September 25, 2008
-
Canon 5D mk2: WRATH & FURY – [EDIT2]
First of all I’d like to mention that the 5D mk2 sample gallery is up.
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos5dmkii_preview/
Cut and paste that to your browser if you really wanna see, otherwise just save DPReview the bandwidth and take my word for it:
High ISO performance looks like the D3 more or less, except 21 megapixels instead of 12. Very decent and clean 6400, totally use-able 12800 for even professional prints of smaller sizes, and a “fun” 25600 that will be great for low-light, “moody B&W” images. Obviously when you down-sample the 21 megapixel files to 12 megapixels for comparison, the 5D mk2 will hold a bit of an advantage over the D3 / D700. Not sure if it’s going to equal more than 1 full stop noise advantage, but I stopped counting when we got a clean ISO 3200, seriously!
It is also important to note that the samples are from pre-production models, so theoretically the final image quality may be a tad better!
I’m very curious to see how the final production models compare to Canon’s “other” 21 megapixel sensor in the 1Ds mk3. Will canon actually be delivering a BETTER performing sensor in a body that costs less than half as much? Or will there be some kind of image quality advantage retained in the 1Ds mk3? I’ll let the official reviewers determine that!
Okay, now for the REAL DISCUSSION:
…I’ve never seen a more polarized, love-it-or-hate-it situation in my whole 5+ years as a photographer. The Canon 5D mk2 is “the light and the glory” to some, and to others it is nothing but nails on a Canon coffin.
The biggest controversy is that Canon went for WAYYY more megapixels than Nikon’s current standard of 12, and decided to leave OUT many pro-grade features like the 45 point AF, full spot metering, true weather sealing, and speed.
I will openly admit that I’m mostly in the coffin-nails camp.
HOWEVER, I’ll be the first to admit that, for those who shoot in very still conditions, at very small apetures like f/8, (both studio and landscape photographers fall into this category) …the 21 megapixel sensor in such an affordable body truly IS a holy grail for those who need the resolution. (Again, studio and landscape photographers) To have a hopefully gorgeous 21 full-frame megapixels at your disposal for a mere $2700, well it’s surely a thing of beauty that Nikon cannot currently touch at all…
Here’s the problem. Myself, and many other wedding photographers, are wedding shooters with a strong photojournalistic, peak-action shooting style. And almost everybody I know uses a 5D for wedding photography. The problem is, you’re taking a studio camera OUT of the studio and into a fast-paced “big day”, and trying to snap shots as a photojournalist.
This is where the camera’s low frame rate, SINGLE cross-type AF point, 73ms shutter lag, etc. all make the 5D-series, well, honestly not much better than my OLD D70 or your rebel… I’m not trying to exaggerate here and make the 5D-series look horrible, but it is simply as close to the truth as I want to get without turning away my Canon readers.
“Well, Canon has to protect their 1Ds lineup and feature set, what do you expect- a 1Ds mk3 without the grip for $3000?” Or almost equally head-in-the-sand, “Pshh, 45 point autofocus, spot metering linked to each focus point, 5+ FPS, those are all just bells and whistles that we can do without…”
1.) Better speak up, Canon fans, Nikon didn’t get the memo on “protecting” it’s pro series features. We have the D700!
2.) You obviously have not shot theater, gymnastics, etc.
So first of all, let’s let the studio and landscape shooters buy their 5D mk2 and be totally happy. The price and the minimal weather sealing is more than enough to tempt even ME as a landscape photographer. But I don’t do that professionally, so…
Now that THEY are happy, (and not listening anymore) …Canon shooters, wake up and smell the trickle-down pro features! Even my D300, now valued at more than $1000 less than the 5D mk2, has almost every pro feature that the $5000 D3 has. INCLUDING a shutter lag time that beat even Canon’s flagship sports camera, the 1D3.
But okay, in the spirit of avoiding a 100% Nikon versus Canon debate, I’ll point out that both the 40D and 50D have a potentially better AF system, too. (All AF points on both of those cameras are cross-type, even the far edge ones, which in my opinion might even be a better idea than Nikon’s current 51 point setup. I think Nikon made a poor decision with their current AF point arrangement.)
