• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Buy the Canon Mark II or wait for Nikon D800?

ensyed

Active Member
So I have been using my Canon 400D for several years and want to move up to a better camera. Instead of going up in steps I figure I may as well get the full frame Mark II or Nikon D700.
I really want the video functionality but from all reports the D700 is better for low light photos.

My uses are photographing moving kids, portraits, kids plays and sporting events, travel photos. So basically all the normal uses of a family with kids.

I will need lenses which go from wide angle to maybe 300mm. I have already read up on the flash that bounces off the ceiling??? Sorry dont know if I am describing it properly for indoor moving kids.

Anyone else debating between these 2 cameras? The D800 may not come out till the fall or even later per nikon rumors website.
Thx
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ian_S

Distinguished Member
Not a great time to buy either the 5D MkII or the D700 IMO, simply because supply is tight right now and prices have gone up as a result.

There's lots of speculation that follow on model launches may be also delayed due to the problems in Japan caused by recovering from the 'quake.

If it were me looking for one of these, I'd be waiting a little while to see whether any new cameras do get announced, (Aug/Sept is the usual time) or to see if supply re-establishes itself enough for the prices to come back down again.

If you're going to stick with Canon, then in the interim, if you don't already have one, a 430EX II flash would improve indoor children photos enormously even on the 400D when bounced off the ceiling. Of course if you'd prefer to move to Nikon then you'd have to wait until you change.
 

gibbsy

Moderator
If you already have Canon lenses that are not specially made for cropped sensors it will make financial sense to stick with Canon. Go with Nikon and you will have to start all over again with lenses. As for a flash then go for the most powerful you can afford in the case of Nikon this would be the excellent SB900.
 

Johnmcl7

Distinguished Member
I think the D700 is an outstanding camera, I chose it over the 5D mk II as I specifically wanted a robust body, very good AF and high iso which the D700 has the advantages in over the Canon. However the Canon is a much better general purpose camera with its very high resolution and video mode (I have GH series cameras so this wasn't so necessary), its high ISO is still outstanding, definitely enough to be worth having video over the D700.

I fully agree with the recommendations for the flash above, even with wide aperture lenses and the D700's immense high iso it's usually nowhere near enough for shooting anything with motion indoors. A flash gives you full control over your light, you don't need to go to very high isos and you can also stop down a bit to get some depth of field which is often needed with a 35mm sized camera.

John
 

Boldonion

Active Member
You say you will be shooting sporting events and moving kids. Not the 5D's forte. The D700's AF system eclipses the 5DII, I'm sure the D800 will be even better and will no doubt have video. 5DII is still an amazing camera , but the D700 is the better allrounder for the stills shooter. Maybe a 1Dxx camera might be better for you if you want to stay canon?
 
Last edited:

Johnmcl7

Distinguished Member
The Canon's AF isn't that bad though and should be easily up to the task of shooting moving kids and kids' (or similar) sporting events.
 

RobDickinson

Well-known Member
There both due replacement but unlikely to be so until sometime in 2012 now.

Canon has more megapixels, better for landscapes and cropping, has great video and IMO as good ISO as the D700 (within some limits).

D700 is better built and has better AF, is larger and heavier and has a lot more buttons I find difficult to use.

The top nikon lenses will set you back a lot more than canons (tho the 14-24 and 24-70 are better) and they have a much poorer 2nd tier pro range ( nothing that really competes with 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200f4L etc).

Make sure you take a good look at the lens range and consider the increased price of FF lenses too!
 

dudeonline

Well-known Member
I think the D700 is an outstanding camera, I chose it over the 5D mk II as I specifically wanted a robust body, very good AF and high iso which the D700 has the advantages in over the Canon. However the Canon is a much better general purpose camera with its very high resolution and video mode (I have GH series cameras so this wasn't so necessary), its high ISO is still outstanding, definitely enough to be worth having video over the D700.

I fully agree with the recommendations for the flash above, even with wide aperture lenses and the D700's immense high iso it's usually nowhere near enough for shooting anything with motion indoors. A flash gives you full control over your light, you don't need to go to very high isos and you can also stop down a bit to get some depth of field which is often needed with a 35mm sized camera.
John

.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Guardians of the Galaxy Xmas Special, Strange World, Bones and All, and Cabinet of Dr Caligari in 4K
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom