search the site
Canon EOS 5D Mark II versus Nikon D700
The Canon 5D Mark II was clearly meant to compete with the Nikon D700 (no we haven’t forgot the Sony A900, but more on that in a future post). On paper we thought the Canon 5D Mark II looked like it might have an advantage in more than just a few categories. Keeping in mind the 5D Mark II cost less (right now) and shoots 1080 high definition video, Canon may have taken the advantage over Nikon again. For your convienience we’ve tabled the more important features of both cameras so you can compare for yourself.
As always, leave your thoughts in the comments.
Get the Canon EOS 5D Mark II at Amazon body only $2700 (Order from Amazon, not 3rd party), Adorama body only $2699, or from B and H for $2699.95.
Buy the Nikon D700 here at B&H Photo or here at Amazon.
Sensor
pixels |
size |
cleaning |
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II |
21.1 million effective pixels | 36 x 24 mm CMOS sensor | Self-cleaning sensor unit (filter in front of sensor vibrates at high frequency at start-up and shutdown – can be disabled) |
Nikon D700 |
12.1 million effective pixels | 36 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor | Image Sensor Cleaning (vibration) |
File Sizes/File Formats/Video
image size |
formats |
Video |
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II |
5616 x 3744 (21.0 MP-JPG)
4080 x 2720 (11.1 MP-JPG) 2784 x 1856 (5.2 MP-JPG) 5616 x 3744 (21.0 MP-RAW) 3861 x 2574 (10.0 MP-RAW) 2784 x 1856 (5.2 MP-RAW) |
RAW (.CR2; 14-bit)
JPEG (EXIF 2.21) – Fine / Normal RAW + JPEG (separate files) sRAW1, sRAW2 (see above) |
1920 x 1080 (16:9) up to 12 mins (Quicktime 1080p H.264; 38.6 Mbits/sec)
640 x 480 (4:3) up to 24 mins (Quicktime 480p H.264; 17.3 Mbits/sec) Max file size 4 GB Quicktime MOV format (H.264 video, PCM sound) 30 fps |
Nikon D700 |
4256 x 2832 (L; 12.1 MP)
3184 x 2120 (M; 6.8 MP) 2128 x 1416 (S; 3.0 MP) 2784 x 1848 (L; 5.1 MP) 2080 x 1384 (M; 2.9 MP) 1392 x 920 (S; 1.3 MP) |
NEF (12-bit or 14-bit, compressed or lossless compressed RAW)
NEF + JPEG TIFF JPEG (EXIF 2.21) |
N/A |
Processing/AF Points/AF Modes
Processing |
AF Points |
AF Modes |
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II |
DIGIC IV | 9-point TTL CMOS sensor
6 “Invisible Assist AF points” Centre point cross type F5.6 or faster Center point additionally sensitive with lenses of F2.8 or faster |
One shot AF
AI Servo AF AI Focus AF Manual focus |
Nikon D700 |
EXPEED | 51 focus points (15 cross-type sensors) | Single Servo AF [S]
Continuous Servo AF [C] Manual focus [M] Focus Tracking automatically activated by subject’s status in [S] or [C] AF |
Viewfinder/Display
Viewfinder |
LCD Size |
LCD Resolution |
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II |
98% frame coverage
Magnification: 0.71x (-1 diopter with 50 mm lens at infinity) |
3.0 ” TFT LCD | 920,000 pixels
Automatic 3 level brightness adjustment plus 7 manual levels 170 ° viewing angle Dual anti-reflection (’Clear View’) |
Nikon D700 |
Frame coverage 95%
Viewfinder magnification approx 0.72x |
3″ TFT LCD | 920,000 pixels170° viewing angle
100% frame coverage Brightness adjustment |
FPS/ISO/Live View
FPS |
ISO |
Live View |
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II |
3.9 fps | Default: ISO 100 – 6400
Expanded: 50 – 25600 |
Live TTL display of scene from CMOS image sensor
100% frame coverage 30 fps Real-time evaluative metering using CMOS image sensor Best view or exposure simulation Silent mode Grid optional (x2) Magnify optional (5x or 10x at AF point) Three AF modes – Live mode / Quick mode / Face Detection Live histogram (Luminance or RGB) Remote live view using EOS Utility 2.0 (via USB or WiFi/Ethernet using WFT) |
Nikon D700 |
5 fps (7 fps w/ optional grip) | Default: ISO 200 – 6400
Boost: 100 – 25,600 |
Handheld mode: TLL phase-detect AF with 51 focus areas (15 cross-type sensors)
Tripod mode: focal-plane contrast AF on a desired point within a specific area |
Dimensions/Weight/Price
Dimensions |
Weight |
Price |
|
Canon EOS 5D Mark II |
152 x 114 x 75 mm (6.0 x 4.5 x 2.9 in) | No battery: 810 g (1.8 lb) | $2699.95 Body Only |
Nikon D700 |
147 x 123 x 77 mm/5.8 x 4.8 x 3.0 in. | No battery: 995 g/2.19 lb. | $2699.95 Body Only |
Get the Canon EOS 5D Mark II at Amazon, B&H Photo ,or Adorama.
Get the Nikon D700 at Amazon, B&H Photo ,or Adorama.
Similar Posts:
- Canon EOS 1D Mark IV Initial Thoughts: ISO and Image …
- Canon EOS 1D Mark IV: AF and Image Quality
- Canon EOS 7D Field Report: Introduction and ISO Samples
- Canon EOS 7D: In Focus?
- Nikon D300s ISO Samples
Leave a Reply
About Neutralday.com
Established in 2007 by photographer Patrick Dean, Neutralday.com brings you the latest in photography news and reviews. With insights on photographers, equipment, and how to's, Neutralday.com is focused on and intended for the photography community.
