Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

Canon 50D v. Nikon D700

DrAdvertising

Austin, US
61 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
DrAdvertising Registered since 27th Sep 2004
Wed 27-Aug-08 02:40 PM

Yes, I know the build isn't as hefty, and it's not full frame, but otherwise the specs are nearly equivalent (ISO) or better (such as megapixels and frames per second) than D700. And price is less than half that of the Nikon. Looks like Canon is going to give Nikon a challenge.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller
act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=17499


Doctor Advertising

RoFus

Luxembourg, LU
119 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#1. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

RoFus Silver Member Nikonian since 14th Nov 2004
Wed 27-Aug-08 01:18 PM

you should once take a look through an FX viewfinder. you will find an answer to a +1,000$ question.

narc

UK
53 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#2. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 1

narc Registered since 07th Aug 2008
Wed 27-Aug-08 06:29 PM

>you should once take a look through an FX viewfinder. you
>will find an answer to a +1,000$ question.

This and cramming 15MP into a small 1.6x crop sensor is never going to do good things to the image quality especially high iso.

TEITZY

WUNGHNU, AU
2529 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#3. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

TEITZY Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments, most notably in the macro and sports forums. Registered since 14th Mar 2007
Thu 28-Aug-08 12:32 AM

Different cameras, different price point, different markets. I'd be very surprised if the 50D comes close to the D700 in high ISO noise performance. D700 also has pro AF, weather-sealing & 8fps with the grip. Price wise it's between the D90 & D300 so more likely to be competing with those bodies than the D700. 12MP vs 15MP is not a huge issue for seasoned DSLR users. Really Canon are just playing catchup featurewise (eg. AF fine tune, 920,000 dot LCD) with Nikon's prosumer bodies as consumers are wanting features + IQ and not just the latter.

Doesn't matter what camp your in, it's a great time to be a DSLR user!

Cheers
Leigh


My Nikonians Gallery

lovemy8514

Columbia, US
2419 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#4. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

lovemy8514 Registered since 05th Oct 2007
Thu 28-Aug-08 08:31 PM

The 50D will not be giving the D700 a challenge. Two very different cameras.

The next generation 5D?? We'll have to wait and see.

Comparing the 50D and D700 is like comparing a film Rebel to a film F5.

J a m e s
My Gallery

Using his camera as a pen, it is the photographer's job to tell a story: Each page authored in frozen moments of time.

All of my work is dedicated to my father, Terry Lee Geib (1943-2009)

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#5. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Thu 28-Aug-08 10:28 PM

>Yes, I know the build isn't as hefty, and it's not full
>frame, but otherwise the specs are nearly equivalent (ISO) or
>better (such as megapixels and frames per second) than D700.
>And price is less than half that of the Nikon. Looks like
>Canon is going to give Nikon a challenge.

I'm not sure what specs you're reading, but the two cameras are markedly different. The "build isn't as hefty, and it's not full frame" comment that you seem to treat so dismissively are two key factors which place the D700 in a completely different (and higher) product category. The superb Canon 5D will be rev'd, soon no doubt, and then I'm sure the Canon shooters will again have something to boast about and will use it to try to knock the D700 off the top of the heap. Of course Nikon will then rev the D700 to get back to the top of the heap. Then Canon, then Nikon, and so on ad infinitum.

Comparing a full frame pro body (D700) to a non-pro APS-C body (50D) is a pointless exercise because of the ridiculously large number of variables. As others have already stated, cramming 15mp onto an APS-C sensor is folly, and from both an engineering and image quality standpoint is exactly the opposite of what needs to be done to reduce high ISO noise. If Canon is still playing an "I've got more megapixels than you" sort of game, it's playing alone. It looks to me like the 50D is just an increment to prep the market for the successor to the superb 5D. I actually hope the 5D successor turns out to be a huge success because it will provide that much more competitive motivation for Nikon to do better still.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

KnightPhoto

Alberta, CA
4962 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#6. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 5

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006
Fri 29-Aug-08 12:32 AM

What about the Canon 50D's pixel-binning approach to extreme high ISO - I understand the Nikon D1 used this approach with some success.

Any comments folks on whether that is a useful avenue for Nikon to consider? Would a D400 with pixel-binning render my intended purchase of a D700 unnecessary if my primary FX justification is high iso?

SteveK
My Nikonians gallery
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#7. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 6

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Fri 29-Aug-08 01:42 AM | edited Fri 29-Aug-08 01:45 AM by agitater

>What about the Canon 50D's pixel-binning approach to extreme
>high ISO - I understand the Nikon D1 used this approach with
>some success.
>
>Any comments folks on whether that is a useful avenue for
>Nikon to consider? Would a D400 with pixel-binning render my
>intended purchase of a D700 unnecessary if my primary FX
>justification is high iso?

Pixel binning is a data accumulation technique that was originally designed specifically for use with CCD sensors. Digital camera CCDs can be designed to clock multiple pixel charges in both the horizontal and vertical direction into a single larger charge sometimes referred to as a superpixel. The superpixel represents the area of all the individual pixels contributing to the charge. The creation of a superpixel is called binning because multiple pixels are stored in a single electronic container or bin essentially. According to various technical papers, binning of 1x1 means that the individual pixel is used as is. A binning of 2x2 means that an area of 4 adjacent pixels have been combined into one larger pixel, and so on.

The CMOS sensors used variously in the 5D, 50D and the D700 don't suffer from the same electrical noise issues typically found in charge-coupled (CCD) sensors.

Binning techniques in CMOS sensors include reducing the transistor-to-pixel ratio, standard signal averaging, and other methods.

All the techniques are perfectly good approaches whether implemented by Kodak, Sony, Canon or Nikon. Unfortunately, the physics and electronic engineering involved eventually always bump their heads on the physical size of the APS-C sensor as well as the practical limits of current processing power in camera CPUs. While the CPUs are perfectly capable of handling binning calculations, designers and engineers are forbidden from occupying all of the CPU's power with one task (such as overly complex pixel binning and data arbitration) because of all the concurrent tasks a camera has to perform every time someone presses the shutter in continuous focus, multiple frame, 3D tracking mode.

Every technological base in electronics has it limits and I think the 50D stretches things to just before the breaking point. Given the fact that engineers at Canon and Nikon are equally brilliant, and given the natural constraints of APS-C sensors compared to full frame/FX sensors, there is no practical/affordable way for the APS-C CMOS sensor to come anywhere close to the low light/low noise/high ISO performace of the FX Nikon sensor - at least not without driving the price of the process through the roof and beyond even the lofty heights already achieved by goofy-expensive cameras such as the 1Ds MKIII and the D3.

The 50D's APS-C CMOS barely scratches at the mid-point of the positively ancient (though still superb) full frame 5D CMOS high ISO noise performance (keeping in mind of course that people raved about the 5D's superb low noise performance at ISO800 - nowhere near the remarkable low noise ISO3200 performance of the D3 and D700). Nikon's accomplishment in this area is truly spectacular. That pros are regularly shooting, publishing and selling money shots with the D3 at ISO6400 is just plain wierd. So after all this time, Canon has rev'd the prosumer/semi-pro series twice and still hasn't bested the wonderful, pro, 5D in image quality or noise performance. Nikon, on the other hand, has put more resources into the much more cost effective effort of scaling the full frame CMOS into a something with four or five times better low noise/high ISO performance than the 5D along with almost equal image quality across the board (and remarkably better image quality in marginal and low light).

S'my view on the subject. While Nikon's genuises may be working on ever more exotic pixel binning for an APS-C successor to the D300, they're also working on even better performance with FX sensors. I also firmly believe that Nikon is heading for full frame exclusively in its SLR line over the next five to six years, gradually sunsetting all of the APS-C sensors. I think we're shortly going to see a whole (rather nice) range of superior point & shoot cameras (from Nikon, Canon and Sony) containing APS-C sensors.