The bottom line is that Canon very strongly believes in protecting it’s top line of professional features, and I don’t see how SOME shooters who may require those features have continued to put up with Canon for this long. It doesn’t have to be this way! You do not HAVE to spend $4000-8000 to get pro features!!!
If you like Canon because they have a better lens assortment than Nikon, (and they do) …then get OFF your full-frame high horse and buy a 40D / 50D to use for your action shots. Or go out and get an old 1D mk2!!! You will thank me later! If you use f/2.8 zooms mostly, then honestly, go down to your local camera store and TRY the D700 + 24-70 2.8. Chances are you will thank me PROFUSELY…
I guess you can tell that I don’t care if I sound preachy. I think that we can all admit that Nikon has been coming out with some killer cameras recently that break new ground as far as offering pro-grade features at an advanced-amateur price. And I KNOW we can all agree that ALL the cameras on the market today can definitely deliver the absolute finest quality images.
I only want to convince everyone, Canon and Nikon shooters alike, to buy the RIGHT TOOL for the job. Don’t let any “bandwagon effect” influence your buying decisions. It just so happens that a lot of Canon bodies / lenses have a bandwagon effect, and I wish those people would all wake up and smell the trickle-down. But even on the Nikon side, the D3 had a HUGE bandwagon, and tons of people bought D3′s just because it was awesome and new, when what they really needed was the D700.
So all I want to say is, buy the RIGHT tool for the job! REFUSE to be influenced by camera geeks who blindly tout Canon OR Nikon, full-frame or crop… YOU go out and try the equipment out for yourself, and buy the stuff that gets your jobs done…
Thank you. Please feel free to rip on me, I think my arguments are sound enough and the facts are plain enough…
=Matt=
[EDIT]
Thankfully, it seems that many Canon users are actually quite happy with the 5D mk2. Reading Vincent Laforet’s blog, It is ALL about the 1080p HD video, and the borderline pathetic AF module is hardly an issue. Apparently most people only ever use the center focus point anyway?
I guess I just have to shrug, keep on shooting Nikon, and try not to care as much about “helping” other photographers get the “right” camera. I guess bandwagons can be fun, HD video can be useful, and probably WILL totally revolutionize the world of low-light video recording. So, way to go, Canon, your marketing department will probably sell out the 5D mk2 for a year. If you want one, pre-order it NOW! I should just be happy that Nikon has come far enough that when a Canon user says their camera is better, I can smirk and chuckle instead of wince… Fair enough!
IN OTHER NEWS, reading the comments has provided a few interesting side notes. Vincent is creating a pretty extensive video production from his shoot with the 5D mk2, and excitement is building around that; even Smugmug corporate offered to host the full 1080P video with unlimited bandwidth… Vincent also hinted at a few things, including: The Canon XH-A1 video cameras don’t even come close to comparing with the 5D mk2′s low-light video capability, thanks to super-clean ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400 when you’re down-sampling ~21 megapixels to ~2 megapixels. (1080×1920) Also, Vincent hinted that he figures Canon will make a “big brother” to the 5D mk2 sooner or later. Could this be the now mythical 3D, with pro-series features at a less-than-1D-mk3 price? I hope so, Canon would be totally redeeming themselves that’s for sure!
=Matt=
[EDIT 2] Well, the 1080p video shot on the 5D mk2 by Vincent Laforet is indeed EPIC and beautiful, a fantastic use of shallow DOF that may not have ever been possible before. Now with the whole 35mm sensor to shoot on, and crazy lenses from 50 f/1.2 to 400 2.8, and tilt-shift lenses etc, …it’s pretty gorgeous considering you can do everything with “existing” photographic gear. There are still a couple issues that keep it from being as versatile as traditional video, with respect to capture speed, but nonetheless the footage is epic. Check out Vincent’s blog to see the videos.
So, everybody seems to be pretty excited about the 5D mk2. And those who are excited, are ecstatic. Glad to hear it!
