5D Mk ii vs D700

[JM Tran]

true Red, resolution rarely has anything to do with a good photograph.

I beg to differ actually, I have hired medium format Hassys at 40mp and 65mp etc for client works and demands from clients, either for the amount of dynamic range, tonal gradation and details being resolved. Same goes for any professional landscape photographers shooting to sell or for a client, why bother lugging those big digital large format cameras around, its heavy! Otherwise, I'd stick with shooting everything with my Pentax DL with 6 megapixels from years ago.

Of course, if you are an amateur, extra MPs dont always mean a better photo.

[Redgum]

Can't disagree with that JM they sure have a purpose. But my boss, National Geographic and the Discovery Channel are more than happy with 12 megapixels. And I could add Newsweek plus a hundred national and international magazines. Plus I've never had any agency in Australia complain about that resolution either.
Besides, in the very rare circumstance of needing more than 12 Mps I'll do what you did, hire the appropriate gear. Better business that way and I make more money.
Also, we're in the days of manipulating and merging images, particularly for advertising, so God knows what we end up with after the graphic artists get hold of it.

[TOM]

"there's nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept" A. Adams

If resolution was really that important, we'd all be shooting large format. And the vast majority of pro landscapers do shoot large format, and resolution is only part of why the do so. I have clients that have their own set of demands, but just because they demand it, it doesn't mean they are right. I'm not saying there isn't a place for mf/lf cameras, but if you make a good image, the resolution is rarely important. If you start out with a requirement that you have to shoot a certain size, then you need the right tool for the job, but that specialty tool doesn't guarantee a good result. Of course if you're shooting product shots, then resolution is important, but those types of shots aren't usually good photographs, they're just a means to an end.

Otherwise, I'd stick with shooting everything with my Pentax DL with 6 megapixels from years ago.

I suspect that a great deal of your work could be shot on the Pentax, and still get you the results you need/want. I have been shooting a lot on my iPhone, and the pictures could go 8x10 on canvas.

[JM Tran]

Can't disagree with that JM they sure have a purpose. But my boss, National Geographic and the Discovery Channel are more than happy with 12 megapixels. And I could add Newsweek plus a hundred national and international magazines. Plus I've never had any agency in Australia complain about that resolution either.
Besides, in the very rare circumstance of needing more than 12 Mps I'll do what you did, hire the appropriate gear. Better business that way and I make more money.
Also, we're in the days of manipulating and merging images, particularly for advertising, so God knows what we end up with after the graphic artists get hold of it.

thats def true mate, hire when I need to as I dont see it to be a wise 'investment' to drop 60k mortgage on a new Hasselblad that I might use a few times a year And regarding, web and graphic designers and editors etc getting your files after, quite often their outcome was a lot diff to what I expected. But in my genres of work, they need all the MP they can get for cropping. Might take a nice shot, and find out later the published work is a 1/4 crop of the original image......sigh

[arthurking83]

The D700 will have a better dynamic range capability if that's important to you for landscapes.
I believe it should be for landscapes!(as opposed to more pixels).

note that Nikon have recently claimed in an interview that they'll be looking to up res their next generation of sensors(ie. we guess that means the D3/700 series) whilst maintaining high ISO noise ability.

But if that comes at the expense of dynamic range, I'd stick to the current generation D3/700 sensor's 12Mp output.

One thing to note about ultimate detail in an image is the ability of the lens to capture that microfine detail as well, so having extra megapixels but using slightly inferior lenses to begin with may be equal to the same ultimate output as the end result.
Already noted is Nikon's 14-24mm zoom, and while it's heavy cumbersome and doesn't readily accept filters, it's ability is beyond even the D3x's 25megapixel count, surpassing it's resolving power.