I'm delighted with my D3 (since last winter) and D700 both of which I'm using now to shoot what I want, whenever I want, and if necessary in lighting conditions which, as recently as a year ago, would have forced us all to call it a day and head for home.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

Len Shepherd

Yorkshire, UK
12722 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#8. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003
Fri 29-Aug-08 07:38 PM

>Yes, I know the build isn't as hefty, and it's not full frame,
Neither is the D300 which has a better AF system and maybe better build quality than the Canon 50D
The 50 D has more MP in a slightly smaller sensor - but all other things being equal a 50 D needs 24 MP to deliver D300 A2 quality (which is good) at A1. Canon's extra MP is moderately useful (subject to image quality) than important.
It is to early to know if the 50 D matches the D300 for build quality, colour fidelity etc.
Using your logic the D300 remains a competitor to the D700 at half the price - so what are Canon proposing that Nikon has not been selling for 9 months?

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#9. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Mon 08-Sep-08 04:57 PM

>Yes, I know the build isn't as hefty, and it's not full
>frame, but otherwise the specs are nearly equivalent (ISO) or
>better (such as megapixels and frames per second) than D700.
>And price is less than half that of the Nikon. Looks like
>Canon is going to give Nikon a challenge.
>
> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller
>act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=17499
>
>
>Doctor Advertising

A better comparison is perhaps Canon 5D vs Nikon D700. I know 5D is a few years old, but in terms of picture quality, it beats D3 and D700 at half the price of D700. If you are taking pictures with a tripod, go with 5D and you will be very happy with it. If you are taking wiht mostly actions, or high ISO performance is crucial, you are better off with D700. Unless you are a professional photographer, D5 is probably a better choice and have enough money for a pro lense (and still cheaper than D700).

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#10. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 9

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Mon 08-Sep-08 06:33 PM

>A better comparison is perhaps Canon 5D vs Nikon D700. I know
>5D is a few years old, but in terms of picture quality, it
>beats D3 and D700 at half the price of D700.

Just for interest, the 5D is nowhere near half the price of the D700 in the UK. At my local pro dealer, the Canon is selling for £1350 and the Nikon is £1700. That makes it only 20% cheaper.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

TomCurious

Bay Area, US
2352 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#11. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 9

TomCurious Registered since 03rd Jan 2007
Mon 08-Sep-08 09:47 PM

There are a number of reviews saying that the results from the D700 and 5D are essentially identical. I.e. the latest issue of DSLR user magazine has a comparison feature between these cameras, or see this link below, or many others. Still, even that is an impressive performance of the 5D as the design is 3 years old. I did not know until now that Canon has been 3 years ahead of Nikon. When Canon comes out with the 5D replacement, I do hope that it will not take Nikon again 3 years to catch up.

http://bayimages.net/tech/reviews/resolution-comparison-5d-d700.html

Aulias

Adelaide, AU
221 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#12. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 11

Aulias Registered since 10th Feb 2006
Mon 08-Sep-08 10:24 PM | edited Mon 08-Sep-08 10:26 PM by Aulias

I had a look at the link, the images do look very similar, D700 might have a touch more contrast in its image processing settings. It is one very specific comparison at low ISO in daylight on a tripod though.

D700 wins on:
-autofocus functionality
-LCD size and resolution
-ISO goes to 24600 (5D is 1600 normal, 3200 "boosted") (I'd be curious to see some back to back comparisons with 5D at ISO1600, and whether image quality's are similar, I'd expect D700 would be cleaner)
-6/8 fps versus 3 fps on 5D
-superior ergonomics / build
I'm sure there's more things, that's just off the top of my head.

So for another 20%, say, I think you'd be mad not to get the D700 if looking in this price range for a FF sensored camera.

To be fair, the 5D is 3 years old though. I do expect the soon to be launched 5D mark II will address all of the above shortcomings, we shall see. I'm secretly hoping it will bring D700 prices down a bit, selfish I know!

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#13. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 11

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Wed 10-Sep-08 12:12 AM

With large landscape prints (30x20 or larger), the differences are clearer, and D5 is ahead. Definitely interesting to see what D5 replacement has to offer. Lower price point for D700, perhaps.

KnightPhoto

Alberta, CA
4962 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#14. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 13

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006
Wed 10-Sep-08 12:43 AM

That 5D sharpness advantage is being attributed to a weaker anti-alias filter on the 5D I believe...

SteveK

Michael1597

IE
188 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#15. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

Michael1597 Basic Member
Wed 10-Sep-08 10:33 AM

I think you have hit it, the 50D is probably more important than the D700, and increasing the resolution is just the start. With the Canon smaller sensor the precision and resolution will be way higher than the D700 and may well have better the IQ too. The D700 and to some extent the D3 are there to be taken, the IQ is debatable I prefer the D300.

Most of the people here have their opinions and ignoring more mps on DX type sensors is one of them. I would like to say Nikon needs to consider bringing out a 20 mps DX model, no need to wait for Sony. As for FX designs, more needs to be done but how is anyones guess, maybe more mps too, who knows.

Mike

RoFus

Luxembourg, LU
119 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#16. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 15

RoFus Silver Member Nikonian since 14th Nov 2004
Wed 10-Sep-08 01:09 PM

I doubt that many D700 owners will suffer from a CAS when seeing a 50D.

actually, since I have my D700, I feel at home again (since the F4 times) and have stopped looking at what is on the D-SLR market. I thought long about a D100 as upgrade to my D70, then the D200, then the D300, considered the D3, seriously considered to buy a S5 when prices dropped by 50% lately, was wondering if a 5D would fit me and finally stopped thinking when the D700 was announced. I just purchased blind and am pretty sure that I will not look back (or left or right).

DrAdvertising

Austin, US
61 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#17. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 11

DrAdvertising Registered since 27th Sep 2004
Wed 10-Sep-08 05:58 PM

My point was really this:

A) Canon has a consumer model that has features no Nikon consumer model can match.

B) Canon CLAIMS to be getting ISO performance in a small sensor that Nikon has achieved only in a large sensor.

C) The 5D is about to be upgraded. Given what Canon has put in to the 50D, I fear the 5D will be more than a match for the D700.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that the 50D is but a warning shot over Nikon's bow. I love Nikon, but I'd hate to be in the shoes of the Nikon management when the new 5D is announced.

Doctor Advertising

Chris P

Reading, UK
137 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#18. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 16

Chris P Registered since 03rd Apr 2007
Wed 10-Sep-08 07:43 PM

Modified Quote "Since I have my D700 I have stopped looking at what is on the D-SLR market"

I have to agree with this. The D700 does everything I want, in my case particularly in being able to easily focus manual lenses. I have bought the camera to keep and use for the next 2 to 3 years, if a Fuji Sxx appears with a 12+12 full frame sensor then I will buy one, but as an addition to the D700, not to replace it.

Chris P

TEITZY

WUNGHNU, AU
2529 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#19. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 17

TEITZY Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments, most notably in the macro and sports forums. Registered since 14th Mar 2007
Wed 10-Sep-08 09:41 PM

>My point was really this:
>
>A) Canon has a consumer model that has features no Nikon
>consumer model can match.
>

I think the D90 will give it a run for its money and for a few hundred dollars more you can buy a D300 which has a better feature set than the 50D. Traditionally Canon & Nikon seem to not try and compete directly with each other when it comes to bodies.

