•  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10(current)
  • 11
  • 12
  • ...
  • 18
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nikon or Canon and then which camera?
#91
Considering FF vs APS-C, personally I do think it is worthwhile to go that route.



When I got my first dslr, the 5D had been out for a few months, and I thought it was too expensive, especially as I didn't know yet what I know now. To cut a very long story short, I ended up with a 5D through a rather circuitous route, and after seeing the results, I wished I had gone that route straight away. APS-C is good, IQ-wise, but FF is just better (I do a fair amount of large prints). I did get the 5D about 40 % cheaper than what it originally went for, but even so, it would have been cheaper to have gotten it straight away, with the money "lost" on all the other stuff. At the time it would have cost me two of the lenses I bought right then, but since those were EF-S, that wouldn't have mattered too much I guess, and I woul dstill have had the same possibilities I had right there and then with the 350D, barrign the crop factor at the long end.



Obviously, the 7D and D300s are completely different cameras then the 350D ever was <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />, but so are 5D II and D700 compared to their predecessors, in so far they had any <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />.



Anyway, if you don't need the extra ruggedness, fps, or AF system of the 7D, I would suggest the 5D II. If youd think that 12 MP is good enough for now, while you wait for a 24 MP or so version,'and Nikon is your preferred route, I'd suggest you go with a D700 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Big Grin' />.



I also agree with jenbenn on glass, BTW. My experiences with Sigma are also less than excellent. I've had a few problems with Canon glass too, but those were fixable (a total of 2 decentered lenses, which were replaced, and focus shift with the 50L, but that was fixed too). The only third party supplier I haven't had any problems with so far, is Tokina, but it does look like others did have problems with that brand as well. When it comes to AF, well, OEM is still the best.



Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
#92
Thanks again for all the good advice. I guess I will stay away from third party suppliers. Too bad, their prices and reviews are really good.

That being said, I had a chance to put my hands on the bodies today and the choice was immediate and obvious to me; I felt much better with the Nikon ergonomics menu system. So it is a D300S or D700! What say you Markus? Both bodies felt good to me and I guess the specs speak for themselves, but in a way I feel that the D300S, a 16-85 and a short macro mrime is the way to start. I frankly felt the 24-70 2,8 was very heavy for a walk around lense and maybe feel that some compromise has to be made when you are not a pro. I look forward to hearing you opinions <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />
#93
Well, you can't go wrong with either camera <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> They mainly differ in sensor size only, but there are two major selling points for the D300s.



One is the 16-85 VR, which indeed offers a lot for the money. The obvious choice for the D700 in this range would be the upcoming 24-120/4 VR, but it won't be in store before the end of September.



The other one is AF frame coverage. Since both cameras use the same AF system, the frame coverage is a lot larger on the D300s.



So, unless you really want or need FX, the D300s is the way to go.



Regarding Macro, have a look at the 105 VR. It's not small (in fact it's rather huge), but offers very high quality and doubles as a long (and stabilized) portrait prime.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#94
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1283453710' post='2427']

Well, you can't go wrong with either camera <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> They mainly differ in sensor size only, but there are two major selling points for the D300s.



[...]

The other one is AF frame coverage. Since both cameras use the same AF system, the frame coverage is a lot larger on the D300s.

[...]

[/quote]



Does this mean that the D700 AF frame coverage is particularly small, or is it generally the case that APS-C AF frame coverage is larger? I like putting my focus fairly far out in the frame, so that would be one more reason to stick with APS-C for me.



-Lars
#95
[quote name='larsrc' timestamp='1283455627' post='2429']

Does this mean that the D700 AF frame coverage is particularly small, or is it generally the case that APS-C AF frame coverage is larger? I like putting my focus fairly far out in the frame, so that would be one more reason to stick with APS-C for me.



-Lars

[/quote]

It is generally the case. Every DSLR has about the same size of AF sensor area. It does not matter much whether you have a Canon EOS 350D, a Sony A700, a Nikon D3s, a Canon EOS 7D, a Pentax K7 or a Canon 5D mk II.

If you would put AF points further apart they would be blind, basically.
#96
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1283453710' post='2427']

Well, you can't go wrong with either camera <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> They mainly differ in sensor size only, but there are two major selling points for the D300s.



One is the 16-85 VR, which indeed offers a lot for the money. The obvious choice for the D700 in this range would be the upcoming 24-120/4 VR, but it won't be in store before the end of September.



The other one is AF frame coverage. Since both cameras use the same AF system, the frame coverage is a lot larger on the D300s.



So, unless you really want or need FX, the D300s is the way to go.



Regarding Macro, have a look at the 105 VR. It's not small (in fact it's rather huge), but offers very high quality and doubles as a long (and stabilized) portrait prime.



-- Markus

[/quote]

Thanks again <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> Have you an idea what the price of the 24-105 will be? Also, I have an offer for a used D700, less than 10000 pics, bought in Nov 09 for 1700€ and finally, what do you think of a used 2,8 35-70 D for 280€?

Vieux loup
#97
phew, i'm glad i'm with sony and don't have so many decisions to make . . .[Image: rolleyes.gif]
#98
[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1283460960' post='2432']

Thanks again <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' /> Have you an idea what the price of the 24-105 will be? Also, I have an offer for a used D700, less than 10000 pics, bought in Nov 09 for 1700€ and finally, what do you think of a used 2,8 35-70 D for 280€?

Vieux loup

[/quote]

Considering the current new price of 1800 € for a D700, personally I wouldn't buy one of almost a year old at a discount of only 100 €. I'd rather go for safe and buy the new one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />.



I assume you mean the 24-120 (Nikkor) rather than the 24-105 (Canon) <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />.



Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
#99
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1283456798' post='2431']

It does not matter much whether you have a Canon EOS 350D, a Sony A700, a Nikon D3s, a Canon EOS 7D, a Pentax K7 or a Canon 5D mk II.

[/quote]



I have to disagree here, especially with the 350D/5D. I never understood why Canon left out the most important Af fields in these cameras.



If you carefully compare the AF moduls (I once did) you'll find out that the D3 module (also used in D700 and D300) covers, by a small margin, currently the largest size, followed by the Mark IV.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

[quote name='larsrc' timestamp='1283455627' post='2429']

Does this mean that the D700 AF frame coverage is particularly small, or is it generally the case that APS-C AF frame coverage is larger? I like putting my focus fairly far out in the frame, so that would be one more reason to stick with APS-C for me.

[/quote]



See other replies, too, but in this case both cameras use the same AF modul. Same physical size, which means more frame coverage with the crop camera, since the frame is of lower physical size.



In general, yes, this is an advantage of crop cameras, but of course depends also on the AF module used in a given camera.



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

  
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10(current)
  • 11
  • 12
  • ...
  • 18
  • Next 


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)