5d2 D700 or...

[sfage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Could someone please help me?

 

I am about to purchase a 24 inch printer. Naturally, the point of this is to make my customers happy. They like "big".

 

First, I must tell you what I do, then we can go from there.

 

1) I never, ever, ever, ever... take photographs of people.

2) I do not work in "dynamic" situations.

3) I shoot super high resolution, super detailed urban decay and abstract industrial.

 

I need a machine that I can be confident with. What I mean by that is: I shoot in some rather "unsavoury" areas of town and sometimes, I need to work very quickly and get the hell out of there. When I say that there are heroin addicts, crackheads, punkers, skin heads, I mean, that is in fact, where I work. And yes, I am alone, possibly laying on the ground and by myself.

 

I will only be using the Leica glass that I presently own. I would not like to change the rings on the lenses themselves. I would like to use a high quality adapter, cost be damned.

 

I understand that the 5d has more megapixels. But, I have been warned about menus and screwing around. More often than not, I do NOT have time for this. I have heard the build quality of the 5d is inferior to the D700. Please verify.

 

The focus capability of the D 700 is attractive to me. But, as I said, I will be using R glass on this machine.

 

So. Would someone please comment upon their opinion? 5d / D700 in this configuration? ... and, at 24 inches?

 

I do stuff like this: http://shanefage.ca/media/Power-Company.jpg

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Paolo.Battista]

Well, on D700 you have to change the mount of the lenses.

With 5D mkII, you can use Novoflex adapters if you want the best possible quality from the adapter itself.

The 5D mk II has more megapixel and a lower anti-alising filter, so in the best condition can render more definition. But the quality of RAW files from D700 seems to be a little better.

 

For the places where you shoot, you could consider a 4/3 or m4/3 body as well, it could be much more unintrusive and the crop factor could let you shoot from longer distances.

I'm very pleased by the results I obtain using R lenses and Digilux 3 and E-3.

[adan]

In your specific case, there really isn't a problem - the Canon 5DmkII will capture more fine detail. A Nikon D3x might capture even slightly more at 2.6x the price (I haven't seen actual D3X output myself)

 

A D700's real forte is ISO 3200/6400 at 12 Mpixels - i.e., it is a pushed-Tri-X camera when what you seem to need is a Kodachrome/Panatomic-X camera.

 

Add to that the fact that the D700 requires new mounts and the Canon requires simply adapters.

 

I would give the D700 an edge in build quality, but the Canon is not horrible.

 

Chipped adapters are a must for the Canons though. Without a chip to tell the camera some kind of lens is mounted, the 5D turns down the brightness of the finder display to near invisibility.

 

Also, there are limitations on which R lenses will work on the Canon without surgery to lens or camera mirror. 15, 19(new), 24, 35 f/1.4, a couple of the wider zooms. Essentially, anything that worked on a Leicaflex SL c. 1978 (21 f/4, original huge 19 f/2.8) will work on the Canon - lenses that won't work on an SL are suspect until proven innocent.

[sfage]

This is excellent information, thank-you to both of you.

 

Could we discuss more megapixels versus "better" megapixels?

 

The price is basically the same for both machines but the 5d has nearly twice the MP.

[sfage]

Well, on D700 you have to change the mount of the lenses.

With 5D mkII, you can use Novoflex adapters if you want the best possible quality from the adapter itself.

The 5D mk II has more megapixel and a lower anti-alising filter, so in the best condition can render more definition. But the quality of RAW files from D700 seems to be a little better.

 

For the places where you shoot, you could consider a 4/3 or m4/3 body as well, it could be much more unintrusive and the crop factor could let you shoot from longer distances.

I'm very pleased by the results I obtain using R lenses and Digilux 3 and E-3.

 

This is interesting. You bring up some of the more "baffling" things about the end product imagery.

 

On the one hand, the 5d has a larger pixel count but you say the raw file is actually better on the D700. Help me to understand this. What is it about the D700 files that make them "better"?

 

At present, I have a Leica D3 so yes, I'm using a 4/3 mount. I have looked at the olympus bodies but they are limited to 12 mp (then again, so is the Nikon).

 

My primary concern at this stage is not just the body. It's the body, plus the adapters for the glass, plus the printer. So, I'm trying to get this decision right the first time because it's a lot of money (to me).

