are the Nikon D700 and D3 as good as Canon?
Posted by admin | Under Nikon D3 Wednesday Jul 23, 2008I am a long suffering Nikon user whos is getting by with the appalling D200 camera. I am thinking of chucking Nikon in and buying the Canon 1ds Mk111. The changeover with lenses will cost me a fortune.I have herad some good things about the D3 though. Is it worth giving Nikon another chance?
The D3 actually exceeds the hype, the first camera to do so for a while.
The D700 is effectively a D3 minus the continuous frame rate (5fps vs. 9), the 4×5 crop option, only one CF slot and with a significantly reduced battery life (about 1/3 of the D3). If you can live with that it costs $2000 less.
The D3 actually exceeds the hype, the first camera to do so for a while.
The D700 is effectively a D3 minus the continuous frame rate (5fps vs. 9), the 4×5 crop option, only one CF slot and with a significantly reduced battery life (about 1/3 of the D3). If you can live with that it costs $2000 less.
References :
Are you being hounded by Canon users?
Actually if you have paid any attention at all to what has been happening, the opposite is true.
Canon users are dumping Canon 1Ds, Mark III’s for the Nikon D3 because it has superior high ISO, low noise performance and a much higher continuous shooting rate than the 1Ds, Mark III.
Recently at a MBL event, there were over twice the number of D3’s than 1Ds, Mark III’s. Why didn’t you see that? Unless you looked hard, the white lenses show up and the black ones do not.
Not only are the Canon’s over $3,000 more per copy, those of my Canon shooting friends have had some issues with the sensors not matching … that is to say there are slight colour shifts between different 1Ds, Mark III’s bodies …
BTW the D200 is a fine camera. What problems are you having? It is such a fine camera, I am delaying selling mine although I have a new D300 and D3. It is just a sturdy, stable camera that does everything I have ever needed it to do.
I have two colleagues who have switched from Canon to Nikon since the introduction of the D3.
References :
Editorial, sports, fashion and glamour photographer
to be honest, Nikon and Canon are both excellent brands. If you already have a range of good lenses, try to stick with Nikon. The D700 is a fantastic camera, It has great high sensitivity (virtually no grain at 3200) and paired with good lenses is just as good as the Canon. ( I actually just converted from Canon to Nikon but still firmly believe that both companies make great cameras, you just have to decide what will best meet your purposes.) I haven’t looked so much at the D3 – maybe check out some test shots (taken under less than ideal circumstances) before you make your final decision.
References :
Experience.
Why do you think the D200 is an appalling camera?
IMO it's a fantastic cam. Are you sure your D200 is working right?
Otherwise you really should have no complaints at all.
Take it to a shop and have them look at it, perhaps the sensor's effed, your lenses are not fitting right…etc, could be many reasons why it's not performing.
There's no reason to switch to Canon, if you have Nikkor lenses you should stick with Nikon.
Canon makes absolutely excellent cameras. The biggest issue of a switch over is lenses. Canon's lenses are a) a tad more expensive, b) far and few between compared to Nikon. (there's more range in shopping for Nikon and Nikon compatible lenses from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina )
If you need a new one and can afford it, have a look at the D3.
References :
Yeah cue another zealots mud slinging contest.
I have a bag of canon lenses. They won’t fit on a Nikon camera, so therefore a canon camera is the best camera for me.
It helps that canon make very good cameras.
If you have a bag of nikon lenses then guess what, a nikon camera is best for you, thankfully, nikon also make very good cameras.
Everybody is happy.
The D200 is not a pro camera in the way that a Canon EOS 40D or 5D is not a pro camera.
If you want pro performance buy a pro camera. No need to switch brands. A used D2X or a D3 is the way to go, the D700 hasn’t had the real-world use to determine its durability or suitability as a pro camera.
Flash in the pentaprism? To me, a potential weakspot for a camera thats going to have a hard life.
The spec sheet isn’t much use when your at a rainy football game in poor light, or a helicopters blowing sand and dust all over you and your camera. The D3 costs a good bit more, professionals put less stock on prestige and more on what works. There will be good reasons why the D3 costs more.
That is not to say that the D700 is a bad camera, or that the same arguements don’t apply to the canon EOS 5d or 5dmk2, D2’s and D3 are proven pedigree if you want a pro camera, that is the only way to do it without making an (unnecessary) change in systems.
If you used canon, then the only pro models are in the EOS1D range.
End of.
There are some differences between the Canon and Nikon systems and bodies, but really, the folk who spend there life fretting about the minutae would be far happier and take better photographs if they just got out there and got on with it.
If you were starting a system afresh I would say buy canon, as you have a legacy of Nikons very fine lenses I will say good luck with any of Nikons excellent pro models.
References :