Support Neutralday.com
Canon Instant Savings
Our Most Recent Reviews
Canon EOS 7D In Depth Review
Canon PowerShot G11 In Depth Review
Canon PowerShot S90 In Depth Review
Nikon D3000 In Depth Review
Nikon D300s In Depth Review
Nikon D3s In Depth Review
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 In Depth Review
Pentax K-x In Depth ReviewRed Hot Pre-Orders
Latest Tweets
resources
Best Sellers at Amazon
flickr
Hi Patrick,
Thanks for your view – for me it can make sense to listen to the experience from people already using the cameras, I am considering, even I know that there will be a risk of some bias answers as well. Choosing one of the cameras, which I compare, will always be choice of possibilities, where you can not get it all – I know that for sure. On the other hand – the use of the cameras is a totally different thing as Ollie mentioned, which discussion is not useful to me in finding out, how satisfied users are with their products – in this case the 5dmarkII and the D700.
Hope to have more views, before I take the big step from my Nikon F70 into the digital world of cameras, and I choose my next camera. My favorite pictures are all kind of landscape to birds and animals and action pictures (sport) – low light indoor pictures etc. Therefore the D700 might be the best camera for me in the long run, even I fancy some of the new possiblities coming along with the 5dmarkII.
This is a very impressive article. Both the Nikon D700 and the canon EOS 5D Mark II show great features. However, being a Nikon kind of guy, I’ll vote for the D700. Still, the 5D Mark II is very nice.
Oh Alex,
I can now vouch for the 5D2, but you’re right they’re both good.
This is an update to a previous post. I mentioned that I was experiencing some difficulty getting adequate resolution from the Canon 50mm f1.4 USM lens on the 5D Mark II. To address this issue, I bought the 50mm f1.2L. Unfortunately, despite its astronomical price tag, the 50mm f1.2 wasn’t appreciably sharper than the 50mm f1.4 at most aperture settings. (It does have better bokeh and better build quality, and of course it has a greater maximum aperture, but I’m just talking about resolved detail.) At large apertures it had slightly better contrast than the 1.4 non-L series lens, but I wasn’t impressed. I was hoping for a lens just as good as the 85mm f1.2, which this isn’t. I am returning it and buying a manual focus Zeiss 50mm f1.4 in a Canon mount. I’ll let you know if that lens is any better.
Meanwhile, I did a shoot for the local public radio station here in Austin last weekend, which was celebrating it’s 50th anniversary, and I shot a lot of the event handheld (usually with no flash) with the Canon 70-200mm f4L IS on the 5D Mark II. I am mostly a studio photographer, so “events” are always a little frustrating for me–I don’t like being in a situation where I have to work with poor lighting. I had to bump the ISO up pretty high–to ISO 1600 and sometimes 3200. The shots look fine. I wouldn’t blow them up beyond about 11×14, but the noise was tolerable at modest print sizes. Once again I am impressed with this camera. I had the 85mm f1.2L prime with me, as I was worried the f4 tele zoom would be too slow for indoor event photography, but I was pleasantly surprised. Now that these new camera models can operate at such high sensitivities, large maximum apertures are not the absolute necessity they once were. Well done Canon!
Been using the 5D Mark II for a couple months now. Works especially great in low light situations. I can hand hold it with the 24~105 lens outside at night and get low noise pictures. This is quite an improvement over the old 5D.
popbunka!,
yep low light performance still amazes me, just can do things now I simply couldn’t before
The comparison between the two models appears to have an error: it lists D700 as having ISO bust limit at 12,800 where it in fact goes to 25,600 (just like the 5D mkII). By the way, I’ve owned D700 for a few months now and I wouldn’t give it up for anything else (other than maybe a new D700 replacement if one is available provided it has all the same feature and performance like D700). I think low light performance is better on D700 after all. I compared some of my very low-light pictures with similar pictures of a friend who has 5D mkII and although his are really good, mine beat them in the quality and lower noise. Also, the focusing system on D700 is a lot better than that on D5 mkII (which is essentially what 5D featured – seems that Canon hasn’t added much improvement in that area). As for the HD movie mode – it’s surely nice to have it (and I considered that) but you really have to use it while the camera is on the tripod (even the Canon IS lenses will not match image stabilization on most camcorders, like Sony HDR-1 that is also HD and you don’t have to be limited to 5mins). So in the end, it’s better to have a really good camera take really good pictures and leave making movies to really good camcorders. Still, 5D mkII is a big improvement over the previous 5D model
Yep, sorry about that ISO number, I’ll edit it shortly….It does look like you’re leaning towards the D700, but I’ll say for the 5D2 that ISO is amazing, very close the D700 and printed on the page difficult to distinguish and that’s at 21 megapixels…As for the AF, it isn’t as complex, but it is very fast to focus. On the movies—it’s first gen, so I expect noticeable improvements next time around
eos 5D MARK II is excellent for every thing.
Kava,
I would almost agree, except really you don’t want the 5D2’s AF for very dynamic subjects, least not as your primary camera.
As always it is a battle between certain vantage points for each unit both I am sure are unbelievable Camera’s. Both show advantage’s and disadvantage’s in some area’s where application may be the deciding factor. I have no Brand loyalty owning Olympus E-3 , Canon T1i and Canon 5D2 and Camcorder Sony SR-11 as usually it is the individual opinion on ease of operation (Specific to operator) , Current Application and personal preference that will eventually decide which is better suited for each individual user . Thanks for the reveiw on these beautiful units I wish I could own them all.