>B) Canon CLAIMS to be getting ISO performance in a small
>sensor that Nikon has achieved only in a large sensor.
>

Canon was the noise king long before the D3 took that title so it's hardly surprising that they could produce a low noise crop sensor. In fact I'm sure Nikon as well as many Canon users expected nothing less from Canon than better high ISO noise performance from a crop sensor. No reason why Nikon won't raise the bar again in the next 12 months.


>C) The 5D is about to be upgraded. Given what Canon has put
>in to the 50D, I fear the 5D will be more than a match for the
>D700.
>

The 5D is three years older than the D700 so Canon engineers have had plenty of time to get it right in terms of a replacement. The D700 will be 5-6 months old before the 5D2 is even on the shelves so it was a smart move by Nikon to get the D700 out early as they knew Canon would probably trump them with the 5D replacement. What I'm hearing from Canon users is that they would be more than happy if the 5D2 simply matches the D700 IQ and feature set so I don't think Nikon have too much to fear from the 5D replacement. Nikon has also won quite a few converts with the D700 as well.


>Basically, what I'm trying to say is that the 50D is but a
>warning shot over Nikon's bow. I love Nikon, but I'd hate to
>be in the shoes of the Nikon management when the new 5D is
>announced.
>

A warning shot maybe, but I hardly think Nikon management are shaking in their boots. In fact their bottom line has been doing quite nicely in recent times and their DSLR market share is on the increase as well. Companies like Nikon and Canon leapfrog one another all the time, it's just the nature of the beast. I'm sure the 5D replacement will be an excellent camera and will probably have superior IQ than the D700 but as some have said in this thread and many others, the D700 is a great camera as well and I hardly think many Nikon users will be jumping ship just so they can use the latest and greatest. In fact all Nikon users should hope that Canon does a good job with their new releases because it will mean Nikon will have to match or better the opposition at some stage, and that's a good thing for us all.

Cheers
Leigh

My Nikonians Gallery

nikolaj1972

wonderful copenhagen, DK
175 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#20. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

nikolaj1972 Registered since 13th Sep 2007
Thu 11-Sep-08 03:51 PM

Sorry im going a bit offtopic,but mayby canon have troubles producing a 5D to compete with D700. I have heard rumours for quite some time now. Is canon slow or do rumours run too fast?. Any ideas??
Just curious here.
Nikolaj Freiesleben

TEITZY

WUNGHNU, AU
2529 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#21. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 20

TEITZY Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments, most notably in the macro and sports forums. Registered since 14th Mar 2007
Thu 11-Sep-08 09:24 PM | edited Thu 11-Sep-08 09:31 PM by TEITZY

Well the 5D is still selling well, has great IQ and until the D700 release really had no competitors either. Canon users have been wanting an update almost since the original 5D was released

Apparently the official date of the 5D2 announcement is Sept 17 and Canon have put a few teasers on their websites showing what looks to be a new full frame body. Some believe they may release 2 new bodies but we'll wait and see. Plenty of speculation about specs but most seem convinced that it will be a high MP (16-24) FF sensor with better AF & video like the D90. One would think that high ISO performance would be superior to the older model so if they can produce something as clean as the D3/D700 at 16-24MP resolution it will certainly be a killer camera. Some also believe they may just drop a full frame sensor in the 50D body with more or less the same MP (15). Most are saying a similar price to the D700 (US$2500-3000), however if they go the high MP route with a similar feature set to the D700 I doubt they would sell it for under $3500. On the other hand if they just drop an FF sensor in the 50D it will probably be cheaper than the D700. Regardless of what Canon release, Canon users will buy it and pay a premium if they have to as this is the most anticipated, rumoured, hyped, beaten to death, spec analysed DSLR camera in history.

Nikon are obviously holding off with their high MP model (mind you they have already released 4 new DSLR'S in the last 12 months) and perhaps waiting to see what Canon do with the 5D replacement. My thoughts (what I thought Nikon should do) on a high MP Nikon body were something like a FF 21-24MP body with less features (not Nikon's current mind set I know) but a significantly lower price point than Canon's 1Ds3. However the 5D replacement will probably change the playing field a bit especially if it's 20+ MP at the same price as the D700 (that will probably drive the D700 price lower still). Some are even speculating that Nikon is coming out with an 'affordable' medium format 40MP body next year which will really change the scheme of things.

Cheers
Leigh

My Nikonians Gallery

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#22. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 21

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Fri 12-Sep-08 08:01 AM

>Some also believe they may just
>drop a full frame sensor in the
>50D body with more or less the
>same MP (15).

It's not quite as simple as "dropping in an FF sensor". As a minimum, the mirror mechanism, shutter, focus screen, pentaprism and eyepiece would also need to be re-designed.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

nikolaj1972

wonderful copenhagen, DK
175 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#23. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 21

nikolaj1972 Registered since 13th Sep 2007
Fri 12-Sep-08 01:28 PM

Hi Leigh
Thanks for the update..

Nikolaj Freiesleben

MstrBones

AW
8238 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#24. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

MstrBones Silver Member Nikonian since 06th Dec 2005
Sun 14-Sep-08 08:04 PM

Just my two cents, but it is not about mpixels. You are not going to be limited in print size in a race between 12 and 15 mpixels.

In fact, to actually double the resolution of the D3/D700, one would require a 48 mpixel sensor. Same for the D300.

The Canon is a trivial gain at the expense of decreased pixel size. They'd been far better off going to 12 and the associate larger pixels.

If you really want to see better ISO performance in a denser mpixel APS sensor, the next generation of cameras, (most likely Nikon and Sony), may be taking advantage of the new Sony patent for backlit sensors, which means the CMOS circuitry is move off the front of the sensor to the back, allowing pixels to have a corresponding larger area by about 30 - 35% percent. That and the super thin, gapless microlenses will probably make another big improvement in APS sensor technology and lead to the next few generations of cameras.

Canon 50D? I don't believe it even compares to the D300, let alone the D700.

""

Mustang

Riverview, CA
66 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#25. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 24

Mustang Registered since 26th Jun 2004
Sun 14-Sep-08 10:35 PM

I shot a D300 extensively ( sports ) for about a year and was very happy with it's IQ and overall performance . Recently , I moved to the D700 . Now , as much as I like the D300 , I simply do not see one thing that it does better than the D700 . Not one thing . I hear people saying that they prefer the IQ of the D300 and that simply baffles me . I cannot even remotely understand what they like better . I realize IQ can be a personal and subjective thing , but after making the move to the D700 , I could not beleive how much better it was . So , Canon 50D to a D700 ?? Come on . Let's see how many pros choose to go the 50D route vs how many go with a D700 .

KnightPhoto

Alberta, CA
4962 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#26. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 24

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006
Tue 16-Sep-08 04:13 AM | edited Tue 16-Sep-08 04:14 AM by KnightPhoto

>
>If you really want to see better ISO performance in a denser
>mpixel APS sensor, the next generation of cameras, (most
>likely Nikon and Sony), may be taking advantage of the new
>Sony patent for backlit sensors, which means the CMOS
>circuitry is move off the front of the sensor to the back,
>allowing pixels to have a corresponding larger area by about
>30 - 35% percent. That and the super thin, gapless
>microlenses will probably make another big improvement in APS
>sensor technology and lead to the next few generations of
>cameras.


OK David, that DOES sound good for we low-light shooters! Any sense at all on when this backlit technology might show up? Next high end DX model (D400)? That would be ideal as would a new one in the D700 body! Or do you think it is a couple camera generations away?

