DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Ok, Nikon users lets hear your love
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 16 of 16, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/11/2011 07:21:26 AM · #1
I may be given the use of Nikon gear in exchange for the promotion of my using it here. I do not know anything about Nikon, other than how much worse it is than the wonderful Canon brand... um, sorry, force of habit...
I shoot mostly sports and live events, some portrait. I only shoot single frames, never burst (ok my 5D mkI is 3fps anyway) so I do not really care about burst speed for sports etc.
Is the D700 or D300 better or worse a body than an old 5D mkI (or for that matter a 5D mkIII soon?)?
One reason I went Canon is they had a single step down (5D) from the top 1D where Nikon seemed to be 2 steps lower after the top D3.
So, for image quality, will anything other than a D3 be a step down from a 5D mkI??

If they offer me use of gear, what Nikon body and glass would you choose to play with? Thanks all.
07/11/2011 11:14:22 AM · #2
Hmm, I thought there was something good to be said of Nikons.... No wonder they are considering lending me one!!
07/11/2011 11:21:26 AM · #3
Check out my list of gear. If I were to go up it would to the D700. I've gotten many great action/sports shots with lenses ranging from my 300mm f.4 to the humble 18-200 f3.5-5.6, which I use to shoot at horse shows, rodeos etc. However, you would probably want the 70-200 f2.8, as do I!!!

Welcome to the Nikon world, where our lenses mount the *other* way round, and the dynamic range of the D90 flattens the 5D MkII...see dsoptix!! ;-)
07/11/2011 11:28:45 AM · #4
Nikon cameras are great but guess what, so are Canons, Nikon lenses are really good but guess what, so are Canons. The only difference for me is, once you've bought lenses for one you generally stay with that company but whichever you'll definitely not notice any difference with the photos.
07/11/2011 11:33:18 AM · #5
As far as I understand it, the D700 is far superior to the 5D you have currently. Both are full frame and the D700 is of course, much newer technology then the original 5D. How it compares to the newer 5D I do not know. It is however, supposed to be renewed soon - rumors suggest, even this year.

I don't think the D300 is in the same class, as it's not full frame. I have had my D300 since they first came out and am very, very happy with it, but it's now almost 4 years old, so can't be possibly be as good as the newer technology.

Lens wise, I suppose it depends on what body you go for. If you stick with the D300s (newer upgraded version of the D300 with video etc), then you can't go far wrong with the 17-55/2.8 apart from price. I love this lens, it is wonderful, but I did just buy a 24-120/F4 lens which is intended for full frame use, and I have found I typically use this now, more than the 17-55. I'm hoping to go full frame when the D700 replacement comes out.

I can't comment about the full frame D700 performance as I haven't used it, but I think typically the 3 lenses of choice are the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200(although this one has been upgraded I think).

I'm sure someone who is infinitely more knowledgable will jump in sooner or later, but maybe that will help you a tiny bit.

As Jagar says, both Nikon and Canon are good (so too, Olympus, Sony etc)

Message edited by author 2011-07-11 11:34:29.
07/11/2011 11:53:04 AM · #6
Thanks for the feedback, if they decide they want me to use the gear, I at least want to be able to seem like I know what I may want.
My elbows are failing, so I doubt I can swing around a 1D or a D3 unfortunately. I would need to have the 70-200 f/2.8 to shoot sports the same as I do now.
Sounds like a D700 would be the best choice, and I may have the freedom to give it back for a different one I think. Thanks.
07/11/2011 11:54:30 AM · #7
I don't know about the 300 or 700, but the D7000 is pretty awesome. It would probably feel small and light after using the 5D, but that's easy to adapt to.
07/11/2011 11:57:24 AM · #8
to add, with a Nikon, you wont look as awesome shooting with a white pro zoom lens :)
07/11/2011 11:59:53 AM · #9
Originally posted by mike_311:

to add, with a Nikon, you wont look as awesome shooting with a white pro zoom lens :)


*snort* no, cause you can always buy it in camo so you look like a REAL pro!!! *ducks*
07/11/2011 12:11:15 PM · #10
Originally posted by snaffles:

Originally posted by mike_311:

to add, with a Nikon, you wont look as awesome shooting with a white pro zoom lens :)


*snort* no, cause you can always buy it in camo so you look like a REAL pro!!! *ducks*


oh, i thought that was so no one so you using it..