The Canon 5D mkII looks to be a great camera. There is something that it lacks that the D700 has though. I currently own a D700, but have no brand loyalty toward Nikon or Canon, my first camera was actually a Canon Rebel X / Film. I love the pop up flash that is built in on the D700. Not only can I use it as a flash in emergency situations or as a fill, but I can remotely trigger flashes because it has a Flash Commander built in. Its just one less piece of equipment to carry around all day. Another feature I like that the D700 has, is the Af Assist light for low light situations. There were times I was shooting in a night club that were nearly pitch black. Some lenses I use aren’t as good as others focusing in low light. Turn on the AF assist light and I can still focus with them. It sometimes is the difference in getting a shot or not.
charles,
those are good points, not often made, in the D700’s favor.
Still, I love the absolutely giant files the 5D2 provides, and love the IQ. So long as I pretend the D3x and medium format don’t exist…I feel like I’m on top of the world.
The file size is oh so nice, but not so nice to my hard drives, I feel like I’m always having to delete things and look for new hard drives as is.
charles,
you’re right about that, the file sizes eat up space real fast, take them into photoshop and it’s easy to get to 1GB if you use multiple layers…
I’m a portrait and event photograper and come from a filmmakers background…I’ve been doing a lot of research on both camera’s…almost 3 months of mags, blogs, and photographers opinions who work in the Hollywood industry…
I feel that a movie camera is a movie cam and a still camera is…well a still camera…the focus points on the 700 are crazy efficient for action shots…also the fact that I can ramp up the shutter to 6-7 frames is cool for events…that means I won’t miss a moment as long as I’m shooting flashless…but what I like the most about the 700 is the color renditions for advertising…
Now don’t get me wrong…21pix almost made me blow a wad and the low light conditions with ISO ramped-up seemed to pick up a lil more shadow detail (I was a guest at an evening wedding and shot a few and the photographer had a 5dm2 that seemed to pick up a lil better with no flash, but then his screen could have been bumped up )…but with a movie camera in the engineering it just seems like something else that can go wrong with your prime unit…especially first generation.
So…d700 for overall camera…plus I own lots of Canon products and I just never liked that tan-greyish color they put on those lenses…
The only thing I wish the Nikon had that Canon kills them on is the SNAP FACTOR…the snap of the shutter is like the difference between shutting a door on a Benz and a Honda…One’s heavy and tank like and when shut feels waterproof and the other (Nikon)…is a little light in the ass…As you can see I like cameras that cost the price of a small car to look and feel cool while doing a great job…People are watching you watching them….thanks guys for letting me vent…
Simba Sims of Jackson Mississippi by way of Los Angeles…simbasimsstudios.com
Thanks for the great comment simba…I of course came to a different conclusion based on different needs, but if frame rate and AF are crucial, there isn’t much of a choice between the two. It really does all come down to your photographic needs, and I think once you figure those out making a decision between the two is pretty easy.
Photographic needs is a major part any camera body purchase, but I would add the question of lens inventory. I finally jumped from the film world (Nikon F5), so I already had a bag full of Nikon glass – my decision was almost predetermined. The low light ability of the D700 was a bonus.
In 40 years of shooting, I’ve had top of the line from both companies (Canon F1, Ftb, Nikon Ftn, F5 and now a D700 – but top end at both companies has skyrocketed out of my price range ($8,000).
kozmo
I have been a Canon user, though with only the 400D, and have been waiting to upgrade to a FF. Even when the D700 came out, I waited for the MKII. But I have to admit, I am now getting the D700, because to be honest, I don’t care about lab tests. To me, both seems to deliver the goods. But, the D700, has certain small aspects, which though not critical, is fun. When I am paying so much, I would like some fun too.
These include, the extra Focus Points, the ready to connect GPS, the on demand Grid etc.
Movie is something I don’t care for much in a still camera. I would leave that to the Movie cameras. Let Chef’s do the cooking, and stewards to the serving.
Simba…About he SNAP factor…it is the same I felt when I first tried the Nikon.
sounak,
I’ve never thought of my 5d mark II as anything but fun, and honestly the AF is fast, responsive and robust enough for most subjects, including moving ones. I look it as the getting the Chef and the Steward, but I can see how others might disagree.
Still, both cameras are real nice, you’re lucky to have either one.
It is one unresolved issue in your review. Namely- lenses compatibility in Nikon D700. All my D lenses lead to resolution degradation (near 5Megapix)while using in D700. So, you need another and much more expensive lenses for D700. I dont know, is it a problem for Canon, but it is still serious problem requires attention for potential customer before hemakes his choice
I used to use a DX lens (Tokina 11-16mm 2.8) on my Nikon D700, unless your blowing up really big photos, 5 megapixels was sufficient. This lens fortunately could also shoot in normal FX mode at ful resolution, but only at 15mm-16mm. That is still very wide on an FX format. Sadly I sold the lens because I don’t really shoot ultrawide that often. The lens though as far as color, contrast, and sharpness could hang with the best of them. Focus speed was also decent on the D700.
I love Canon’s lens prices and availability, it always seems like I have to pay an arm and a leg for Nikon lenses (Usually couple hundred bucks more for a nikon equivalent, and sometimes several hundred dollars more). They are always hard to find, and you don’t save much buying used either. I have Canon lens envy for a 85mm 1.2 af or a 35mm 1.4. af Sadly Nikon doesn’t have these beautiful lenses. They have some great manual focus lenses like the 50mm 1.2 and 35mm 1.4, but unfortunately they don’t have AF.
nikon has the 85mm 1.4 which is an absolutely beautiful lens, especially on ff. in my opinion, produces just as good results as the canon 1.2.