[sfage]

In your specific case, there really isn't a problem - the Canon 5DmkII will capture more fine detail. A Nikon D3x might capture even slightly more at 2.6x the price (I haven't seen actual D3X output myself)

 

A D700's real forte is ISO 3200/6400 at 12 Mpixels - i.e., it is a pushed-Tri-X camera when what you seem to need is a Kodachrome/Panatomic-X camera.

 

Add to that the fact that the D700 requires new mounts and the Canon requires simply adapters.

 

I would give the D700 an edge in build quality, but the Canon is not horrible.

 

Chipped adapters are a must for the Canons though. Without a chip to tell the camera some kind of lens is mounted, the 5D turns down the brightness of the finder display to near invisibility.

 

Also, there are limitations on which R lenses will work on the Canon without surgery to lens or camera mirror. 15, 19(new), 24, 35 f/1.4, a couple of the wider zooms. Essentially, anything that worked on a Leicaflex SL c. 1978 (21 f/4, original huge 19 f/2.8) will work on the Canon - lenses that won't work on an SL are suspect until proven innocent.

 

The "pushed" high ISO is not something I would ever do. Basically, for the style of imagery I do, this wouldn't work because of the detail I need (and my customers like) without noise. I appreciate you pointing that possibility out, though.

 

The D700 needs the Leitax mounts and the Canon doesn't? I would think that novoflex makes an adapter for the R / D700, don't they? Doesn't Andy Barton use this configuration? Maybe I'll get lucky and Andy will pop in here at some point.

 

The chipped adapter and brightness issue. Ouch. That's a BIG deal. Umm, that brings up another rather serious issue. I want to be able to use the same lenses upon my SL2 and the Canon. I always shoot film AND digital. I get 2 or 3 of each subject before I move on. Am I getting in to a situation where I need to have my lenses coded? If I do, am I going to have a problem mounting the lenses on to the SL2? I've heard this "is" a problem. Can you address this?

 

I will be using a simple 50 cron and an Elmarit 60 macro. I checked in to this and they both seem to be okay for the clearance.

[sfage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just looked at the D3x and D3s.

 

The S I might be able to do (financially) the X is really pushing it.

 

The X is 7300 plus the printer I am buying, plus the adapter.

[lct]

...Am I getting in to a situation where I need to have my lenses coded? If I do, am I going to have a problem mounting the lenses on to the SL2? I've heard this "is" a problem. Can you address this?...

No problem with the 5D1 at least. Coding is useless and you can use a single adapter on the Canon body provided it is solid enough like Fotodiox. The latter is chipped contrary to the Novoflex IINW. Beware that some Fotodiox adapters don't fit on some Canon bodies though. Due to tight tolerances or sample variation i don't know but two of them did not fit on my 5D1 body.

[sfage]

Ok, so this kind of R mount is not going to be a problem, combined with that "flange" that juts in to the camera body (once the adapter ring is on)?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[lct]

...Chipped adapters are a must for the Canons though. Without a chip to tell the camera some kind of lens is mounted, the 5D turns down the brightness of the finder display to near invisibility...

Chipped adapters don't change anything in the finder's brightness in my experience. Their purpose is to provide focussing assistance that's all. With the 5D1 at least. The finder is always too dim at f/6.3 and on whatever adapter i use with the body.

[lct]

Ok, so this kind of R mount is not going to be a problem, combined with that "flange" that juts in to the camera body (once the adapter ring is on)?

I don't know, which lens is this?

[Guest]

Just a suggestion: 45 mm PC Nikkor and 60mm Nikkor, preferably on a D3x body for digital use and your SL2 50 + 60 for film like before.

These 2 Nikon lenses are absolutely not inferior to the mentioned Leicaflex lenses.

Rather buy the printer later than the D700, which is very fine camera, but a compromise for your jobs.

If you insist on film alongside with digital, not changing bodies but grabing the other cam speeds you up.

Imo a Zeiss 50mm (1:2 Macro) on a 5D2 and no film might be just it.

Cheers!

[johnwolf]

...

I understand that the 5d has more megapixels. But, I have been warned about menus and screwing around. More often than not, I do NOT have time for this...

