Helllllllllpppppp

[taaffy]

At present I am using a Canon 400d and have had some very good results but I'm now ready to upgrade.....

My automatic choice was the 5d but a good friend suggested I should look at the Nikon D700.

So...

What is the best option.....?

Most of the reviews I have read put the Nikon ahead in most areas but ultimately say that the Canon provides the best image although it is more fiddly to use.

For both units what are the best Lenses to buy.....another eye opener as they seem to have jumped in price along with the cost of the camera.

Do I really need image stabilising lenses ....?

Just when I thought I'd got to grips with this photography lark .....I move to the next stage and the headache starts all over again.


So D5 or D700 .....??????

[byhff]

Not to be patronising but if you need to ask whether you need IS lenses you don't need a new camera.

What function of the 400d holds you back? What lenses do you have just now?

[Simpo Two]

taaffy said:

For both units what are the best Lenses to buy.....another eye opener as they seem to have jumped in price along with the cost of the camera.

Well for the D700, and as you did say 'best':

Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 G AF-S ED: £1269
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED: £1195
Nikon 70-200mm AF-S Nikkor f2.8G ED VR II: £1999

- should do for starters

[taaffy]

byhff said:

Not to be patronising but if you need to ask whether you need IS lenses you don't need a new camera.

What function of the 400d holds you back? What lenses do you have just now?

I get pretty good sharp images when handheld but am curious to what IS would add to my pictures.

[SamHH]

taaffy said:

byhff said:

Not to be patronising but if you need to ask whether you need IS lenses you don't need a new camera.

What function of the 400d holds you back? What lenses do you have just now?

I get pretty good sharp images when handheld but am curious to what IS would add to my pictures.

It means that you can use a slower shutter speed before the unsteadiness of your hands starts to make the photo blurry.

If the photo is blurry because of the unsteadiness of the subject, it won't do anything about that.

[Simpo Two]

taaffy said:

byhff said:

Not to be patronising but if you need to ask whether you need IS lenses you don't need a new camera.

What function of the 400d holds you back? What lenses do you have just now?

I get pretty good sharp images when handheld but am curious to what IS would add to my pictures.

If camera-shake is not an issue for you, then the answer is nothing. There's a world of difference bewteen out of focus (not focused) and camera-shake (ie in focus but smeared).

[LongQ]

taaffy said:

At present I am using a Canon 400d and have had some very good results but I'm now ready to upgrade.....

My automatic choice was the 5d but a good friend suggested I should look at the Nikon D700.

So...

What is the best option.....?

Most of the reviews I have read put the Nikon ahead in most areas but ultimately say that the Canon provides the best image although it is more fiddly to use.

For both units what are the best Lenses to buy.....another eye opener as they seem to have jumped in price along with the cost of the camera.

Do I really need image stabilising lenses ....?

Just when I thought I'd got to grips with this photography lark .....I move to the next stage and the headache starts all over again.


So D5 or D700 .....??????

It all depends on whether you are really going to benefit from a move to Full frame at this point.

And that depends quite a lot on what you snap.

[-Pete-]

'Upgrade' by buying a decent lens or two. The 400D is a great camera, but it's only a box with a shutter. The lens is the important (and expensive) bit.

What kind of photo's do you take?

[taaffy]

My 400d is going to the wife as she needs a decent camera to take pics of people before and after dental treatments......so I thought that this was an ideal opportunity to upgrade to a full frame camera. I take a mix of landscapes and sporting action shots.....

I was just looking for peoples opinions on which of these two units and lenses would be most appropriate for general allround photography.

[taaffy]

Simpo Two said:

taaffy said:

For both units what are the best Lenses to buy.....another eye opener as they seem to have jumped in price along with the cost of the camera.

Well for the D700, and as you did say 'best':

Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 G AF-S ED: £1269
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED: £1195
Nikon 70-200mm AF-S Nikkor f2.8G ED VR II: £1999

- should do for starters

The 1st two I had already earmarked.

[-Pete-]

Canon and Nikon are both excellent, it's the lenses that will make the difference. For sports/action IS might be a good idea, or f2.8, at least 200mm. As I said, it's all about the lens.

For landscapes, the max aperture doesn't matter too much but you need a lot wider than 28mm and a decent tripod doesn't hurt.