Interesting article and comparison. As a working wedding photographer I shoot on average of 3-4 weddings a month I have completely fallen in love with the D700’s ability to shoot in any light. I honestly cant remember the last time I used a flash. Coupled with fast lenses I regularly shoot at ISO 1600-3200 and beyond with so little noise it blows my mind when I remember how much noise there used to be even at ISO 400 in the old days. In fact every image in my portfolio at http://www.kissthebride-weddings.com/photography was shot using only available light. I love the blooms of light and ambiance you pick up when not using flash. Even when flash is used effectively it still makes people look a little harsher and you have to contend with shadows being cast and cluttering up you pictures with more visual chaos.
In my mind the sensor in these full frame cameras is a lot like the old print days… the higher the DPI ( or pixel count in this case ) the darker the image. With the sensors in these cameras the more pixels there are – the less light there is to fall on each photo receptor. Keep in mind there is a finite number of photons that can expose an image on the sensor. Unless your shooting for billboards the extra pixels are just an opportunity to introduce more noise accumulation on the sensor. The d700’s 12mp is plenty even for the 24X36″ signature frame prints that I create from my couples engagement sessions.
As a former Canon shooter – don’t get me wrong I think the 5DMK2 is an amazing camera – and a lot of pros I work with swear by them – I just don’t think the high ISO is quite there yet as well as the frame rate. Sometimes that 1/250th of a second in between a span of 22 frames you were able to fire off in 3 seconds can be the difference between a nice try and a nice job. Just my 2 cents
ezra,
frame rate is a big issue, though I’m less sure about big differences in ISO, I think the 2 are very, very close at ISO, which is a big deal given the 5D2’s resolution.
Good point! – My business partner Steve is a videographer. He uses the 5DMK2 in conjunction with his regular HD video cams. With a matte box and focus rig I am constantly blown away by the video it takes – which in my mind is incredibly ground breaking.
Now for flip side – It could be argued that the 21mp resolution may not be the best compromise over the loss of light gathering ability and slower frame rate. Even though 21mp 5616 x 3744 sounds like a lot over 12mp 4256 x 2832 – in practical terms it’s not perceptible when the photos are printed at any size less than 18X24″. Anyone doing paid work that needs to produce work larger than 18X24 is probably considering medium format solutions and this whole argument becomes moot.
I mentioned a loss of light gathering ability- The 5DMK2 has made amazing strides in terms of high ISO. Our experience with the camera is that most of that is a result of noise filtering software built into the camera. I have compared side by side exposures of areas like peoples hair in low light and even though the d700 has a lower resolution – my experience is that it turns out sharper pictures in these conditions because it does not have internally process the photo to reduce noise. The 5DMK2 has a tendency to smear fine details like hair and the texture of fabrics when it does it’s processing for noise. Here are some side by side comparisons that delve into the noise issue this a little deeper http://www.abacuspub.com/arnie/blog/?p=21
Add in the D700’s ability to focus on 51 points -vs- the 5DMK2’s 9 points and the Nikon makes it a lot easier to selectively use depth of field better ensure your focus is going to track on the right subject.
I am not trying to start a holy war lol.. and to be honest I have loved using Steves 5DMK2 when I am able to get it from his kung fu grip – for me it’s like choosing between a Mercedes and BMW. They are both awesome – there are just a couple of things that keep me coming back to my D700.
Oh one other benefit the biceps you get carrying around the heavier D700 lol – add the grip and a 70-200mm f/2.8 and you could do curls with the camera haha – maybe thats not such a benefit after a 12 hour day haha
Continuous shooting up to 5 frames per second: Shoot at up to 8 frames per second with the optional MB-D10 Multi-power Battery Pack. Not 7fps as noted above.
I use Canon as well as Nikon systems. I have a Canon 5D, Canon 1DS mark II besides several autofocus and manual focus Canon EOS , T series and A series bodies. I use a Nikon D 700 and Nikon autofocus and manual focus bodies. I love to use both the systems and each system offers certain advantages in certain shooting situations. Nikon, with its more advanced software and sensor, is very good for action photography, low light photography and high ISO photography while the canons produce a more vibrant colour for landscapes. While Nikon does have a much better sensor and a faster focussing AF system, Canon 1DS Mark II can focus accurately using the central sensor with lenses having an aperture of F 8. This is one area where the D 700 autofocus system does not focus fast enough or is unable to focus. Both systems are wonderful photo taking machines and helps one to take top quality photographs.
Which do you feek would offer the best in close up / micro-macro photography?
Cheers
matt
either’s fine, but what’s your realistic print size–and then look at the lenses available for both. Examine those lenses prices and performance, then choose camera accordingly.
I shot with D700 for some time but moved to 5D because Canon offers good wide primes. I don’t know whether I made the right decision for the long run. If Nikon offers primes like 28mm 1.4 and 35mm 1.4, I would love to be back with Nikon.
Ezra, what fast lenses do you use for 1600-3200 ISO on D700?
Hi Gurbally,
I like Nikons 85mm, 50mm, 28mm f/1.4 – primes for low light – @ ISO 1600 f/1.4 with all of those lenses even candle light produces good results. For everything else I use the Holy Trinity of Nikkors – the 12-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm @ f/2.8
I recently added the D700 to my stable and can’t say enough about the IQ, the incredible speed with which it focuses and the sound of the shutter… that shutter sound lets you know you’re in the VIP lounge
very good comparison except that you focus too much on the camera-to-camera features.
I just bought the d700 yesterday and just realized that it has a very limited range of lenses available and how expensive they are. something that is missing from almost every review. Currently using af-s 24-70.
Yes, you’re quite right, there are a number of intangibles that deserve to be considered as well, lens library and lens cost chief among them.