There is however still a strong dissent among those who are rightfully upset concerning Canon’s persistence in refusing to incorporate some professional features in the lower price point bodies. If you want certain features, Canon has made it very clear that they want you to spend no less than $4,100 on a 1D mk3. (Or as much as $7,800 on a 1Ds mk3…) Personally, I’d stick it to Canon by either buying a used 1-series, ($2500-$3500!) or a D700. In fact as a long-term purchase, the D700 makes the absolute most sense out of any camera from any brand on the market today, period. Especially considering the speed boost and pro-series battery compatibility that you get with the vertical grip.
=Matt=
Comments (27)
First, let me say that I am a Cannon user and have been for the last two years. I am a bit peeved that Cannon is releasing this camera on the heals of the 40d that just came out not six months ago. Although that was not the camera that I had my eyes on I would be pretty pissed off if I bought one and now know that for another G I could have stepped up to something much better. Nobody really needs 21 mega-pixels to do 99.9 % of the jobs that we have as photographers and honestly they are just feeding the mega-pixel wars that have been going on since the beginning of digital. I have stayed with Canon because of their assortment of prime lenses which realistically Nikon is years away from catching up with, but Cannon is really pissing off their pro customer base right now with what they are doing.
In the end we are not their market. More DSLR’s are going into the hands of soccer moms then wedding photographers.
From what I have seen from Nikon they also catter to the average Joe as well.
That’s probably why they can’t build a decent prime
D
@alittledarkershadesofbrown - Agreed. Nikon’s primes are dark-age. Canon’s new 24 1.4 sounds like the greatest thing since sliced bread, seriously have you read the press release details? It’s probably going to be insanely sharp with gorgeous colors. Nikon has never even gone wider than 28mm at f/1.4, ever, and now they’re multiple generations behind.
I will say however, that the old manual focus primes that Nikon DOES make are of impeccable quality indeed. Nikon’s 28mm 1.4 AF and 35mm 1.4 AIS are legendary, and they have a pretty decent 50 1.2 AIS.
It will probably be quite a few years before Nikon can come out with equivalents to ALL those lenses, and by then Canon will still be many steps ahead.
But then again, how could we have possibly guessed, 14 months ago, that Nikon would come THIS far with their bodies in this short time? I’m hoping that within the next 12 months we see at least 2-3 f/1.4 primes from Nikon that are not just close / equal in quality to Canon’s 1.2′s, but far cheaper too hopefully.
Like I said, L lenses are a huge reason to stick with Canon. And not just the fast primes, also the f/4 zooms, the 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 series, all are completely un-equalled by Nikon. I just know that many Canon shooters are pretty mad about the DSLR body situation. The 40D->50D quickie was just cruel, and the 5D-series remains aimed squarely at a very small niche that is causing a flood of Nikon D700 purchases. For those who use f/2.8 zooms exclusively, Nikon is by far the way to go right now.
Hopefully they can come out with a pro-grade, up-to-date 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 by the time I am ready for them! Otherwise I WILL be picking up a 50D + 35 L…
Of course the truth is as you say, the vast majority of DSLR’s sold are the low-end rebels and mid-range “advanced amateur” bodies. That is where companies make the bulk of their profits. But Canon’s marketing tactic has for a long time been “see look, all these pros shoot Canon, you should too!” And as we saw at the Olympics this year, Canon won’t be taking any more pictures of “a sea of white lenses”… (Unless of course they SUPPLY photographers with all the gear the want, like in the NFL…) To be honest, both Nikon and Canon’s beginner DSLR’s are crap this generation. Sony, Pentax and Olympus have much better value for soccer moms. (in-body stabilization, dual card slots, weather sealing + pro AF in the Pentax, etc. etc.)
=Matt=
Now that I think of it, if I had a magic wand, the one thing I would like is for Nikon to modernize their extension tubes.
The 5d Mark II is basically exactly what I expected Canon to release, but I haven’t been totally surprised by the negative reaction from a lot of Canon users. They’re all waiting for Canon to adopt Nikon style feature inclusion on their bodies, but I think that’s going to be a hell of a long wait!
Random question- how is Nikon’s 35mm f2? I’ve seen some images, and it looks nice and sharp wide open (much more so than Canon’s), so I’ve been thinking of picking one up for my prime wait. This is of course dependent on next week. Come on, new 50 1.4….
