes with the
FA/FM/FE/FG I would see that, but it was easy to fix, as you
point out...;-)
--DR