My vote is for 5DMKII. All-in-one is the future, still and video together, at this quality, its about time. Still a few things to work out on the video side.
9 vs 51 focus points is the only bummer, but I prefer manual anyway.
I enjoyed Fuji Film S2 Pro for last several years. I am wondering which one is my next pet. This website is really useful to compare two bigs.
I’m partial to the 5D mark II. Might be best to wait for the D700s if you wanted to go the Nikon route.
however isnt d700s a 24mp which like the d3x isn’t intended for low-light/high ISO but rather controlled studio work?
Hi everyone I’ve been shooting on DSLRs for 3yrs now. I started with an entry level Nikon D40 which was great for a few years. I then switched to the Canon 40D which at the time was a whole lot of camera for the money, and still is. I’m still avidly using the Canon 40D and recently shot a friends wedding with it. This was a great learning experience and very hard work, starting at 7am and finishing at 1am the following morning.
The reception was in an end function suite of a hotel which had floor to ceiling glass, the whole length of the room (on the 3rd floor) the rest of the room was interior and effectively very dark, so I was constantly having to adjust…..a great learning experience.
My approach was to shoot on manual or Aperture Priority mode and know my limitations in terms of minimum shutter speed , but I found it frustrating to have to keep stopping and switching ISO speed to maintain a decent lens speed to prevent camera shake. I can’t believe that on Canons auto ISO is restricted to 400ISO speed?
This was a really good experience, as afterwards, I thought I must have been doing something wrong and surely a pro photographer mustn’t have to constantly adjust the ISO manually if the light changes.
I’ve since shot a few more weddings and now know what to expect, so I’m now thinking about getting a second body to reduce the need for constantly changing primes! lol. My plan is to keep my Canon 40d with either a 85mm 1.8 prime, or 70-200 IS, and consider getting a full frame body to compliment it and use with a wider lens. I was initially all set on going for the 5d Mark ii, but on reading this and a few other forums and discussions, I’m starting to see the benefits of the D700, particularly in terms of speed of focus, especially in low light, and the wide ranging control of automatic ISO. I even remember my little Nikon D40 had a maximum ISO option if setting it to automatic. I just find the Canon 40D so frustrating when I set automatic ISO and its fixed at 400? I think the most important thing is knowing your lowest hand hold speed threshold, and setting your camera to that, then letting Auto ISO kick in and keep it at this minimum, where the light demands. What are your views and opinions. Don’t get me wrong, I love Canons and their rich tones, but I find this lack of function very time consuming and antiquated.
At present my kit is…Canon 40D – 50mm f1.8 – 85mm f1.8 – 18-55 f2.8 IS – Metz af48 flash
So do I go for a 5D mark ii, or save myself all this manual sweat and time and go for the superior metering and faster and more acurate low light focusing of the D700. Will only be able to afford one lens, so either a prime wide or a wide zoom to go with whichever body I choose.
Many thanks for your advice on an interesting dilema.
HI John B,
I have been shooting with the D700 and D3 for the past year. My partner who is a videographer shoots with the 5DMK2 for the video work we do. Like you we cover weddings and I on occasion will use the 5D when I want to do a video/photography fusion project.
Here is my experience in regards to how both cameras perform. Let me start by saying you wont go wrong with either body – they are both amazing cameras. I do however prefer the D700 – I shoot available light only – in fact I hate flash photography – even when exposed properly you can have shadow issues – deer in the headlights expressions and in my experience it is generally more unflattering to your subjects. In the studio strobes are great – 3 point lighting etc – I love it… but on location at a wedding you don’t get the luxury of setting up proper lighting.
My portfolio http://www.ktbweddings.com is shot available light only – which is the reason I love the performance if the D700. During the course of the wedding day you encounter so many lighting situations – from the brides prep in her room or at the salon to the church – to outdoors all the way to candle lit receptions. The D700 shoots near flawless shots with almost no noticeable noise at ISO 3200 and at 6400 the noise is still almost no existent. Yes the 5D has made great strides to close the gap on ISO performance – but its done so through built in noise filtering software – not sensor performance. The photoreceptor pitch on the D700 is so large that it gathers a lot more light per pixel than the crammed sensor of the 5D.
In my opinion the light gathering ability of the camera is the most critical factor. The more light you gather the faster shutter speed you can use and the more tack sharp pictures you end up with. A simple but often overlooked fact is this – Higher ISO = more light when you gather more light you can shoot with a faster shutter speed, shooting with a faster shutter speed gives you a higher percentage of sharp pictures. A sharp picture shot at 12MP ( D700 ) will yield you a better, sharper picture than a less “tack sharp” picture shot on the 5D (24MP) because you could not shoot at quite the same ISO and you were forced to shoot at a lower shutter speed.
When I use the 5D I am also a little frustrated at how many fewer points of selective focus there are compared to the D700’s 51 points. Those close up shots of wedding details with fantastic bokeh and the perfect point of focus on the detail I want to capture get aggravating when I am having to rearrange objects or move my position because I cant select the exact center of focus in the viewfinder like I want.
Incidentally the D700 shoots at a much higher frame rate when paired with its battery grip than the 5DMK2 does. The 5D even with the battery grip is still too slow to ensure that I get the perfect moment in those running jumping action shots I like to get with the bridal party in-between the ceremony and reception
Most of our shooting is done with fast primes in very extreme lighting conditions. I am not sure why but the 5D seems to hunt for focus like crazy while the D700 seems to have a much less difficult time finding a lock. While I like to shoot manual focus most of the time I do like the option of having a really reliable AF system.
