Advice needed - Canon 5DmarkII or Nikon D700

[quixilver]

Hi Bros,

I have one Canon 500D and I want to upgrade to a full-frame to get more serious in freelancing for pre-wedding sessions and events.
I'm in a position to upgrade to a full frame camera, choices are Canon 5DMarkII or Nikon D700. I know that 5DMII has an advantage of the much higher resolution compared to the 12.?mpx from D700 and the full HD video recording capability, but the AF technology with only 9-points is too far behind the 51-points+3D tracking from D700. Still considering about the image quality, colors, speed, lens options and. lo-light performance (for night outdoors and indoor events).

Please kindly share with me if you have any useful advice, will be highly appreciated
Cheers !

 

[henry soh]

Hi, I have seen photographers carry 5DMk2 during wedding.

 

[sinned79]

you dun need so many AF points to shoot a wedding.

a 5DMKII + prime lens is fast enough to get you going.

 

[ismokeweed79]

Have you considered what lens you have now?

If you are switching to Nikon, you would have to understand the entire different system and you also have to understand the different nikon lenses too.

If you are going to sell your current system, will there be an assignment given to you during this period of time when you are changing systems?

 

[quixilver]

Thanks for the responses guys... Currently, I have one 17-55 f/2.8 and one 50mm f/1.4. If I need more lenses then normally I would rent one or two for stocks like fish eye or macro.
I'm considering about the AF-points because so many times I ended up with back-focus problem from the focus&recompose method when I shoot at max aperture, f2.8 and above shouldn't be an issue.
I felt that I have to move quite far leaving the focus point using only 9-points if you get what I'm trying to say. Perhaps my technique is just simply wrong ???

Well, on the bright side I'll be more convenient to stay with Canon system which I've used to and rumors said that D700 will be replaced quite soon.

 

[sinned79]

Thanks for the responses guys... Currently, I have one 17-55 f/2.8 and one 50mm f/1.4. If I need more lenses then normally I would rent one or two for stocks like fish eye or macro.
I'm considering about the AF-points because so many times I ended up with back-focus problem from the focus&recompose method when I shoot at max aperture, f2.8 and above shouldn't be an issue.
I felt that I have to move quite far leaving the focus point using only 9-points if you get what I'm trying to say. Perhaps my technique is just simply wrong ???

Well, on the bright side I'll be more convenient to stay with Canon system which I've used to and rumors said that D700 will be replaced quite soon.

I think your technique is wrong.

 

[gigahz]

practice more bro, skill is what you need not a new camera.

 

[quixilver]

I can't really learn about further technique of "focus & recompose". However, it is probably a common issue encountered by a new photographer as I read from this website : http://visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm :think:

About the upgrade itself, I believe it will bring another step of benefits especially the speed performance under lo-light condition, where I can boost up the ISO higher with a bigger sensor. Honestly, going up to ISO1600 with my 500D is a big sacrifice of image quality but I can't find any significant problem with either 5DmarkII or D700 up to ISO2000 or even further ISO3200 :sweat:

 

[banana0ne]

I can't really learn about further technique of "focus & recompose". However, it is probably a common issue encountered by a new photographer as I read from this website : http://visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm :think:

About the upgrade itself, I believe it will bring another step of benefits especially the speed performance under lo-light condition, where I can boost up the ISO higher with a bigger sensor. Honestly, going up to ISO1600 with my 500D is a big sacrifice of image quality but I can't find any significant problem with either 5DmarkII or D700 up to ISO2000 or even further ISO3200 :sweat:

Geez, I thought I've seen enough... but compose and recompose? this is on another level...

guess too thin DOF, why not stop down to increase? wide open on 1.4 sometimes focused on 1 eye and not on another eye especially very near distance...

 

[sinned79]

I can't really learn about further technique of "focus & recompose". However, it is probably a common issue encountered by a new photographer as I read from this website : http://visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm :think:

About the upgrade itself, I believe it will bring another step of benefits especially the speed performance under lo-light condition, where I can boost up the ISO higher with a bigger sensor. Honestly, going up to ISO1600 with my 500D is a big sacrifice of image quality but I can't find any significant problem with either 5DmarkII or D700 up to ISO2000 or even further ISO3200 :sweat:

this method only happens if u shoot wide open, anything bigger then f2. f2.8 and smaller this method still workable since the DOF is not that thin.

usually for weddings... i dun think you will want to shoot that wide open cos not every appreciate bokeh style of photos. So a safer approach is to shoot at f4. That way, the bokeh is not that 'dramatic' and you can still answer to your clients.

 

[quixilver]

this method only happens if u shoot wide open, anything bigger then f2. f2.8 and smaller this method still workable since the DOF is not that thin.

U're absolutely correct bro, it appears until f/2.8. Any smaller than that wouldn't be so obvious. Back to the topic, I think D700 has one advantage on this part as the 51-points AF + 3D tracking will help to resolve this kind of back-focus issue coz I can simply move the AF-point to the desired area while recomposing, but how about any other aspects like image quality, sharpness, WB sensor, build quality and high-ISO performance compared to 5DmarkII ???