Well said Matt. Thanks for the read. I completely agree about the bandwagon effect. I think Nikon and Canon have very different approaches to their dSLRs. Nikon doesn’t mind passing down features from their top of the line SLRs. Canon on the other hand, draws a very sharp line between their pro model and the rest of the clan. One thing can be said, the $2700 price point is very attractive.
@CameraTalk - I have not read the reviews on that particular lens. Ever since I saw the reviews on the prime lenses Nikon has served up I just stayed away from doing any more research on them. I will say that the clean ISO Canon is putting out with the 5d is something that will be hard for me to resist. I’m going to wait and see how clean it truly is before I get too excited about possibly purchasing one. If we truly can get clean ISO at that level it would be worth the purchase. I’ll just have to keep the thing out of the rain….LOL
I have a question for you? What are your feelings on the canon 10-22mm vs the Sigma 10-20mm on a full frame sensor? I think I remember you writing about using sigma lenses on your nikon body.
D
@Lexybeast - The 35 f/2 is great, considering the price it is worth it. It’s just not pro-grade construction, no AFS, and the fact that Nikon USED to make a stellear 35 1.4 just deters me for now. You can probably pick one up at KEH.com for cheap, $275 maybe… But yeah, I’m not buying any primes until Photokina is over, that’s for sure! I’d say NEXT WEEK is when Nikon ought to announce any new lenses they may have up their sleeves…
=Matt=
@alittledarkershadesofbrown - No dice for Canon. Can’t mount any crop-sensor lenses on full-frame bodies, might break the full-frame mirror. Nikon is the only system that allows “DX crop mode”.
And yes, on Nikon I would indeed consider using DX crop mode quite a bit. Seriously the ~5 megapixel crop mode on the D700 / D3 would be PERFECT for shooting RAW children’s theater where white balance is crap but resolution isn’t critical. Besides, I do love my Sigma 50-150 2.8, indeed!
I wouldn’t mount an ultra-wide on FX though, I’d rather just use my D300 and get the full 12 megapixels at the full 10mm… Definitely thinking of getting the Tamron 10-24!
BTW: I don’t think there will be any reviews out for the new Canon 24 1.4 L just yet, it was announced with the 5D mk2 so it’s brand spanking new. If that’s what you were referring to. Sorry if there was confusion about Canon / Nikon…
=Matt=
@CameraTalk – rumor has it that nikon will be releasing a new 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 AFS! i want a 24 1.4 though =
A little off the subject…as I’ve met photographers all around the country through xanga, I’ve noticed a difference in their photos, some are clar and sharp, others have a softer look. So I started asking which camera they have. Results: Nikon=sharp and clear, Canon=soft and muted…I’ve notice this with my own Canon…is it the lens, sensor or my imagination?
@broncomom - 99.9% of the time, it’s the shooting technique + computer / web presentation. Canon sensors are inherently a tad sharper at the micro-fine, per-pixel level than Nikons actually because of the aliasing filter, but that’s as geeky as I’ll get about that. And you have to have the $1000+ lenses to really notice, anyway.
It can of course be a lens issue. Many Nikon / Canon lenses alike will deliver softer, less colorful / contrasty images when compared to the super expensive lenses. But again, that is solved with one quick tweak or two in Bridge… You’ve seen the pics I get with my Sigma!

I REALLY need to get my products put together as far as helping the photographers out there understand sharpness and print / web image presentation… It will hopefully shed LOTS of light on the topic. The bottom line is that every single camera on the market today is totally capable of the highest quality results…
=Matt=
Yea…I totally agree with you. The 5DmkII is nice…but it has a lot of handicaps…speed and versatility being the largest.
i couldnt agree with you more on this whole post matt. right now with my two 5Ds im not evening thinking about upgrading and i totally hear you on the sharp fast speed that a 40d or 50d can get. shoot to be honestly my 30d has better tac sharp action shots than my 5d has ever gotten
“I only want to convince everyone, Canon and Nikon shooters alike, to
buy the RIGHT TOOL for the job. Don’t let any “bandwagon effect”
influence your buying decisions”
stick to your guns. Your PS doesn’t have to be “so i’m wrong…” with regards to these issues (“borderline pathetic AF module etc). What you say still makes sense: buy what’s good for what you’re doing (and to all the equipment whores…they’re going to buy the newest thing anyways because that’s how they get their jollies).