One last point I think deserves some attention is the issue of ergonomics. The d700 gives me access to the things I want to change without having to drill down into a bunch of menus like the 5D does. ISO aperture and shutter-speed on the D700 all have their own dedicated buttons. An experienced shooter can change any of these settings without having to look away from the viewfinder. For me that is really important as I am continually changing the the ISO aperture and shutter-speed through the course of the entire event as lighting conditions change.
To make a short story long – my advice would be to go with the body that gives you the better sensor and focus system. Both Nikon and Canon have a great lens library – but I am certain there are major portfolio pieces I would have missed without my Nikons supernatural ability to gather light the way it does.
Ok thats it for my mini novella – but those are all factors that ultimately influenced my move away from Canon and over to NIkon. Either way John – you will love the experience of shooting full frame on both cameras
-Ez
Ezra,
Damn, thanks for stopping in and leaving such a great answer…
I’d suggest the 5D2, but on the other hand the D700 is faster and the file will be more manageable for wedding workflows. I don’t know, I feel like the 5D2 is a better value with roughly the same ISO ability, and an AF that many other wedding photogs seem content with. But you’re right Nikon has had that auto ISO superiority for awhile now, don’t know why Canon doesn’t just match it.
Ezra,
Your last point caught my attention.
—
“One last point I think deserves some attention is the issue of ergonomics. The d700 gives me access to the things I want to change without having to drill down into a bunch of menus like the 5D does. ISO aperture and shutter-speed on the D700 all have their own dedicated buttons. An experienced shooter can change any of these settings without having to look away from the viewfinder. For me that is really important as I am continually changing the the ISO aperture and shutter-speed through the course of the entire event as lighting conditions change.”
—
So not true…
With Canon I can change most of the setting with only one hand, without having to leave my eyes from the viewfinder, including the drive mode. No drilling down to bunch of menus. All the buttons are on the top right of the camera. Press and change the setting using the dials, using thumb or index finger while still holding the camera and the left hand holding the lenses and eye intact at the viewfinder.
With D700, there are dedicated buttons too. But some of the buttons are only the left of the camera (WB, ISO, QUAL, and DRIVE). I’ve to use both hands to change these settings, I find it very-very hard not to leave the viewfinder to change the setting using both hands, especially when the lens is heavy (14-24, 24-70, 70-200 all are heavy).
Now I wonder whether the rest of your mini novella is accurate or not.
P/s: I’m not a Canon user whose partner using Nikon D700, I own one. You inaccuracies in giving facts are not healthy.
Hi Hati,
Unless my partner Steves camera is set up different then yours I am at a loss why we are having different experiences when it comes to changing settings on the 5D. That said the the ergonomics were the least material of my observations. No need to get testy – this is a friendly post right
Maybe I just need to spend more time behind the 5D. I have used the 5D on less than a dozen occasions – hardly enough time for one to completely get used to a different control layout. My past experience just lead me to believe that 90% of the settings changes were done using the jog wheel on the back and on of the buttons found on the top right of the camera. Maybe you one hand your camera most of the time – but I usually hold a camera with two hands so depressing a single dedicated button on the top left and a scrolling a dial with my right thumb or index finger alway felt a little more comfortable to me than trying to use the same hand for both as I have to do on the 5D – but it just maybe an issue of conditioning as opposed to ergonomics – I am completely willing to concede that.
In regards to the credibility of what I stated in my post – as I said both cameras are amazing – as an available light shooter I just lean heavily towards the high ISO performance of the D700 – Not science of course but based on my experience of the final output of the 5D vs D700. Hopefully my opinion of the performance of the D700 is evidenced in the work we do here
Thank you for correcting the “unhealthiness” of my post
Cheers!
Hey guys thanks for the fast replies…. I don’t want to get into a war of words. Both cameras are fantastic tools by all accounts. I have used a Canon 40D for 2years and believe the ergonomics are pretty much the same as the 5d mark ii in terms of button layouts so well aware of these. I guess its all personal choice and experience on that.
Huge Thanks to Ezra Primack for taking the time over the very detailed information from your experiences. Having read your response, I think for my personal requirements (and not to the detriment of the 5d Mk ii), the D700 meets more of my needs in terms of focus speed, accuracy and crucially for me, complete automatic ISO with the ability to set an upper limit. I totally agree with the statement
“A simple but often overlooked fact is this – Higher ISO = more light when you gather more light you can shoot with a faster shutter speed, shooting with a faster shutter speed gives you a higher percentage of sharp pictures”
This is always my strategy…fast shutter speeds to ensure tack sharp images. In knowing the slowest handheld shutter speeds for me to get tack sharp images, I thought that Auto ISO would take care of the rest and adjust accordingly to allow me to shoot at these speeds, but realise its fixed on the 40D to 400max, (which I’ve read is the same on the 5d mk ii?) which was the reason behind my frustration shooting my first few weddings on my 40D, and hence my questions here.
I also must say with my 40D having to hit the top right ISO function button, then constantly guess between wheels to adjust it, I personally find it a bit laboured, time consuming and resultantly the cause of missing shots, in a fast moving wedding environment, with light changing constantly.
I know the 5D mark ii is amazing, but I’m impartial to brand, and want the camera that suits my personal requirements. If I had the money I’d have both……one day, lol!
It appears to me the strong points of 5D mk ii are high ISO, FF video option, and awesome saturated colours. But restricted to maximum ISO of 400 on auto ISO setting.
Whereas strong points of the D700’s are accurate, fast and low light focusing, high ISO performance, and a full range of ISO fully auto settings with no restriction on upper limit in the auto mode. But no video option.
Two stellar cameras and a very tough choice.
Hi John,
It is a tough choice! Hope I didn’t seem too pushy towards the D700
You would do incredibly well with either camera – You seem to have a really good command of the concepts that lead to getting good photos.