Oh, and Mustang - you are not helping my NAS!
SteveK
My Nikonians gallery
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

Mustang

Riverview, CA
66 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#27. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 26

Mustang Registered since 26th Jun 2004
Tue 16-Sep-08 08:19 AM

Sorry

Assumer

US
50 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#28. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

Assumer Registered since 15th Jul 2007
Tue 16-Sep-08 10:35 AM

Here is a review of the D700/300/5D in terms of IQ
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D700/noise.shtml

freddyh

Veghel, NL
180 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#29. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 20

freddyh Registered since 11th Nov 2006
Tue 16-Sep-08 11:37 AM

>Sorry im going a bit offtopic,but mayby canon have troubles
>producing a 5D to compete with D700. I have heard rumours for
>quite some time now. Is canon slow or do rumours run too
>fast?. Any ideas??
>Just curious here.
>Nikolaj Freiesleben

I understood that the 5d successor was nearly finished at the end of last year, but that the engineers were pulled back to sove 1d3 focus issues.

--
In Hollywood, brides keep the bouquets and throw away the groom.
-Groucho Marx-

freddyh

Veghel, NL
180 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#30. "20 MP aps sensor?" | In response to Reply # 15

freddyh Registered since 11th Nov 2006
Tue 16-Sep-08 11:38 AM

>Most of the people here have their opinions and ignoring more
>mps on DX type sensors is one of them. I would like to say
>Nikon needs to consider bringing out a 20 mps DX model,

Why? You'd be diffraction limited at around f/8. I don't think that's overly usefull.

--
In Hollywood, brides keep the bouquets and throw away the groom.
-Groucho Marx-

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#31. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Tue 16-Sep-08 12:03 PM

I think both camera makers have to consider something besides useless additional megapixels. The dynamic range of a sensor is in my view the single biggest limiting factor in capturing perfectly exposed high contrast images. The sensor technology and camera CPU power exists now to process a stream of sensor data in a variety of ways - simultaneously. So how about a sensor which exposes photosite data above a certain threshold differently from other data it senses at the same time which happens to be below the same threshold? The idea is to create a sensor/photosite and CPU combination which senses high dynamic range compositions and then applies different exposure settings to different clusters of photosites on the same sensor in order to correctly expose the entire composition.

If the Canon 5D MK II contains such technology, Nikon (and Sony, Pentax, Olympus, etc.) will follow suit and the expenditures on new bodies will continue unabated.

Anyway, I think that all other considerations are important too, but I also think the true HDR sensor/CPU combination is shortly going to show up.

Interesting times ahead.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

MstrBones

AW
8238 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#32. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 26

MstrBones Silver Member Nikonian since 06th Dec 2005
Tue 16-Sep-08 06:45 PM

>Any sense at all on when this backlit technology might show up?

Steve, I don't no the timing, but here is the June 2008 article describing the technology for your reference.

BTW, I should have said back illuminated rather than back lit.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html

About half way down the webpage are some good graphics that make it easy to see the advantage of the reconfigured sensor design.

""

Len Shepherd

Yorkshire, UK
12722 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#33. "RE: Why "way higher" ????" | In response to Reply # 15

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003
Tue 16-Sep-08 08:03 PM

> With the Canon smaller sensor the precision and resolution will be way higher than the D700
Why "way higher"???
The D300/700/3 have identical resolution and sharpness so sensor size is of little relevance as regards your point - resolution.
Yes - the yet to be tested new Canon has 25% more MP - but it takes 100% more MP (camera software etc being equal) to double potential sensor resolution as regards area i.e A2 (which the Nikon's do comfortably) to A1 print size.
As sensor surfaces are subject to inverse square law 25% more MP implies 12.5% more sensor resolution BUT if you start with a lens of 100 lpm resolution and a sensor of 100 lpm the laws of optics work in such a way that the camera/lens output resolution is only 50 lpm.
The implication is the 12.5% sensor resolution increase is worth about 6% more resolution when the effect of combining it with a lens is taken into account.
I agree there could be some increase in resolution - but is the likely 6% "way higher"?

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

KnightPhoto

Alberta, CA
4962 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#34. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 32

KnightPhoto Gold Member Nikonian since 18th Dec 2006
Tue 16-Sep-08 11:48 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 01:55 AM by KnightPhoto

Well, if that back-illuminated CMOS sensor lives up to it's promise:
- better high iso;
- better dynamic range (not sure why);
- better handling of light coming in at an angle (sharper corners?);
- probably more megapixels (but not sure if diffraction penalty);
it sounds pretty good - Thanks David!


Also, just a quick observation on 50D vs. D700 or D300 etc.:
- my shooting buddy owns a 40D and 500mm IS combination and we go out shooting all the time. He would give his eye-teeth to have Kwanon put together a 1.6 crop sensor with the AF capabilities of the D300! If the 40D is unable to initially acquire AF, the 40D has a regular problem with the AF giving up on BIF and stopping attempts at AF at point of closest-focus. He then has to manually tweak the lens to infinity focus and reinitiate AF. Canon simply does not make the D300/D700 level of features in a single body. They make pro-level autofocus but only on 1.0 and 1.3 crop cameras for big $$$$. They make crop cameras with cut down features (AF, weather sealing, plus many more compromises).
- due to this I don't see the 40D / 50D line as an even-up competitor to the D300 let alone the D700. It's more like a 50D / D90 that could be compared to my way of thinking.
- it's this line of Canon design thinking that will cause a revolt if tomorrow's announcements are more incrementalism. Anyhow I am not saying they are bad cameras, just that they don't package them with the same full feature set as we enjoy our Nikons.

SteveK
My Nikonians gallery
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

tommiejeep

Goa, IN
4638 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#35. "Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 31

tommiejeep Gold Member Nikonian since 07th Jan 2008
Wed 17-Sep-08 03:12 AM

Howard, 5DMkII is up.
Cheers,
Tom

Manuel Sousa - alias... T.D.Hardin
http://taja.smugmug.com/
https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/165169

AdamW

CA
38 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#36. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 35

AdamW Registered since 05th Jun 2008
Wed 17-Sep-08 11:27 AM

Yup, looks like this thread should be D700 compared to 'hot off the press' Canon 5D Mark II and not the high end consumer grade Canon 50D.

Ahh ... the tech wars continue to the benefit of us all.

Adam Woodhouse
Ontario, Canada
www.woodhousephotography.net

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#37. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 35

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 11:47 AM

>Howard, 5DMkII is up.

Right. Thanks . . . just saw it this morning. I could not find an MSRP though - I expect it will show up later today. Can't imagine how much money they'll want for the thing.

Is this where SLR competition is going? Nikon and now Canon are chasing after HD video? Are we going to be confronted by some 'SLR' body in the not-too-distant future that is more video than photo, from which we capture individual video frames whenever we find an image that we like? Please no! I don't want to learn advanced video editing. I just don't have the time. Imagine the size of even a 21.1 megapixel-per-frame series of video captures. Hopefully, Nikon, Canon and Sony will keep photo mode and video mode completely separate.

3.9 frames per second? That's it? Even with a DIGIC IV processor? I guess that means it really takes a huge amount of CPU horsepower and a huge amount of buffer memory to handle even moderate 21.1mp capture rates. I guess the sports shooters will be sticking with their D3 bodies.

21.1 megapixels? Who is chasing after these enormous files? And who on earth is going to jockey huge CF cards loaded with huge files across USB cables and USB card readers? I think all of those people who want more megapixels should also (if they haven't done so already) resolve to get their photos right in-camera as much as possible in order to reduce the amount of post-processing time needed with these huge files. If all future camera bodies are going to chase after more and more megapixels, the follow-on cost of purchasing ever more powerful Windows and Mac PCs to avoid bogging down post-processing workflows will become yet another cost factor associated with every purchase of a new body.

I want even lower noise out of the 12 megapixel designs. I want even truer color out of 12 megapixel designs. I want more user-friendly features. I want faster CPU and even more robust and complex programming to help me get good exposures more often. I want photosite groupings separately metered on one sensor so that HDR exposure & capture becomes practically automatic.