 

[sinned79]

U're absolutely correct bro, it appears until f/2.8. Any smaller than that wouldn't be so obvious. Back to the topic, I think D700 has one advantage on this part as the 51-points AF + 3D tracking will help to resolve this kind of back-focus issue coz I can simply move the AF-point to the desired area while recomposing, but how about any other aspects like image quality, sharpness, WB sensor, build quality and high-ISO performance compared to 5DmarkII ???

like i mentioned, u dun need so many AF points. Its user problem. You need multiple AF points usually for fast action shoots like sports for example.

I have seen most wedding photographers using 1 AF point only and its more then sufficient for them.

 

[daredevil123]

During events and AD weddings, don't think you have time to keep changing the AF point...

 

[woeilee]

I have not used D700 before so can't recommend. But for 5DII, 21MP is amazing. One brilliant thing about high MP is that it allows you to crop the photo and still give great detail photos. This is a big thing if you ask me, because cropping is PP's way to 'recompose' images. To focus-and-recompose in camera will, most of the time, be too slow to capture 'the' moment that appears, esp people's expressions.

 

[quixilver]

5DmarkII or D700 ??? or a used D3 worth to try ?

 

[alcohollywood]

I suspect you are mistaken about the uses of the 51 AF points and 3D tracking offered by the D700. I use a D300s which possesses the same AF system as the D700, and I can tell you that if you want to capture candid moments, it's practically impossible for you to scroll through from one end to the other of the AF grid to get the specific point you want, unless you have lightning-fast reflexes. One alternative, however, is to switch the AF system in the camera to an 11-point grid (that's available on the D300s, you can go confirm if it's on the D700 too). This will reduce your AF point switching time, but then it wouldn't be very much different from the 5DII's 9 points.

The 3D tracking is to shoot moving objects, like in sports photography or when you're taking shots of pets, wildlife or children. It shouldn't have that much of an impact on your wedding event photography unless you tend to have clients who like to run about a lot literally.

Having higher resolution will allow you to crop images in PP as what previous users have mentioned already. However, the higher resolution also means ISO performance will be compromised compared to an equivalent sensor size with lower resolution. Whether the end-result is acceptable is for you (and your client) to determine.

 

[quixilver]

Having higher resolution will allow you to crop images in PP as what previous users have mentioned already. However, the higher resolution also means ISO performance will be compromised compared to an equivalent sensor size with lower resolution. Whether the end-result is acceptable is for you (and your client) to determine.

Thanks for your tips alcohollywood... I read some review saying that D700 performs better in hi-ISO (less noise compared to 5DmII) under low light situations but I'm not sure how big is the difference.
If I scale down the image to 70-75% of the original 21MPx from 5DmII, I assume I would get a sharper image rather than the full-size 12MPx from D700. Let me know if I'm wrong :sweat:

 

[gazkw]

Thanks for your tips alcohollywood... I read some review saying that D700 performs better in hi-ISO (less noise compared to 5DmII) under low light situations but I'm not sure how big is the difference.
If I scale down the image to 70-75% of the original 21MPx from 5DmII, I assume I would get a sharper image rather than the full-size 12MPx from D700. Let me know if I'm wrong :sweat:

at the pixel level, it is arguable that D700 registers better performance for ISO.

but at the full image level, you won't see any significant difference. if anything, 5D2 at 21Mp will be perceived cleaner than D700.

unless you go around examining every picture at the pixel level, its not going to be a big deal. also, how often would you shoot at 6400 ISO? i rarely go above the 3200 ISO level on my 5D2.

other important aspects you have to consider is that D700 has onboard remote flash control whereas on 5D2 u have to rely on flash transmitters. many that choose the 5D2 indicate they like the colours better but everyone has a different opinion.

 

[alcohollywood]

at the pixel level, it is arguable that D700 registers better performance for ISO.

but at the full image level, you won't see any significant difference. if anything, 5D2 at 21Mp will be perceived cleaner than D700.

unless you go around examining every picture at the pixel level, its not going to be a big deal. also, how often would you shoot at 6400 ISO? i rarely go above the 3200 ISO level on my 5D2.

other important aspects you have to consider is that D700 has onboard remote flash control whereas on 5D2 u have to rely on flash transmitters. many that choose the 5D2 indicate they like the colours better but everyone has a different opinion.

I agree with the points made here. If you don't pixel-peep, then the differences in noise levels by the two cameras probably won't be very significant for you.

Thanks also for pointing out the flash aspect of the two cameras. This point completely slipped my mind as I don't shoot with flash so it didn't occur to me while I wrote my previous post. In any case, I don't have much experience with external flashes so I wouldn't really be in a position to comment.

 

[alcohollywood]

Thanks for your tips alcohollywood... I read some review saying that D700 performs better in hi-ISO (less noise compared to 5DmII) under low light situations but I'm not sure how big is the difference.
If I scale down the image to 70-75% of the original 21MPx from 5DmII, I assume I would get a sharper image rather than the full-size 12MPx from D700. Let me know if I'm wrong :sweat:

About comparing a scaled-down 5DII image with a full-sized D700 image for sharpness, that I'm not very certain. If you're really interested, you can probably obtain two full-res, identically-framed shots by both the 5DII and D700 from an online comparison review, then do the scaling down yourself and compare them side by side, or however else you deem appropriate.