So you said:

.... I'm looking to get more serious about landscapes so printing large is probably going to be part of the brief. I like all the other Nikon features over the Canon but this one feature seems to be a bit glaring......

what are the other parts to the brief?
Is there a limited cash fund?
Does it have to be a Nikon or Canon?
If Mp count is the major factor, and value for money is a high priority then nothing comes close to the Sony A800 for both(at the same time of course! ). Get some decent CZ glass, of which they are some of the best also!.. and you're set to sell 100" prints.

according to my preferred sources of info:
in terms of sheer resolving power the Sony A800 + CZ 16-35/2.8 will win in terms of ability to resolve fine detail.
next would be the 5D plus 16-35/2.8, but the lens doesn't resolve as much detail as the Nikon 14-24mm can, so in actual real life terms, I think it may be a closer run thing that the pure Mp numbers may be indicating, between the Nikon D700+(14-24)mm combo and the Canon 5D+(16-35) combo.
if it were my money, I'd be putting it into the nikon... with an almost guaranteed soon to be released D700x in the next 6 months(if nikon's recent history is anything to go by.
if I had no problems in changing brands and indeed operating two brands concurrently, then the Sony option would be my preference going by current system specs.
(otherwise I'd wait for another few months to see what nikon has in store over the coming Chrissy period )

I have to admit I've never printed any of my stash of a 'billion and a half' images (seriously) but I do have two images I'd like to print at 1 meter sized prints, both of which were taken by my lowly 6Mp D70s. They've both been cropped to a wide looking pano format, and the printer told me that as long as they're sharp(which they are), 1 meter prints should not be a problem for the 3000 pixel width of the image.
I need to save the image in the highest quality Tiff format and it'll apparently come out fine.
Larger physical pixels can be up-rezed a lot better than smaller photosites can be ...
Note the printer(Prism Graphics here in Melbourne) explained this to me and they do it for me! I only supply the tiff file as best as I can.

Note that a Sigma 10-20mm, while it will still work on the D700, is a bad investment as it'll really only end up using approximately only 6.5Mp of the available 12Mp.

A better investment is a Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6. They usually sell for about just under $1K and are good enough for most purposes... just be mindful of your toes!

[bb45pz]

Thanks for the information Arthur.

There is a limited cash amount (probably around $7000 including whatever lens's and a few filters). I don't have a problem changing brands but for some reason have either Canon or Nikon stuck in my head and probably am not comfortable going away from these two when talking about this price range.

After looking at the DXO website I came to the conclusion that, particularly for an amateur like me, dynamic range is more important that MP so I think I'll stick with the D700.

Say I go for the Nikon 12-24mm and keep my 50mm and 28-105mm, which telephoto would you recommend for the D700, was considering the Nikkor f4.5-5.6 80-400mm ED?

Thanks again for all the help.

[arnica]

Thanks for the information Arthur.

There is a limited cash amount (probably around $7000 including whatever lens's and a few filters). I don't have a problem changing brands but for some reason have either Canon or Nikon stuck in my head and probably am not comfortable going away from these two when talking about this price range.

After looking at the DXO website I came to the conclusion that, particularly for an amateur like me, dynamic range is more important that MP so I think I'll stick with the D700.

Say I go for the Nikon 12-24mm and keep my 50mm and 28-105mm, which telephoto would you recommend for the D700, was considering the Nikkor f4.5-5.6 80-400mm ED?

Thanks again for all the help.

Why would you look past the 70-200 VRII?

[jasevk]

Why would you look past the 70-200 VRII?

Agreed...... Magnificent lens.... If you need longer throw in a 2x teleconverter

[arthurking83]

When looking for lenses make sure that in the lens's name description, the description doesn't include 'Dx'.

The Dx refers to the smaller sized sensors, so they become limited on the Fx sized sensor.

Nikon 12-24 will work on the D700, but really becomes an 18-24mm lens at Fx setting, and even though it'll work in Dx mode, that's subsequently only @ 6Mp.

Alternatives include the Nikon 16-35mm f/4VR and the 17-35mm/2.8, both lenses are more than capable on a D700

As for telephoto lens, because I'm assuming it's for birding the 80-400VR is a good lens and the D700 has more than capable focusing ability to make this lens work ok.
If it's for portraiture or sports shooting from a close-ish distance arnica's suggestion is the best.
You could also add a Nikon 2x teleconverter to that lens, and the TC20EIII seems to work well

[dulvariprestige]

If you need to get more out of the files from the d700, you could always use onone's genuine fractals, from what I've learnt, this is the software to use when you want to do really big prints.

Plus the d700's focusing and fps would be better if you did want to shoot sport or wildlife.

[mkooper]

I like the additional MPs as it allows me to take a larger framed picture and crop to desire.