Both the 5D and the D700 are just really capable tools – I have seen incredible work done using disposable cameras – so in the end I guess more of it has to do with how passionate the photographer is
Hi Patrick,
Thanks! I think your right in the fact that the 5D is a better value – the video is incredible – I hope Canon updates the firmware to allow complete manual control over the video ( ISO etc ).
I think the D700 is the “classic iPOD” of the camera world. It’s very little frills and doesn’t have a zillion non photography features – but what it does do ie: great AF system that works in very little light, extremely clean high ISO images – it’s world class in those specifics.
Ezra,
Yeah I see the D700 that way too. For wedding use, I could see going either way and getting great results, but there are other types of shooting, like sports where the D700 would totally own the 5D2. Sometime usage makes a big difference, but things like weddings thread the needle just a bit, IMO.
Patrick,
Excellent site and great review of the two cameras.
I’m a transport and occasional landscape photographer, which means that I’m shooting both moving and stationary subjects, but not usually close-up stuff. I’ve been deliberating over these two cameras for a few months now. Currently, I use a Nikon D200 with a 50mm F1.8 FX prime. This has been a good pairing for a few years now, although I’ve experienced some annoying background blur with the 50mm F1.8, presumably caused by using this FX lens on a DX body. With that in mind, I was thinking of keeping the 50mm F1.8 lens and replacing the D200 with a D700. However, some friends who own the Canon EOS 5D mk2 have sent me some full size sample images (JPEG’s, converted from RAW) which were all taken with a Canon 50mm F1.4 lens in full sunshine (pretty sure it’s the older version of this lens, not the more recent one) and I was completely blown away. On the one hand, the sample images I’ve seen online of the Nikon D700 have not impressed me even half as much, even the ones taken with the Nikon 50mm F1.8.
So, in your honest opinion Patrick, which camera would you suggest please? (considering I’ll be wanting pin sharp backgrounds and will be shooting moving subjects as well as the occasional landscape view). Also note that I’m a bit of a “fair weather photographer” who usually only ventures out to take pictures when the sun is shining, so low light performance doesn’t really bother me.
Cheers,
Ben.
Ben,
I’m tempted to say the D700 would be superior, only because you do have to photograph dynamic subjects. I don’t know how dynamic we’re talking here, but I find the D700 easier to use for AF duties. I love the 5D2 IQ, and I do use for dynamic stuff as well, but it isn’t a focus for me, nor does if offer the same depth in option via the menu etc. Perhaps you could borrow a friends camera, and see if it works for your situation?
Thanks for the reply Patrick, most helpful. Unfortunately, all my mates who own a 5D mk2 live quite far away, so it wouldn’t be practical for me to borrow one at the moment (plus, I don’t know anyone who owns a D700). However, they all do a similar style of photography to me and they are always raving about how good it is for the kind of photography in question. Have to say though, most of the reviews on the web are slightly in favour of the Nikon, so I’m still deliberating. Will let you know how I get on.
尼康D700与佳能5D Mark-2那个更好？
回复：
对已经是佳能用户的人来说，是5D2好；
对已经是尼康用户的人来说，D700好；
对已经买了其他品牌单反的人来说，二者还都不够好；
对还没有投入的人来说，哪个能买得起哪个就好；
对没有足够资金的人来说，哪个降价快哪个就好；
对严谨的FOTO评测编辑来说，目前他们还不知道哪个好；
对中、大画幅摄影者，以及莱卡和LOMO的用户们，哪个好都无所谓；
对……
说一百个人一百个看法，可能有点夸张～不过一百个人，有一百个立场，一百个视角，这应该是没问题的。
Hi, I have a nikon f80 film camera and I would like to switch to digital. I can’t decide between the D700 and the 5D. I’m not a professional but one day I might like to sell a few photos at a craft show or gallery. I like taking photos, mostly black and white that I can frame and put on my wall. Most of my favorites are taken in europe of architecture, sculptures, courtyards things of this nature. Not so much sports or fast moving things so far. I was wondering which of these two cameras you would recommend for me for my purposes. I would like to be able to have the ability to produce say 24X36 sized photos with the best resolution possible. I think I would like the nikon D700 but I worry that the Canon would be the better choice if I want to be able to make larger prints. I’ve looked on various sites to see at what size of print will you start to see sharper images using the Canon with its 21 megapixels. I’ve seen conflicting options on this, everything from “unless it’s billboard size there will be no difference” to “at around 16X24″, I was wondering if someone could give me the straight goods. I know there are a lot of other factors, but with all else being equal at what size of print will the increased megapixels take advantage in terms of resolution?
I just moved into a new office and I have a studio that is about 16 feet deep. My primary business is as a youth sports and school photographer, but we just got the studio and are doing a lot more studio work. I’m thinking I should get a full frame camera, like the D700, but what is the best lens(s)? Do I get a prime lens? Right now I have 5 Fuji S5’s, 2 S3’s, 2 D200’s and a couple of Canons. Do I need the D700 for just studio work? I love the video on the 5d but the Nikon seems to have a slight edge on some of the other features. I am thinking of renting the D700 and maybe the 5D for a weekend with a couple of lenses to see what they feel like in the studio. Any pointers?
Hi Andy,
I shoot pretty much Nikon – I use the D700 and D3 for 99% of my work. I love the the D700 for event work – it can handle any lighting situation you throw at it – shooting at ISO 1600-3200 it is SUPERB if you love shooting without flash like I do – ISO 6400 is incredibly clean – and with noise filtering software ( I like Noiseware ) you can filter out the very minimal noise at ISO 6400 using very light settings on your noise filtering software without worrying about it mucking up detail. I shoot weddings and for events I cant imagine a better camera.
