Buying New- Sony A700 or Cannon 50D

[Tayfun]

Let's not mention that if you're going into adverse conditions, it's best to take the right tool for the job. The Canon manual tells you the 5DMK2 is NOT weather sealed. If you want a weather sealed camera, take a 1D.

That's the point I am talking about. If I am a studio shooter my tool would be 5D MKII because of high resolution. But for hard conditions 1D is also available but D700 is cheaper and a closer opportunity for me. D700 is perfectly wheather sealed, and robust camera.

 

[inTempus]

That's the point I am talking about. If I am a studio shooter my tool would be 5D MKII because of high resolution. But for hard conditions 1D is also available but D700 is cheaper and a closer opportunity for me. D700 is perfectly wheather sealed, and robust camera.

The D700 is a fine camera, no doubt. Is it "far superior" to the 5DMK2 as someone else said? Not even close. If anything they are functionally dead even competitors with some ergonomic/cosmetic differences.

Given the choice, I would take the 5DMK2. If someone gave me a D700 I would be happy as a lark. But when it comes down to me spending my money, I can't resist the 5DMK2. Truth be told, I'm thinking of ways to justify a 1DMKIII.

 

[Tayfun]

Here's a blog that explains it in some detail. I wasn't clear, it's not just the gapless (or reduced gap) design that helps to improve ISO performance, it's coupled with new photo diodes that are supposed to be able to gather more light.

Canon’s new sensor design « Mayank’s Viewpoint

According to that blog

"According to Canon’s Chuck Westfall, this new technology in the 50D, which features Canon’s highest pixel count (15 megapixel) APS-C sensor to date, will result in approximately 1-1.5 stop better high ISO noise performance as compared with the 10 megapixel 40D (Source: Rob Galbraith)"

But on dpreviews review, 50D has worse high iso performance than 40D.

 

[Tayfun]

The D700 is a fine camera, no doubt. Is it "far superior" to the 5DMK2 as someone else said? Not even close. If anything they are functionally dead even competitors with some ergonomic/cosmetic differences.

Given the choice, I would take the 5DMK2. If someone gave me a D700 I would be happy as a lark. But when it comes down to me spending my money, I can't resist the 5DMK2. Truth be told, I'm thinking of ways to justify a 1DMKIII.

100% agreed :thumbup:

 

[inTempus]

But it is said that 50D gave more noise than 40D.

The 50D is slightly more noisy than the 40D. The 50D has 50% more pixels than the 40D. The 50D does not have 50% more noise. It has maybe 5-10% (10% being very high, I would say 5% or less) more noise. It's very little which is quite an impressive feat for the Canon engineers.

 

[inTempus]

According to that blog

"According to Canon’s Chuck Westfall, this new technology in the 50D, which features Canon’s highest pixel count (15 megapixel) APS-C sensor to date, will result in approximately 1-1.5 stop better high ISO noise performance as compared with the 10 megapixel 40D (Source: Rob Galbraith)"

But on dpreviews review, 50D has worse high iso performance than 40D.

The blog talks about pre-release marketing hype. I didn't post the link to start a debate between which has more noise, the 40D or the 50D. It was posted only to explain the technology behind the new sensors.

On the Canon forums there have been countless exchanges (with lots and lots picture comparisons), and for the most part the noise differences between the 40D and 50D are slight, with slight advantage going to the 40D.

While Canon didn't achieve better ISO performance as they were claiming, they did bump the pixel count by 50% with only a marginal loss of high ISO performance. That in and of itself is an amazing accomplishment. Sure, it's short of what they were targeting, but hey... they were cheating the laws of physics.

The point is, the technology works.

 

[ANDS!]

I have not made a commitment yet but I'm sure in my mind, I still want to read and compare. This is an expensive investment to just buy on impulse.