didn’t read the rest of the comments. perhaps that soured your mood a bit…
You’re right… the MkII is a disappointment. Unfortunately, I can’t go with the 50D or 40D because our shooting style relies heavily on the FF look. The lens we use for most of our WOW shots is the 24 1.4. 5fps and better AF would have been very nice, that said we can make do with the current 5D, but we couldn’t make do without the 24L.
@randplaty - Indeed, the wide-angle fast-apeture primes are lenses that probably will never be done on crop. 17mm f/1.4 DX is just not going to happen, and even then it would have an inherent DOF disadvantage compared to 24 1.4 on FF. And Canon just re-did the already stellar 24 L! It is going to take a long time for Nikon to catch up to that…
When (if) they do come out with a 24, 28 or 35 1.4 AFS, then I’ll join the FF ranks maybe, but until then, my style is doing fine with 50 1.4 on crop…
=Matt=
The Vincent Laforet 5d Mark II video honestly felt like smoke and mirrors to me. What made it impressive- the 5D MkII sensor? Rather, I’d say it’s the thousands upon thousands spent on:
-Basically every L lens (according to Canon’s website… Laforet claims a budget of a few thousand dollars, but Canon lists about $15,000 of L lenses being used in the video, including the discontinued 200 1.8!)
-Massive production for lighting, crew, camera mounts, etc.
-A freaking helicopter ride!
Looking at it from a pure video quality point of view, it looks pretty cheesy to me. It has a homemade HD movie feel like you get on the public HD TV channels around here, plus some of the skylines looked strangely noisy in a pretty bad way, especially during the helicopter ride. The best part of the video speak more of Laforet’s production skills than the video quality.
Michael Reichmann has a video he made up on Luminous Landscape which frankly strikes me as a more sensible and realistic view of the camera’s video capabilities. It’s just him talking for the first 4/5 or so, but the last part has various scenes he shot, and it looks nice enough, without over the top production value. Less ‘wow’ value to be sure, but a much better depiction of what most photographers can expect.
Video is definitely coming to SLRs, and I welcome it. I’m just waiting for the next generation. Or for Red to smoke everyone else, Canon and Nikon included! Until then, I predict a surge of corny wedding videos thanks to these 5DMkIIs…
Dude that that Vincent Laforet video is all kinds of awesome. Anything that involves attaching a camera with suction cups to a Jeep is full of win. I just picked up a suction cup a week ago. Gotta wash my car so it’ll stick though!!
@Lexybeast - Did you jump ship and switch to the dark side? If we ever meet IRL, I’ll bring my 35 f/2.
Matt, very well thought out. Your view encapsulates everything I feel about the current situation. I own a 5D, which takes marvelous photographs, but watching Nikon maintain all the pro features in it’s less expensive bodies at the expense of megapixels is, in my opinion, the right attitude. I spent a little time today and last week with the D3 and the D700, both beautiful cameras to be sure. They had the kind of responsiveness and dynamism I wish I could get from the 5D or indeed any of Canon’s non-1D cameras. Although unfamiliar, the controls were largely something I could get used to. Your assessment of the 40/50D and 5DmkII’s AF might need revising. Despite the all-cross sensors of the 40/50D, the 5dmkII’s 1-cross-plus-6 added sensors in the center are reputed to track continuous AF better than the 40/50D. I completely agree that not everyone wants the center point all the time, and not having focus point spot metering really blows—something that would help me a lot.
The trouble in this scrabble for who makes the best camera is that Nikon will never completely beat Canon, no matter how many strides it’s taken in the right direction—and vice versa. When I got into the DSLR game 2 years ago, Nikon was practically a write-off, showing total disregard for what customers were telling it, which was it needed a full-frame commitment, better ISO performance, better AF (let’s face it—Canon’s AF used to be the envy of Nikon photogs) and some lenses that weren’t powered by that stupid screw-driver that I used to have on my Minolta Maxxum 5000 in 1986. They woke up and seriously delivered, at least for the first 3 points. The lens issue is catching up more slowly, albeit at a price point that makes this L-coholic blush.