Now that I have plugged Nikon
I must say knowing that you shoot in a controlled environment like a studio my opinion shifts towards the 5D. With studio lighting the higher MP count on the 5D might give you an advantage when doing prints larger than 18X24. If you think you might be shooting studio and events I would say to go with the D700 – but if studio work is your primary need I would go with the 5D – Just my opinion. Either Camera is amazing and you wont be disappointed 
–
Oh and your lens choices – the 70-200mm f2.8 VR2 is a magic portrait lens. It’s great for isolating your subject and if have the room behind where you are shooting at it has AMAZING bokeh giving your images an almost 3D quality. 3 other must have lenses: Nikons 80mm f1.4 ( another great available light portrait lens) , the 50mm f1.4 and the all purpose 24-70 f2.8 – Once you have those the 14-24mm f2.8 is great if you want to go really wide.
Ok enough of my rant
-Ezra
http://www.ktbweddings.com
http://eblog.ktbweddings.com
Sorry I made a typo – I meant to say 85mm f1.4 – I have a Summilux 80mm f/1.4 that is almost permanently mated to my M7 – Nikon does not have an 80mm f1/4 to my knowledge…
Thanks Erza! Great information. One thing to keep in mind is my studio is 16 feet long, so the 70-200 won’t work in there, but you are right, it is an amazing lens. That is the reason I am considering the full frame, to give me more room to shoot. I have 5 Fuji S5’s, which are great portrait cameras. I wouldn’t be using this for events, I don’t really shoot anymore, I have 15 photographers that don’t take care of the equipment so I wouldn’t be giving this one out to be used by them. I need a dedicated studio setup and I would use it myself for my personal stuff. That is why I like the Canon, for the video. I’m torn, I might rent them so I can at least get an idea of the distance factor in the studio area. Thanks a ton for your advice.
Andy,
I’d agree with Ezra almost totally, if you still need to continue to shoot sports, the D700 of course does very well there, and will be fine in the studio as well. It’d take much bigger prints to find the advantages of the 5d2’s detail. I don’t shoot any action really, so I’m fine with the 5D2, but I easily see it’s limitations with dynamic subjects–it can still do it, but the D700 is “easier”. Lenses as Ezra says, for either—70-200mm f/2.8 with IS or VR is your MONEY MAKER, throw in the 24-70 2.8’s and your golden for just about everything. Then tweak out based on interests….I want a 90mm TS for product photography and maybe creative portrait stuff, others like 85mm, or 100mm for studio work….really depends on how and what you shoot, small products, head shots, full body, etc…
Hi guys, I asked a question on Dec 15th but didn’t hear from any of you, probably everyone was very busy so close to Christmas. (I hope it’s not because my question is ridiculous- I really need help) I know next to nothing about digital camera and I don’t want to make the wrong decision (camera D700 or 5D approx $3000 + $2000 lens initial investment) My question again is:
Lesley Glen says:
December 15, 2009 at 11:08 pmHi, I have a nikon f80 film camera and I would like to switch to digital. I can’t decide between the D700 and the 5D. I’m not a professional but one day I might like to sell a few photos at a craft show or gallery. I like taking photos, mostly black and white that I can frame and put on my wall. Most of my favorites are taken in europe of architecture, sculptures, courtyards things of this nature. Not so much sports or fast moving things so far. I was wondering which of these two cameras you would recommend for me for my purposes. I would like to be able to have the ability to produce say 24X36 sized photos with the best resolution possible. I think I would like the nikon D700 but I worry that the Canon would be the better choice if I want to be able to make larger prints. I’ve looked on various sites to see at what size of print will you start to see sharper images using the Canon with its 21 megapixels. I’ve seen conflicting options on this, everything from “unless it’s billboard size there will be no difference” to “at around 16X24″, I was wondering if someone could give me the straight goods. I know there are a lot of other factors, but with all else being equal at what size of print will the increased megapixels take advantage in terms of resolution?
lesley,
so sorry for the delay, sometimes i miss a day of comments, and one gets lost in the shuffle. I personally see differences after a dimension goes past 10 inches, so say after 10×15, I see small differences. Certainly at 16×24, I see advantages to the 5D2’s resolution. Not to say the D700/D3s files look bad, just comparing the two. If you don’t photograph moving subjects frequently, you’ll like the 5D2, especially if you print past 16×24.
Hi Patrick, just reading your comments to Andy re: print size. I was wondering if you could be more specefic as to approximately what size prints would you find the advantages of the 5D’s detail.
Thanks,
Brian
bsmale,
I see advantages after say something like a 10×15 (looking real close). If you just pixel peep our post on the D3s vs 5D2 ( http://www.neutralday.com/nikon-d3s-vs-canon-eos-5d-mark-ii-first-look-incredible-iso-performer/) , you can see the detail advantage that the 5D2 has. Obviously you could go bigger than 10×15 with D700/D3s with fine results, but there is more detail to be had on the 5D2. Certainly if you print 17×24, you’ll see the advantages. Not huge, but there is more fine detail there. Not that there is anything wrong with the D700/D3s files, but if we’re comparing the two, or even a D3x, Sony A900, there’s a difference. (I’ve only compared the 5D2 to the D3s and D700—so that’s my personal experience)
Thanks guys, I really appreciate your input. I will keep you posted on what I decide.
I have a question about stitching a landscape pic. I own a 5d and I’d like to rent or buy a canon 24mm 3.5 II ts-e lens. If I stitch three 5d pics in landscape mode. Would I be able to get medium format quality in a 36″x 24″ size? Also how many megapixels would that size be then? And how would a 5D Mark II’s pixel size compare to the 5d? Thanks alot!