The largest print I've ever made was 20"x30" from a 12mp original file.

I hope all the photographers, amateur and pro alike, truly understand the burdens of handling, editing and backing up ever increasing image file sizes. The only upside I can see with respect to large image file sizes is that a lot more marginal shots will never see the light of day. They'll be deleted in-camera as the photographer chimps and starts to get depressed about having to move and store bad shots he might otherwise keep if they were 'only' 12mp instead of 21mp.

Looks like I'll be keeping and happily using my D3 and D700 for a long time to come.

The 5D MK II is probably wonderful, and like the D3, out of the financial reach of most hobbyist, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's already true that plenty of Nikon pros are eminently satisfied with D300 and D700 bodies simply because image quality from those bodies coupled with good lenses is already so very, very good. I believe the same thing applies to existing Canon 5D and 40D shooters. The 50D is still an unknown quantity for most intents and purposes, but I'm sure it's a very good quality body, and like the D300 suitable for a wide variety of needs for amateurs and pros.

The Canon 5D was remarkable for it full frame innovation. The 5D MK II enters a market segment which, although it was originated by Canon, is now well met by the Nikon competition and soon to be joined by others. The price of the 5D MK II will likely dictate the narrowness of its market segment, use and deployment more than any other single factor.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

RoFus

Luxembourg, LU
119 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#38. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 37

RoFus Silver Member Nikonian since 14th Nov 2004
Wed 17-Sep-08 11:59 AM

in Germany, the 5D MkII is listed for 2,499€ (2,599€ for the D700). street price from my dealer is 2,399€ MkII versus 2,299€ for the D700.

MstrBones

AW
8238 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#39. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 34

MstrBones Silver Member Nikonian since 06th Dec 2005
Wed 17-Sep-08 12:30 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 12:37 PM by MstrBones

Steve,

As I understand it, the better DR and associated higher SNR comes from the 35% increase in the light gathering ability of the pixels before they hit burnout. For instance, if the D3/D700 had this capability, ISO 12,800 and 25600 would be much cleaner since filling in the shadow data component of an exposure is easier with the larger pixel wells - ie, higher signal to noise.

This is where adding megapixels bugs me. Just as we get the sensors to collect more light correctly, marketing steps in and says, "but we need more of something that we market!".

Ok, now a minor rant - frankly, for outstanding prints up to 16x24, which are pretty darn big images, (bigger than I can print with my epson r2400), 12 mpixels is great, and as we all know, that 12 mp can even print much larger and look great. So, give me DR, give me finer color gradation thru 14 bit images and spare me the marketing megapixel stuff! Few shooters need the additional resolution - though I realize there is a market for such and there is equipment out there to address the pro who needs it.





""

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#40. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 38

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Wed 17-Sep-08 01:00 PM

For comparison, the 5D MkII has a UK RRP of £2,299. The D700 launched here at £1,999, and is now down to £1,699 from official Nikon Pro dealers.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

Arkayem

Richmond Hill, GA (Savannah), US
6129 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#41. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 40

Arkayem Moderator Awarded for his high level skills in flash photography Charter Member
Wed 17-Sep-08 01:27 PM

For further comparison:

The 5D MK II suggested retail price is USD $2699 (body only).

The D700 was introduced at USD $2999 (body only).

Russ
http://russmacdonald.smugmug.com/
http://NikonCLSPracticalGuide.blogspot.com/

ddarko

New York, US
29 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#42. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 37

ddarko Registered since 13th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 01:30 PM

I don't understand the problem with the integration of video into SLR cameras. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it. I'm scratching my head why anyone would "hope" for a strict segregation between video/still. As long as the still photography capabilities are not compromised - and there's not the slightest hint that would ever happen - I don't see the issue. And the video quality and capabilities will only get better and better. It's going to happen.

The body price for the 5D Mark2 is USD 2699, EU 2499, UK 2,299 (according to DP Review).

sorin

RO
386 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#43. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

sorin Registered since 06th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 03:10 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 03:23 PM by sorin

this is the "challenge"???

canon-ci.co.kr/common/image_view.jsp?path=/pds/product/camera/sample/IMG_0932.JPG

canon-ci.co.kr/common/image_view.jsp?path=/pds/product/camera/sample/IMG_3944.JPG

canon-ci.co.kr/common/image_view.jsp?path=/pds/product/camera/sample/IMG_4642.JPG

canon-ci.co.kr/common/image_view.jsp?path=/pds/product/camera/sample/IMG_0188.JPG

no better AF than 5D, no gapless sensor, autoiso is either fixed to 400 or locked to 1/mm of the lens, no CA correction, video recording limited to 12min (4 GB) and it isn't fully manual, no pop-up flash as usual with canon, no face detection on phase (impossible on canon anyway) and the most funny thing "Canon tells us the 5D Mark II can function in light rain for "up to several minutes".

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E5D2/E5D2A.HTM

nathantw666

US
34 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#44. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 42

nathantw666 Registered since 24th Aug 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 04:10 PM

I personally think it's fantastic to have video integrated in a SLR camera. You have interchangable lenses that you otherwise wouldn't have on a regular, consumer video camera, such as an optical 600mm lens, 14mm lenses or a 16mm fisheye.

ddarko

New York, US
29 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#45. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 43

ddarko Registered since 13th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 04:28 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 04:34 PM by ddarko

Instead of giving pluses and minuses based purely on some hypothetical feature checklist, perhaps you might consider that there would be good reasons for the 5D Mark2's design?

DP Review's preview of the new 5D sensibly suggests that the gap between the sensor lens "has been maintained to enable a shifted pattern near the corners of the frame (which helps reduce fall-off on such large sensors)." In other words, the gapless design may be fine for a smaller sensor used on the 50D but would have degraded performance on a full frame sensor. I'm not personally technically knowledgeable enough to assess this claim but it seems quite reasonable, far more so than simply slagging the sensor because it isn't gapless! The horror!

As for your "no better AF" complaint, Rob Galbraith points out that in his experience, the tracking on the 40D/50D, which use the newer AF system that looks better on paper, was "erratic at best" whereas the old 5D auto-focus was acceptable. Given the choice between two AF systems, one of which looks better in tech specs and the other which performs better in REAL LIFE, I'll take the latter. Points to Canon for making smart decisions that are designed to improve camera operation and not simply meet some marketing hack's checklist. This is a credible competitor to the D700. Canon users should be pleased.

sorin

RO
386 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#46. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 45

sorin Registered since 06th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 04:33 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 04:45 PM by sorin

>DP Review's preview of the new 5D sensibly suggests that the
>gap between the sensor lens "has been maintained to
>enable a shifted pattern near the corners of the frame (which
>helps reduce fall-off on such large sensors)." In other
>words, the gapless design may be fine for a smaller sensor
>used on the 50D but would have degraded performance on a full
>frame sensor.
>


it's Phil Askey's idea. he finds excuses where nikon actually had gapless design on full frame. at the same time he implies that D3 is a bad camera since it's a FF and has gapless sensor. Phil is a genius at marketing. canon must really hire him.

he isn't working in sensor design as far as i know, not an expert. it looks to me as trying to go for publicity on canon's side. you may think what you like and believe dpreview. i'm sure the final review will be at least "the best camera ever ever".

but the pictures i've posted speak 1000 words. and what i've said are real facts, not rumors. read again.
5dmk2 it's not a mix of both great sensor and gread body (AF, metering, functions). it's just a sensor on a body from 2005. it isn't even weatherproof. i may resist in light rain for up to several minutes....

the lack of absolutely any other feature other than 21mp (and the strangest autoiso ever) is a very sad thing. canon owners are not happy at all. 5d mk1 will sell great and so will d700. d700 has no competition at all. seems nikon is the only company capable of a full frame camera with excellent features on all areas at that price.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/techdigest/20080917/ttc-exclusive-canon-engineers-held-back-e870a33.html

another publicity stunt. they're trying to find more excuses now.

ddarko

New York, US
29 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#47. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 46

ddarko Registered since 13th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 05:44 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 06:24 PM by ddarko

>
>it's Phil Askey's idea. he finds excuses where nikon actually
>had gapless design on full frame. at the same time he implies
>that D3 is a bad camera since it's a FF and has gapless
>sensor.