Where Canon seems to do so right, is in the area of image quality; viz the 1Ds mkII, III and 5D’s dominance in areas where this counts for everything. Of course, I’m excluding it from uses photojournalistic, including sports, where maneuverability, speed and ISO flexibility are vital. It seems to me that Canon’s approach to IQ at the expense of ergonomics and features for all it’s other cameras is damaging to their long-term loyalty. With a camera like the D700/D3, how can you sit back and expect YOUR customer base to spend $8000 for what should be doable for $3-4000? Not doing PROPER weather sealing is just an insult for those who buy $3000 cameras and there’s no excuse for it.
This brings me to my sad, sad conclusion. That if you want it all, you have to have a stake in both systems if you don’t want to feel left in the cold. As much as Nikon is winning certain battles right now, just look at the excitement the 5DmkII has generated, from people who don’t necessarily need 9fps. I’ve pre-ordered one already, primarily on the basis of the silent shooting modes and because my 5-lens-and-growing investment will thank me for it. But if I want superb ISO and decisive response in very low light (where I do most of my shooting—think WIlliam Claxton’s venues but without his talent) I would want a D700 with the new 50 f/1.4 and maybe a 135mm. I’m not sure with the AF and shutter lag and mirror blackout of the 5DmkII that I will get any better than what I’m getting now, which is a lot of OOF and late shots.
Am I crazy to want both? money-wise YES. But this goes beyond money, doesn’t it?
Dan
@Skunkabilly - Yep, Lexy is rolling a D&00 + 24-70. In all honesty, there’s not much advantage to the 35 f/2 though from the 24-70, considering the wide-open sharpness of the 24-70 is probably better than the 35 f/2 at any aperture. The advantages to the prime are it’s cost and size / weight. I think Lexy might be the kinda guy to go for that, though, and what with 35 f/2′s costing like $275 used, it’s a worthwhile purchase until Nikon makes a 1.4 AFS G N ED etc. version… IMHO.
=Matt=
Yeah. 35mm f/2 is my point and shoot. Oh until I get that Canon G10….
@Dan - Wx sealing never did ME any good! HAHAHAHA
@Dan -
Thank you for bringing up the center AF point on the 5D mk2. Yes, with the 6 hidden assist points it will indeed beat the 40D / 50D’s center point. I have been too busy lately to mention that, and I guess it is important for those who “focus+recompose”, though I honestly have done that like once or twice in the past year since I switched from the amateur systems to the pro systems…
The ironic thing is, when you got into the DSLR game 2 years ago, Nikon was already well into the D3 development, if not nearly done. The problem is that it has become industry norm to not talk at all about what is up your sleeve. (Except for Olympus, who I praise for being so open with their roadmaps!)
Canon’s 45 point AF, especially when in the 1.3x crop series, is possibly STILL better in some respects than the new Nikon system. Having cross-type points ALL OVER the viewfinder is awesome, and severely lacking in Nikon’s current 51 point system. The only problem is, Canon’s old (1D mk2) AF system was absolutely abysmal for selecting those AF points, while Nikon’s has been second-nature and effortless for years. And the 1D mk3 which now I think adds direct AF point control in a firmware update, well after the whole high-temperature AF shutdown fiasco, I think the verdict has been that while the 1D mk3 is indeed faster, the 1D mk2 is still more reliable. I’ll take reliability over speed EVERY day of the week.
I slightly disagree with the “if you want it all” statement. Because primarily, nobody needs more than 6-12 megapixels, and the D300, D700 and D3 deliver superb results. (I down-sample my D300 images to ~6 megapixels all day long; clients never need more than 2-3 megapixels for the prints they make, and if it’s a really important image that’ll be printed huge I’m not shooting it at ISO 3200 anyway! At ISO 100-400, I can get 5D-matching image quality from even the D300. Like, counting eyelashes quality…
Before the new generation of Nikons, however, of course Canon was the prominent leader in image quality. Or at least, at higher ISOs. My D70 (and that 6 megapixel sensor that Nikon loves) got gorgeous images at ISO 200-400, and so did the 10 & 12 megapixel sensors at those lower ISO’s. The D2X gave the 1Ds mk2 quite a run for it’s 16 megapixel money at lower ISO’s, especially considering the $3000 added value in the D2X. But yeah, above ISO 400 Nikon was a complete joke, more than just a matter of “generations behind”. They were OUT of the game, period.