Can you share the 400D with her, buy a couple of lenses, sorted?

[jon-]

What glass have you got currently?

If you shoot sport and already have Canon glass the 8fps and extra reach of the 7d would be the winner for me. Remember moving to full frame all your glass suddenly becomes 1.6x shorter and the d700 can't do video or shoot quickly.

Glass sharing with the wife would be another bonus of the 7d.

[taaffy]

The glass I have at present is nothing special so there is massive room for increase in quality.....I have a Nifty fifty a sigma 17-70 and a sigma 50-150 f 2.8.....these were bought to replace the kit lens as it was reviewed to be poor.

I was a complete newbie new to the DSLR so did not want to spend masses as I was not sure if I was going to be serious about my photography.

Now a couple of years down the line I am hooked and am pretty fussy about my results, so time for better equipment.

I have circa 4k to spend so will change camera body and all glass if needs be.

I did contemplate the 50d but thought that if I am that close to full frame price then I might as well go full monty and get the 5d......then someone said look at Nikon d700 and that's when it all got complicated..

I do understand that it is mostly about the quality of the glass used so I am quite prepared to shell out for that.

So options are.....

50d with top end glass
5d or d700 with slightly lower quality glass

[jon-]

Again, why the lust for full frame? They excel in portrait work (which you've said you don't shoot) but are the speed of the 5d/d700 would be a hindrance for sports. I've also read the 5d mkII af isn't that great, which for sports is essential so count that one out too.

Initial reports show the 7d's noise control to be almost as good as the 5d, and the all new AF is fast and sharp. It pumps out 8fps too.

[SamHH]

jon- said:

the speed of the 5d/d700 would be a hindrance for sports.

Really? Everything I've read said the Nikon AF is really good, plus it can do 5fps or 8 with the battery grip.

[jon-]

SamHH said:

jon- said:

the speed of the 5d/d700 would be a hindrance for sports.

Really? Everything I've read said the Nikon AF is really good, plus it can do 5fps or 8 with the battery grip.

Nikon AF is the dogs, no argument from me there. I also thought the d700 was limited to 5fps.

TBH if I was in your situation and didn't want video (which I don't) I'd probably be edging towards the d700, but mostly for CLS (the flash control) and full frame as I like shooting people.

As I can't afford to move away from Canon I'm waiting for the 1d MK4 to knock the 1d MK3 prices down a little, and I'm the Canon flash system, while a pain in the ass to use, isn't that far behind the CLS once you get used to the quirks. I just keep telling myself the Nikon system has quirks too (like the flash EV vs global EV when using ITTL)

[lowdrag]

Simpo Two said:

taaffy said:

For both units what are the best Lenses to buy.....another eye opener as they seem to have jumped in price along with the cost of the camera.

Well for the D700, and as you did say 'best':

Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 G AF-S ED: £1269
Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G AF-S ED: £1195
Nikon 70-200mm AF-S Nikkor f2.8G ED VR II: £1999

- should do for starters

Having played a lot with the 14/24 I'd frankly leave out the 24/70 for now. The new lens is that good and tack sharp although you can't fit filters to it. The 70/200 has been my main lens (although I do have the 24/70) for most things since it came out some years back, whether on DX or FX format. Now though, at least for the moment, the 14/24 rules.

[Simpo Two]

lowdrag said:

Having played a lot with the 14/24 I'd frankly leave out the 24/70 for now. The new lens is that good and tack sharp although you can't fit filters to it. The 70/200 has been my main lens (although I do have the 24/70) for most things since it came out some years back, whether on DX or FX format. Now though, at least for the moment, the 14/24 rules.

What did I do to warrant a ? Even if you *assume* that everyone has the same needs as you, you overlooked the fact that the OP said he's already got the 24-70 on his wants list, and he seems sufficiently well informed to know that he wants a lens in that range. I merely answered his question with a list of 'top' lenses, which is what he asked for.

Edited by Simpo Two on Sunday 27th September 10:59

[jon-]

Simpo,

You missed out on 2 other essential lenses

Nikon AF-S II 300mm f/2.8 ED-IF £3899.00
Nikon AF-S II 400mm f/2.8 ED-IF £6068.08

Should have the OP covered for every eventuality

[taaffy]

Thanks for all the input ....it is a minefield and getting it right now saves on huge expense in the long run.....