5d2 D700 or...

[glenerrolrd]

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.

 

Between my daughter and myself we have all of the cameras you are considering. Cost aside the D3X is in a different class . You can easily find a perfect used D3X for less than $6000. You get better DR,color saturation and rendering of fine detail.

 

The 5DII is a great value and way less money plus you can use an adapter and not have to modify the mount. The megapixels will let you make the very large prints with the fine detail. There is a big demand for this body you buy a new one and resell it after a few months losing only a few hundred $$$.

 

The D700 is a great camera .. except when you expect that the fine output will be very large prints. You can of course find examples that disprove this but they require a level of perfection that seems counter productive . The D3S is better and IMHO a great sports or action camera but for your purposes a bit of waste.

 

For the type of work you describe you want a combination that provides fine detail and the

mid tone separation for this the D3X is best in class but the 5DII can also produce excellent results.

[Advertisement]

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

[mrware]

Shane,

 

I'm new here and have nothing to add, but would like to say, I like your work.

[sfage]

Thank-you

If you want to show me some of your work, send me a PM!

[nugat]

I extensively tested 5D2 vs D700 before settling on D700. (caveat: I do not shoot video on my DSLR). The Canon resolution advantage is 2800lw/ph to Nikon's 2200 lw/ph , or ca 25%. Barely visible in print. Canon AF is old 5D1 system, reliable mostly in the one-spot mode. D700 best AF around. Not applicable for you with R glass. D700 built/weatherproofing is much better (luminous-landscape Antarctic expedition). D700 high ISO advantage.

Of course if you insist on not modyfying the lens mount you exclude the Nikon.

For me the main issue with mounting R glass on full frame is the edge/corner fallout.

With my elmarit 35/2.8 wide open I get this below.

In your place I'd get a EPL-1 to test your R-glass. Adapter, center crop to avoid distortions, relative invisibilty/disposabilty (price) , resolution 2400lw/ph, ISO 1 -2 stop disadvantage.

But you also get reliable manual focussing with the magnification in the EVF. And the Olympus "look" with R glass is a winner.

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!

[sfage]

So, if you see the D700 having the advantage, would you say it retains this advantage at, say, a 24" print?

[nugat]

So, if you see the D700 having the advantage, would you say it retains this advantage at, say, a 24" print?

 

Advantage in resolution? No, I wrote D700 has 25% less vertical resolution than 5D2 (lw/ph).But I haven't seen any big difference on the biggest prints I do ie. 19x13 inch.

Don't know much about bigger sizes though.