Your remarks are ludicrous. Where has DP Review EVER said or even implied that "D3 is a bad camera" because it doesn't have a gapless sensor? DP Review's review of the D3 was spectacular. 4 out of the 6 categories received a 9.5, another received a 10. Only the value criteria received a relatively low mark of 8.5. You don't even know DP Review's actual opinion of the D3 yet you attack the site and the site's operator with outrageous distortions. This is the final sentence from DP Review's evaluation of the D3:

"If there is an EOS-1Ds Mark III - bating 'D3X' coming this year it will have quite a job to do to better the D3; possibly the most compelling, capable and well-rounded professional digital SLR ever made."

Phil definitely sounds like a man who hates the D3.

>he isn't working in sensor design as far as i know, not an
>expert.

And your expertise and background in sensor design is....? I'm guessing none.

It's also completely unprofessional of you to dismiss a new camera that hasn't even been released yet based on a couple of lossy JPG photos posted on the web. The notion that you can reach any kind of reasoned opinion based on the linked photos you cite is far-fetched.

Put down the marketing kool-aid and stop assuming every new wiz-bang marketing feature is better. Gapless designs are better than sensors with gaps? The more sensors points there are, the better the AF system will work? Hey, my speakers volume setting goes up to 11. Must be better than those speakers limited to 10.

Better yet, stop trolling in Nikonians forums. You're the flip side of the Canon booster; a Nikon fanboy who perceives conspiracies and slurs everywhere.

sorin

RO
386 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#48. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 0

sorin Registered since 06th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 05:47 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 05:54 PM by sorin

if you read these people, Phil and Thom, first question that comes in your mind is why is nikon not bankrupt? it seems there are no worse cameras other than nikon's.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&thread=29353067&page=2

> still not 100% convinced that Nikon fully understands or pursues
> "ultimate image quality." Their choices for the AA filter, default
> sharpening, default color, and a host of other pieces are not
> optimal, and have NEVER been.

sorin

RO
386 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#49. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 47

sorin Registered since 06th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 05:49 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 05:59 PM by sorin

>Your remarks are ludicrous. Where has DP Review EVER said or
>even implied that "D3 is a bad camera" because it
>doesn't have a gapless sensor?>
>
>And your expertise and background in sensor design is....?
>
>Better yet, stop trolling in Nikonians forums.
>

calm down. your 20 posts show you're not used to a civilised forum.
this is not dpreview. express your opinion and then stop. it's nothing personal.

and d3 HAS gapless design. you didn't know that?

ddarko

New York, US
29 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#50. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 49

ddarko Registered since 13th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 05:58 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 06:07 PM by ddarko

>calm down. your 20 posts show you're not used to a civilised
>forum.
>this is not dpreview. express your opinion and then stop.
>

Kettle, meet black. And I'd take my 20-odd quality posts any day over your 300 posts if they're anything like your ranting against the new Canon 5D.

Oh, and here's the point which you seem not to grasp. It's absurd to get fixated on some marketing gimmick like "gapless" sensor and then ding or praise a camera based on whether it does or does not have it, which is what you do when you criticized the 5D Mark2. The only thing that matters is the quality of the pictures produced by the camera. I'll take a sensor with gaps as wide as the Mississippi River as long as the photos are great. Your error is to not have the common sense to withhold judgment until people can take pics with the 5D but to dismiss it out of hand based on its "flaw" of having a sensor with gaps. And also to attack the integrity of another site based on your fantasies of that site's supposed anti-Nikon, pro-Canon bias.

nik691

US
53 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#51. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 48

nik691 Registered since 24th Oct 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 06:32 PM

Wow I was in the same boat here. Looking at the D700 then heard about the canon 5D II. I have always been a nikon fan for a very long time. So I am hoping nikon will bring the d700 wayyyyy down in price and bring out a d900 with 24 mp or something because that 5dII is looking tempting at that price range. I have a d300 now and love the ergonomics of it. Damn you canon.

Mustang

Riverview, CA
66 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#52. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 51

Mustang Registered since 26th Jun 2004
Wed 17-Sep-08 06:38 PM

I am just curious , what's the big attraction with 20+mp ??
What advantage does that offer ? To do a larger print ?
I wonder how many people actually do 19 x 20 sized prints on a regular basis ? To me , there seems to be more disadvantages than advantages .
Would not further advances in dynamic range / lower noise / better AF
be better ?

sorin

RO
386 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#53. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 52

sorin Registered since 06th Sep 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 06:44 PM

don't know

but here's a site with samples

http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news-16717-EOS+Canon+5D+Mark+II+HANDS+ON+with+Video+&+Pictures+Sample!!!.html

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#54. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 45

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 07:18 PM


>Given the choice between two AF
>systems, one of which looks better in tech specs and the other
>which performs better in REAL LIFE, I'll take the latter.
>Points to Canon for making smart decisions that are designed
>to improve camera operation and not simply meet some marketing
>hack's checklist. This is a credible competitor to the D700.
>Canon users should be pleased.

The only complaints I've ever heard from active, professional 5D users (including my shooting partner in the UK) are about the horrible main LCD, lack of weather proofing, and jealousy over Nikon's Auto ISO/shutter speed features. Canon seems to have met all those needs and tossed a potpourri of other stuff into the pot.

I've read the complaints in the forums, but I've never heard complaints about autofocus directly from any active 5D user. The differences between autofocus performance by D200, D80, D300, D200, D700, 5D, 30D, 40D, and plenty of other bodies from other makers besides Nikon and Canon are often too small, during actual use with intermediate or better lenses to be a major factor in any purchasing decision from generation to generation of bodies. My old D70/17-55 combo seemed to acquire focus instantly in all sorts of goofy and marginal lighting. The same was true for my D80/17-55, D80/18-200, D200/17-55, D200/18-200, D300 and now my D700.

I too am delighted Canon came out with this 5D MK II. It only means that Nikon now has some competitive issues to either meet & beat, veer away from in the process of defining a better direction, or ignoring in favor of completely different technical development strategies.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#55. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 42

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 07:41 PM

>I don't understand the problem with the integration of video
>into SLR cameras. If you don't like it, you don't have to use
>it. I'm scratching my head why anyone would "hope"
>for a strict segregation between video/still. As long as the
>still photography capabilities are not compromised - and
>there's not the slightest hint that would ever happen - I
>don't see the issue. And the video quality and capabilities
>will only get better and better. It's going to happen.

Historically, blended hardware development (in this case photo and video combined on one chassis) always suffers from warring dev camps. The side with the best product manager and marketing group gains more traction when it comes to making overall decisions on product development. The cockeyed push by so many tech industry segments to converge hardware applications ends up creating products which offer much more mediocrity than excellence.