07/11/2011 01:56:14 PM · #11
Originally posted by salmiakki:

As far as I understand it, the D700 is far superior to the 5D you have currently. Both are full frame and the D700 is of course, much newer technology then the original 5D. How it compares to the newer 5D I do not know. It is however, supposed to be renewed soon - rumors suggest, even this year.


Far superior is a stretch. Yes, it is newer technology, and so it does have somewhat better high-ISO performance, it has a more sophisticated focusing system and it has a higher resolution LCD. It's also a higher frame rate camera. So are there significant differences? Oh, yes, as you'd expect for cameras that are an entire generation apart. The bottom line, though, is that the IQ out of them is not much different at all. Some will like the 5D images better, others the opposite.
07/11/2011 04:03:11 PM · #12
The D300 is a generation newer than a 5D, and the D700, 2 generations newer. The 5D was (and still is) an amazing camera, but like 21.gif kirbic says, the newer cameras have better autofocus, faster frame rates and whatnot. Whether or not those things matter to you has a lot to do with the kind of shooting you do. Personally, the D300's autofocus was game changing, and I wouldn't want to go back to an older camera.

Having used all 3, my impression of them is that image quality is excellent on all of them. As far as side-by-side comparisons, I used the 5D and the D300 on the same shoot once, and the two things I noticed, imagewise, was that there was virtually no difference in the amount of noise in similar shots, but there was a vast difference in the amount of sensor dust. The D300's sensor cleaning thing really does work. I got some good images from the 5d, but then I spent half a day cleaning sensor dust. Otherwise, the images from both cameras were both excellent.

07/11/2011 04:28:37 PM · #13
Originally posted by amsterdamman:

.....If they offer me use of gear, what Nikon body and glass would you choose to play with? Thanks all.


D3S Body (or D3X if you plan to play in the studio). 17-35, 24-70, 70-200 VR lenses.
Retail about 10 grand.
07/11/2011 10:00:38 PM · #14
The D700 is full frame and the D300 is 1.5. I have the D300 and love it. I have read a lot of great reviews on the D7000 which is also 1.5.
07/11/2011 10:23:11 PM · #15
As a guy who has owned all of the Cameras you are talking about, I can say that one thing the Nikon's have over the Canon besides the newer technology is the fact that they have more than 9 AF points. The 5D and 5DII are really crippled in my opinion with the AF points and focusing system. After 5 years I moved over to Nikon and for a while I had a D700 with grip to back up my D3s, there is a large step down between the two but the D700 is still a step or so above the 5D or 5DII which I have owned in the past.

However I will tell you this, there is a large learning curve to go from Canon to Nikon, don't expect to jump right in and be shooting comfortably and not fumble around, everything works backwards from what you have learned on Canon and do from memory.

07/12/2011 01:25:43 AM · #16
I moved up from the D90 to the D700 this year and adore my cameras. The D700 is astonishing in low light - much better than my sweetie's 7D. Significantly richer colors, sharper detail and WAY less noise. I tend to shoot dark so this was a joy to discover. I do do bursts, and find that the 7 fps is more than enough (I think it's 9 with the extra battery). It IS a bit on the heavy side (especially if you're using any appreciable glass), but even I have gotten over the almost double weight from the D90.

In terms of action "feel", compared to the 7D, the D700 seems "springier", like the suspension between a sports car and a sedan. I haven't used the Canon enough to compare much else. No sports.

I have a 60mm macro and a 28-300mm and for my purposes it's almost enough. I shoot mostly portraits, some landscape, some street. I've shot live events, and believe me, the low light capabilities will astound you.

If you're being given the opportunity of owning the D700, and already own the 5D MII Canon, I'd say go for it. And if it doesn't work out for you, I'd consider buying it from you.

Message edited by author 2011-07-12 01:26:39.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/19/2017 03:20:54 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2017 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/19/2017 03:20:54 PM EST.