Indeed even today, for those who need +12 megapixels, the Canons are the only option. (The Sony 24 megapixel sensor is crap so far from what I’ve seen, the 1Ds mk3 blows it away at -3 megapixels…) However, I believe that game will change DRASTICALLY within the next 6-8 months. Some form of a D3X will show, and it will deliver the goods at 24+ megapixels. Game over for Canon bodies, especially if that D3X comes out at $4000-$6000…
Of course Nikon has areas where they will never truly catch Canon, namely in certain lens collections, and for those reasons many shooters will stick with Canon. The 70-200 f/4 L IS is a dream and I won’t switch to Nikon FX until they offer an equivalent. Nor will I buy into Nikon FX until they have more f/1.4 AFS primes…
In the end, I’d love to own both systems too. I’d love to own a 50D, or a 1D mk2N, for action and stuff. Would do fantastic for my work in gymnastics, children’s theater, etc. etc. (spot metering on AF points, too!) The 5D mk2, albeit with semi-pro weather sealing, makes a huge lunge at the landscape photographer market considering the weight savings below the D700, and the awesome Canon 17-40 f/4 that Nikon does not equal. Unfortunately neither of those things are very profitable for me, so for now I’m just gonna worry about making my current clients happy… And for the speed, accuracy and versatility that the D300 + D700 offer, right now the system that gets my work done is Nikon.
=Matt=
with all this hype around the 5dmk2 we’d better be seeing some awesome new VIDEOGRAPHERS in the months to come. if not, then all this hd video babble is worthless. if i owned a 5dmk2 i really dont think id use the video to its potential. it’d be more like my point & shoot video, where i document stupid little occurrences of the day (but in awesome 1080p format – essentially, it is professionally useless to me, but still cool for vacations and shows).
@GERKshinobi - yeah, and even then, there are P&S cameras that do 720p, right? Surely that’s good enough for your kid’s soccer game. (or at our age, our friend’s stupid stunts…)
For people who are already videographers, however, the 5D mk2 is going to crack open a HUGE new world for low-light and shallow DOF videography. Shooting video on a full-frame 35mm sensor, with an 85mm f/1.2 lens, at sensitivities that are PERFECTLY CLEAN up to 3200 and 6400, …you’re truly going where no videographer has gone before…
Which is exactly what Vincent Laforet’s “Reverie” showcases- How you can totally school even the best HD cameras (even RED) when it gets pitch-black dark…
=Matt=
Thinking again about what bugs me about Canon’s philosophy:
1. +/- 2 stops of exposure comp for ambient or flash. Again, you have to buy a $4000 camera to do -3 stops in anything but manual. Lame.
2. Too much sharing of buttons. WB & drive, AF and ISO. Eeeek!
3. Refusal to recognize the ETTL-II flash system as “cool” and to expand the system. CLS is “cool”, not because it’s that much better but because Nikon want to have the cool flash system and marketed it properly. Making the pop-up flash a trigger sealed the deal. ETTL has nearly all the same capabilities but the flash division of Canon don’t know how to make people excited about it and their R&D and marketing proves this.
Agreed on the lens issues. I owned a 70-200 f/4 IS and now have the 2.8 IS and the F/4 is indeed amazing. Since I rely on a lot of primes, it makes a Nikon switch taste a little bitter.
Dan
@Skunkabilly: yeap, I’ve converted and got myself a D700. I love that damn thing. Thanks for the offer, but I actually picked up a 35 f2 the other day. I have to say, this lens is a lot of bang for your buck. It’ll fill my small walk around prime need nicely… until Nikon starts rolling out new 1.4 wide primes that is. =)