I'm saying that shouldering blended dev will invariably result in a loss of focus from time to time on development of the photo side of any blended photo/video product. That's what I don't like. Hopefully, blended hardware designs will take into account the fears I think are important and make my concerns baseless. My own experiences while consulting with companies developing convergence products are not encouraging. We'll see of course.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

TEITZY

WUNGHNU, AU
2529 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#56. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 51

TEITZY Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments, most notably in the macro and sports forums. Registered since 14th Mar 2007
Wed 17-Sep-08 11:20 PM | edited Wed 17-Sep-08 11:42 PM by TEITZY

>Wow I was in the same boat here. Looking at the D700 then
>heard about the canon 5D II. I have always been a nikon fan
>for a very long time. So I am hoping nikon will bring the d700
>wayyyyy down in price and bring out a d900 with 24 mp or
>something because that 5dII is looking tempting at that price
>range. I have a d300 now and love the ergonomics of it. Damn
>you canon.

The 5D2 will not have a significant impact on the D700 price IMO (something else might), because they have different specs and really are aimed at different amateur users. Both cameras are priced very well for what they are and I just don't see any need for either manufacturer to drop their price. If Nikon release a 24MP body in the near future I seriously doubt it will be in the same price range as the 5D2, more like the price of the D3 or higher. If you need 21MP resolution NOW, then buy the Canon, but also be prepared to spend some serious cash on quality glass if you want to get the most out of that 21MP sensor (just ask 1Ds3 users how cheap glass and even some L's fair with all that resolution). Nikon seem convinced that most DSLR users are happy with 12MP (D90, D300, D700, D3) and I think they are right for the time being at least. The higher MP bodies from Nikon will come along with new matching glass (the 14-24 & 24-70 are just the start) so don't get too depressed with your current Nikon gear just yet

Cheers
Leigh

My Nikonians Gallery

Arkayem

Richmond Hill, GA (Savannah), US
6129 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#57. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 54

Arkayem Moderator Awarded for his high level skills in flash photography Charter Member
Thu 18-Sep-08 12:33 AM

>
>>Given the choice between two AF
>>systems, one of which looks better in tech specs and the
>other
>>which performs better in REAL LIFE, I'll take the latter.
>
>>Points to Canon for making smart decisions that are
>designed
>>to improve camera operation and not simply meet some
>marketing
>>hack's checklist. This is a credible competitor to the
>D700.
>>Canon users should be pleased.
>
>The only complaints I've ever heard from active, professional
>5D users (including my shooting partner in the UK) are about
>the horrible main LCD, lack of weather proofing, and jealousy
>over Nikon's Auto ISO/shutter speed features. Canon seems to
>have met all those needs and tossed a potpourri of other stuff
>into the pot.
>
>I've read the complaints in the forums, but I've never heard
>complaints about autofocus directly from any active 5D user.
>The differences between autofocus performance by D200, D80,
>D300, D200, D700, 5D, 30D, 40D, and plenty of other bodies
>from other makers besides Nikon and Canon are often too small,
>during actual use with intermediate or better lenses to be a
>major factor in any purchasing decision from generation to
>generation of bodies. My old D70/17-55 combo seemed to acquire
>focus instantly in all sorts of goofy and marginal lighting.
>The same was true for my D80/17-55, D80/18-200, D200/17-55,
>D200/18-200, D300 and now my D700.
>
>I too am delighted Canon came out with this 5D MK II. It only
>means that Nikon now has some competitive issues to either
>meet & beat, veer away from in the process of defining a
>better direction, or ignoring in favor of completely different
>technical development strategies.

I have shot weddings using the Canon 5D, 20D, 40D and my own Nikon D200. The 5D is a good camera (not a great camera), and I had AF problems in some situations. The Nikons do focus better, especially in lower ambient conditions, but the focus assist lamp on the flash takes care of that most of the time.

The 5D was consistantly sharper than my D200 on the formals. And I am talking about after sharpening the D200 images which are much softer still directly from the camera. The 5D wasn't enough sharper to be a serious problem, but it was quite noticeable in 11x14s when we had images from both my D200 and the 5D side by side.

The LCD on the 5D was much worse than the D200, and checking for focus was nearly impossible. Basically the 5D shot slower, and didn't handle nearly as well as the D200. It is much more pleasing to shoot with the D200.

With the 5D MK II, it looks like they have addressed most of the beafs I had. It will be interesting to see how well it competes with the D700. I think the D700 will turn out to be a much better camera overall, but it also costs more.

Russ
http://russmacdonald.smugmug.com/
http://NikonCLSPracticalGuide.blogspot.com/

agitater

Toronto, CA
4551 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#58. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 52

agitater Gold Member Donor Ribbon awarded for his very generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 18th Jan 2007
Thu 18-Sep-08 01:39 AM

>I am just curious , what's the big attraction with 20+mp ??
>What advantage does that offer ? To do a larger print ?
>I wonder how many people actually do 19 x 20 sized prints on a
>regular basis ? To me , there seems to be more disadvantages
>than advantages .
>Would not further advances in dynamic range / lower noise /
>better AF
>be better ?


Of course you're right, except for the fact that Nikon's current 12mp sensors easily produce gorgeous 16"x20" prints and even larger. At 21mp, it's possible to produce 30"x40" and even larger prints. Obviously it's extremely rare for the vast majority of photographers to print such sizes.

You can also forget about using walkabout lenses and indeed any other lens which isn't top of the line on a 21mp full frame body.

My Photo.Net Gallery
My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#59. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 56

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Thu 18-Sep-08 02:04 AM

> Nikon seem convinced that
>most DSLR users are happy with 12MP (D90, D300, D700, D3) and
>I think they are right for the time being at least. The higher
>MP bodies from Nikon will come along with new matching glass
>(the 14-24 & 24-70 are just the start) so don't get too
>depressed with your current Nikon gear just yet
>
>Cheers
>Leigh

Nikon were convined DX was the future and had no plan for FX until recently... FX is the way to go. I suppose the same logic applies here: 12MP is better than 20+MP until they can come out with a 20+MP camera. Is it called marketing?

sorin

RO
386 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#60. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 43

sorin Registered since 06th Sep 2007
Thu 18-Sep-08 05:47 AM | edited Thu 18-Sep-08 05:48 AM by sorin

all images from canon's website i've posted are no longer working.
only thumbnails remained

if you didn't see them yesterday, they're gone now
i really hope you did see them.

MstrBones

AW
8238 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#61. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 47

MstrBones Silver Member Nikonian since 06th Dec 2005
Thu 18-Sep-08 12:05 PM

Peter,

Let's stop the insults now per terms of use of Nikonians.

""

MstrBones

AW
8238 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#62. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 46

MstrBones Silver Member Nikonian since 06th Dec 2005
Thu 18-Sep-08 12:20 PM

Sorin,

I don't think any of us can read the minds of the reviewers at DP Review or engineers at Canon.

""

jrp

San Pedro Garza García, MX
38836 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#63. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 59

jrp Administrator JRP is one of the co-founders, has in-depth knowledge in various areas. Awarded for his contributions for the Resources Charter Member
Thu 18-Sep-08 01:23 PM | edited Thu 18-Sep-08 01:25 PM by jrp

The remarks of Nikon Imaging CEO three years ago in a press conference indicated that they hade been working on ("studying") full frame sensors and bodies for some time. So it is not a new thing.

Nikon engineers are ready when they are ready, as they take a samurai-like pride in what they do.

DX and FX will co-exist for long, given the economics of the products and the economic world conditions that prevail.
DX will remain holding the largest market share (in sales volume in units and dollar or yen figures), not FX, for the same reasons.

As for the "need" for more megapixels. Professionals have accepted for long that it is the clients (advertising agencies for the most part) who create the need, not accepting images with less once somebody has come up with it. So monster MP count is a true need for the professionl market, even when not exactly or necessarily driven by the photographers themselves.

Again, ultra-high and high MPix count will be camps divided by the economics.