 

I wouldn't be too concerned about the 5DII menu system. The camera offers three custom functions, in which you can store pretty much whatever set of function you want. In additon, you can create your own custom menu of most-used functions.

 

It sounds like you use a tripod, so I would also look at LiveView capabilities. I don't know anything know the Nikon's LV, but the 5D's is wonderful.

 

Why aren't you considering medium format?

 

John

[sfage]

I wouldn't be too concerned about the 5DII menu system. The camera offers three custom functions, in which you can store pretty much whatever set of function you want. In additon, you can create your own custom menu of most-used functions.

 

It sounds like you use a tripod, so I would also look at LiveView capabilities. I don't know anything know the Nikon's LV, but the 5D's is wonderful.

 

Why aren't you considering medium format?

 

John

 

I also use medium format. Rollei and Bronica Etrs.

 

And no, a tripod is pretty much out of the question in these circumstances. That would be a real invitation to get killed. Heroin addict says: "Hmm. Tripod. I'll bet that's a real camera on that tripod. I'll bet if I steal that camera, I could buy more heroin."

 

Monopod, maybe.

[andybarton]

 

The D700 needs the Leitax mounts and the Canon doesn't? I would think that novoflex makes an adapter for the R / D700, don't they? Doesn't Andy Barton use this configuration? Maybe I'll get lucky and Andy will pop in here at some point.

 

There is no "simple" adapter solution for mounting an R lens on a Nikon body because R's mount clockwise and Nikons mount anticlockwise. You have to change the mount.

 

The Leitax ones that I use are extremely well made.

[adan]

Nikon and Leica R have almost identical distances from lens to film/sensor - thus no space to fit in an adapter and maintain focus to infinity. Canon EOS and Sony/Minolta Maxxum mounts are shallower, leaving a couple of mm to squeeze in an adapter.

 

To clarify, with regard to chipped adapters, I was referring to the brightness of the numerical LED display of shutter speeds, NOT the brightness of the ground glass image.

 

Canon turns down the brightness of the display in the 5D cameras when no lens is sensed via the electrical contacts, to conserve battery power (not true of the 1D cameras and some of the cropped Canon bodies).

 

This is very easy to test for oneself. Look through the finder while mounting and unmounting a Canon-made lens on a 5D - the display below the ground-glass will darken with the lens off, and get brighter with the lens on. Put on a lens with an unchipped adapter and it never gets brighter.

[sfage]

There is no "simple" adapter solution for mounting an R lens on a Nikon body because R's mount clockwise and Nikons mount anticlockwise. You have to change the mount.

 

The Leitax ones that I use are extremely well made.

 

Hmm. I see. In order to use the lens on the D700, the mounts on the lens itself must be changed, therefore, that leaves the SL2 out.

 

Hmm.

 

Not so good. That kind of makes my decision for me. It looks like the 5d is the way to go.

 

I must admit, I did look at the Leitax and yes, they look well made and the procedure is pretty simple.

[sfage]

Nikon and Leica R have almost identical distances from lens to film/sensor - thus no space to fit in an adapter and maintain focus to infinity. Canon EOS and Sony/Minolta Maxxum mounts are shallower, leaving a couple of mm to squeeze in an adapter.

 

Just for the sake of "try before buy", I called Leica this morning. It appears that they have some 18628 adapters left for my present digilux 3.

 

I have been meaning to buy one anyway, so I think I will.

 

One issue the person at Leica brought up is the change in focal length that will happen. So my 50 cron becomes 100.

 

Is this your experience? I guess it makes sense.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lct]

...Canon turns down the brightness of the display in the 5D cameras when no lens is sensed via the electrical contacts, to conserve battery power...

Makes no difference on my 5D1 Andy.

[andybarton]

 

One issue the person at Leica brought up is the change in focal length that will happen. So my 50 cron becomes 100.

 

Is this your experience? I guess it makes sense.

 

The chip is smaller than a frame of film, which doubles the effective focal length. This is true when putting any lens on any chip smaller than the frame size it was designed for.

 

So, IIRC, the DMR had a crop factor of 1.3 (i.e. a 50mm became a 65 equivalent)

 

The M8 had a crop factor of 1.33 (50 -> 66.5)

 

The Digilux 3 has a much smaller sensor, and the crop factor when using lenses designed for 35mm film is 2x