Careful about the lenses you listed above. I upgrade to 5DII and had to sell the Sigma 10-20 as it does not fit on a full-frame camera.

[bigdazzler]

Does it have to be a Nikon or Canon?
If Mp count is the major factor, and value for money is a high priority then nothing comes close to the Sony A800 for both(at the same time of course! ). Get some decent CZ glass, of which they are some of the best also!.. and you're set to sell 100" prints.

How many times AK ... A850 !!!

Yep ... Ive got a 10m self portrait billboard going up on the side of Sydney Town Hall any day now ... Geez I look good too

[bb45pz]

Ok so here we have it.

Nikon D700
Nikon 28-105 and Nikon 50mm f1.8 which I already have just as general purpose lenses.
Nikon 16-35 f4 for wide angle and either Nikon 80-400 or 70-200 VRII with teleconverter for wildlife.

Is this setup compatible to make the most of the D700 full frame sensor?

Thanks Arthur for your unbelievably helpful advice, thanks everyone else also for your contributions.

[Darinpix]

Lots of good advice here - and remarkably little Canon vs Nikon sniping! Certainly lens investment has got to be a primary consideration, and almost enough to base the entire decision on. Another factor well worth considering is camera ergonomics. Nikon and Canon take very different approaches to control layout, and switching from one to the other is not that simple. I favour Canon's simple approach with a main dial and thumbwheel controlling most things, but I know a lot of people rate Nikon's "dedicated button for everything" approach.

Sooo... hire out a body for a weekend, have a play, and choose the one you prefer. Nowadays, image quality, ISO range, colour, tonality etc. are simply outstanding whichever way you go - so pick the body that YOU find more intuitive.

[ricktas]

Lots of good advice here - and remarkably little Canon vs Nikon sniping!

That's cause we don't allow to much. A bit of a jab here or there in fun is ok, but we are fairly strict on the baiting etc on this site.

[bigdazzler]

I favour Canon's simple approach

.

and Sonys are even simpler. My entire A850 is controlled from a one touch Fn button, and a single joystick. IMO Sony has Canikon covered easily in terms of menu layout, and ease of use and navigation.

[arthurking83]

....

Sooo... hire out a body for a weekend, have a play, and choose the one you prefer. ......

if better ergonomics are a priority, then even just a very short stint at playing with a camera on the shop floor will suffice to determine which one is better for you.

The OP has semi decided that the D700 is the camera for him(so far) and going from a D80, the D700 will be easy peasy in terms of understanding the workings of the controls.

I've never used a Canon 5D, but I have now on two occasions had difficulty 'operating' two lower end Canon bodies(I think something like a 350D wayyy back and recently a 1000 type body who's owners had no idea on how to control various aspects of the camera).
In the time that it took to figure out how to control ISO, aperture(it must have been set to shutter priority??) and exposure compensation to at least help them get the shot, the day was over. I reckon it took me about 30sec to 1min, to figure out that I couldn't figure it out, and as all three of us looked up the sunset was now gone.
Ergonomics should come naturally, and BigDazzer has mentioned that Sony's have good menus and ergos, and I tend to agree with him(based on my playing with a friend's lowly A100 type camera).

[Redgum]

and Sonys are even simpler. My entire A850 is controlled from a one touch Fn button, and a single joystick. IMO Sony has Canikon covered easily in terms of menu layout, and ease of use and navigation.

Much like a point and shoot, Darren?

[bigdazzler]

Much like a point and shoot, Darren?

Not quite mate, like a DSLR with a Fn button that gives you access to pretty much the entire camera. You can toggle through, and access, all the functions of the camera on the LCD using the joystick.

It also has one touch dedicated buttons on the body for all commonly used critical functions like ISO, WB, motor drive, EV Comp, Metering, AF, etc .. So you rarely even need the Fn button anyway.

They are very intuitive, and user friendly mate. I have played with both Canons and Nikons and I feel Sonys are by far the best laid out of all when it comes to menus and button layout.

I suppose like anything though, you will become accustomed to your chosen brand, but the thing with the Sonys is, when I first picked up a DSLR in the shop, I wasnt immediately overwhelmed by the camera. It made sense, even to an absolute noob

[Redgum]

Ah! I see. Much the same as a Canon or a Nikon.