Have a great time :-)
JRP (Founder & Administrator. Mainly at the north-eastern Mexican desert) Gallery, Brief Love Story
Please join the Silver, Gold and Platinum members who help this happen; upgrade.
Check our workshops at the Nikonians Academy and the Nikonians Photo Pro Shop

Arkayem

Richmond Hill, GA (Savannah), US
6129 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#64. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 63

Arkayem Moderator Awarded for his high level skills in flash photography Charter Member
Thu 18-Sep-08 02:23 PM

>As for the "need" for more megapixels. Professionals
>have accepted for long that it is the clients (advertising
>agencies for the most part) who create the need, not accepting
>images with less once somebody has come up with it. So monster
>MP count is a true need for the professionl market, even when
>not exactly or necessarily driven by the photographers
>themselves.

Well, I shot weddings for about seven years, and the only feedback I ever got from clients on my equipment was "Wow, that's really a big camera; must take great pictures". I would just point to the best of the best images on the wall and smile. No one ever asked about megapixels.

I think a lot of pro photographers put the pressure on themselves. Many do not fully understand all the technical details about resolution, and they are convinced that more MP's will give them better quality. I heard photographers in our studio say many times that they wanted a 21 MP camera, but when I pressed them as to why, they really had no answer, except 'better quality'.

The biggest complaint I have with a 21 MP camera (based on my limited experience with a Canon EOS 1D Mark III) is the file size for the raw images. I know that memory is cheap, but time is not. It takes much longer to transfer 21 MP images from the card to the PC, edit them, and convert them to jpegs for proofs as a 10 MP camera. The size bogs down even the fastest PCs running Lightroom. I used to shoot about 1300 images at a typical wedding, and then spend about three hours transferring, editing, and converting with Lightroom before uploading jpegs to our proofing site. I just cannot afford six hours instead of three.

So, for me the 12 MP FX D700 is just about the right resolution for the largest prints I'll ever need as a wedding/event photographer, and it allows very quiet high ISOs for great available light work, while keeping the file sizes manageable.

Now, if I can only justify getting a D700, since I am only doing a small amount of professional work these days!

Russ
http://russmacdonald.smugmug.com/
http://NikonCLSPracticalGuide.blogspot.com/

TEITZY

WUNGHNU, AU
2529 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#65. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 64

TEITZY Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments, most notably in the macro and sports forums. Registered since 14th Mar 2007
Thu 18-Sep-08 09:02 PM

Yes, if you have to buy a new a computer to handle 21MP images and new glass (I see Zeiss have just released ZE mount lenses for Canon) to make the most of that resolution, the 5D2 becomes a pretty costly upgrade.

Cheers
Leigh

My Nikonians Gallery

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#66. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 64

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Fri 19-Sep-08 12:21 AM

People don't typically make huge prints for wedding and event photos. 10 or 12 MP cameras should be sufficient. If you are not cropping a lot, event a 6 MP camera would do a good job. But if you want huge prints (something like 30x20 or larger), you will be better off with a 20+MP cameras. You will benefit from high MP cameras for wedding photographies, too -- you have plenty of pixel areas to crop to get the desire picture even your lenses is not long enough to fill the frame.

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#67. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 65

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Fri 19-Sep-08 12:27 AM

>Yes, if you have to buy a new a computer to handle 21MP
>images and new glass (I see Zeiss have just released ZE mount
>lenses for Canon) to make the most of that resolution, the 5D2
>becomes a pretty costly upgrade.
>
>Cheers
>Leigh

Hmmm, I'd just built a new PC about 2 months ago: Dual Xeon quad-core processors, 12 Gbyte of RAM, 2 TB disks, Nvidia 9800 graphics card.... If I need faster PC, I would just get a pair of faster processor. Personally, all I need is the body and a lenses.

MstrBones

AW
8238 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#68. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 66

MstrBones Silver Member Nikonian since 06th Dec 2005
Fri 19-Sep-08 09:35 AM

I'm just curious, do you print a lot of 30x20? That size print is rather specialized.

""

Arkayem

Richmond Hill, GA (Savannah), US
6129 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#69. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 68

Arkayem Moderator Awarded for his high level skills in flash photography Charter Member
Fri 19-Sep-08 11:11 AM

>I'm just curious, do you print a lot of 30x20? That size
>print is rather specialized.

I'm not the person you asked, but 20 x 30 is one of the standard sizes from Smugmug. You can get glossy or lustre. The largest standard size from Smugmug is 24 x 36.

Russ
http://russmacdonald.smugmug.com/
http://NikonCLSPracticalGuide.blogspot.com/

TEITZY

WUNGHNU, AU
2529 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#70. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 67

TEITZY Awarded for the continuous and generous sharing of his high level expertise and his always encouraging comments, most notably in the macro and sports forums. Registered since 14th Mar 2007
Fri 19-Sep-08 08:40 PM

>
>Hmmm, I'd just built a new PC about 2 months ago: Dual Xeon
>quad-core processors, 12 Gbyte of RAM, 2 TB disks, Nvidia 9800
>graphics card.... If I need faster PC, I would just get a pair
>of faster processor. Personally, all I need is the body
>and a lenses.

And that cost you nothing? Yes the latest and greatest computers will handle 21MP files but MOST people don't have the latest and greatest. Most people are probably running systems 2 years or older (in my case 5 yo) so at the very least they will need extra RAM. You also need extra storage space so that means bigger CF cards and hard drives or external drives and so on. And once you try starting to print these files at full resolution, older systems (I only have USB 1 ports) can chug away for hours before spitting one of these out. And it probably means it's time to update the old 17" CRT/LCD to a 24"+ LCD so we can view these files properly.

My ancient computer (2.8ghz p4, 2gb RAM) can just handle 12MP files (it's slow though) so I can only imagine what it would be like with 21MP files but that's what 5D upgraders will have to deal with and for some (perhaps many) it will mean a significant upgrade in hardware if they are going to keep their sanity.

Cheers
Leigh

My Nikonians Gallery

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#71. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 70

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Sat 20-Sep-08 12:45 AM

>>
>>Hmmm, I'd just built a new PC about 2 months ago: Dual
>Xeon
>>quad-core processors, 12 Gbyte of RAM, 2 TB disks, Nvidia
>9800
>>graphics card.... If I need faster PC, I would just get a
>pair
>>of faster processor. Personally, all I need is the
>body
>>and a lenses.
>
>And that cost you nothing? Yes the latest and greatest
>computers will handle 21MP files but MOST people don't have
>the latest and greatest. Most people are probably running
>systems 2 years or older (in my case 5 yo) so at the very
>least they will need extra RAM. You also need extra storage
>space so that means bigger CF cards and hard drives or
>external drives and so on. And once you try starting to print
>these files at full resolution, older systems (I only have USB
>1 ports) can chug away for hours before spitting one of these
>out. And it probably means it's time to update the old
>17" CRT/LCD to a 24"+ LCD so we can view these files
>properly.
>
>My ancient computer (2.8ghz p4, 2gb RAM) can just handle 12MP
>files (it's slow though) so I can only imagine what it would
>be like with 21MP files but that's what 5D upgraders will have
>to deal with and for some (perhaps many) it will mean a
>significant upgrade in hardware if they are going to keep
>their sanity.
>
>Cheers
>Leigh

Money already spent, and we talking about then next item - a camera body.

swu00

Brooklyn, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#72. "RE: Canon 50D v. Nikon D700" | In response to Reply # 68

swu00 Registered since 05th Dec 2004
Sat 20-Sep-08 12:48 AM

>I'm just curious, do you print a lot of 30x20? That size
>print is rather specialized.

quite a few times. I take landscape pictures, though.

G