If you have the ability to hold a PRO Nikon body - not the toy that the D40 is - do so. You will be significantly shortchanging yourself by just going off the feel of one entry level body compared to the upper enthusiast bodies of the competition. There are advantages and disadvantages to all systems. For studio shooting, Nikon has the advantage of integrated CLS system, which esssentially removes the need for cumbersome "radio poppers" and "triggers" and cords and etc. etc. Sure you can go with Alienbee strobes or continuous lighting, but there are folks out there creating incredibly portraiture with a few SB800's and their camera as a wireless commander. You've also got the weather sealing, incredibly rugged body of the D700, and smooth high iso performance. Cons are of course the price as compared to the competition. In the similar Canon body you get HD video, larger pixel count (funny how this all of a sudden matters) at a lower price point. I don't know the cons, but perhaps the Canon shooters can offer an HONEST critique of their system (for once).

Let's not mention that if you're going into adverse conditions, it's best to take the right tool for the job. The Canon manual tells you the 5DMK2 is NOT weather sealed. If you want a weather sealed camera, take a 1D. Even though its not weather sealed 20 of the 5DMK2's functioned flawlessly. More than the number of D700 that functioned flawlessly, because there were far fewer D700's.

Oy vey. Your math is right - your logic is wrong.

 

[AlexColeman]

I went nikon, and never looked back. I love it.

 

[fragged3d]

I'm just sitting on my hands and waiting, all this just makes it harder and more confusing. All the arguing and pointing flaws out makes me not to want a new camera! It seems like you have to spend $3000+ for a good one after you get past the entry level $1000 cameras. I looked at the Nikon D700 and it's 12.1mp, thats suppost to be better than 21.1 mp that the Canon 5D Mark II does? Yep, I think I'm going to wait until the dust settles, I find someone that has a Nikon of that caliber around me and I can shoot it, I find someone that has a Canon of that caliber around me and I can shoot it and I have done plenty more research. I never knew something so simple could be such a headache. Thanks guys for all the sdvice and opinions, I encourage more to help me learn.

 

[LuckySo-n-So]

My head hurts after reading all of this.

This is kind of like PS3 v. XBox 360.

 

[inTempus]

Oy vey. Your math is right - your logic is wrong.

It's a statement of fact. Logic has nothing to do with it. I merely stated an indisputable fact (assuming the authors camera count is accurate) and drew absolutely no conclusions from it.

Fact: There were more 5DMK2's than D700's present on the trip.
Fact: 20 5DMK2's functioned flawlessly, which is more than the total number of D700's on the trip.

That's all I stated. For you to claim there's some faulty logic in a statement of fact is a bit perplexing. Is it your contention that there were actually more than 20 D700's present? Perhaps you think the D700 is superior to the 5DMK2 based upon this single story?

I make no statistical or scientific conclusions based on the anecdotal evidence found in the story. I stated that right up front. From that single event there is nothing to be concluded which would indicate one brand/model is superior than the other. Apparently you disagree.

If we had 5 Toyota's and 1 Nissan and say we ran them up Pike Peak. Of the 5 Toyota's, one failed while the other 4 functioned as expected. The single Nissan also performed without any failures. From that, would you conclude Nissan is superior to Toyota? I would hope not. If you did, then it is your logic that is faulty.

 

[Tayfun]

It's a statement of fact. Logic has nothing to do with it. I merely stated an indisputable fact (assuming the authors camera count is accurate) and drew absolutely no conclusions from it.

Fact: There were more 5DMK2's than D700's present on the trip.
Fact: 20 5DMK2's functioned flawlessly, which is more than the total number of D700's on the trip.

That's all I stated. For you to claim there's some faulty logic in a statement of fact is a bit perplexing. Is it your contention that there were actually more than 20 D700's present? Perhaps you think the D700 is superior to the 5DMK2 based upon this single story?

I make no statistical or scientific conclusions based on the anecdotal evidence found in the story. I stated that right up front. From that single event there is nothing to be concluded which would indicate one brand/model is superior than the other. Apparently you disagree.

If we had 5 Toyota's and 1 Nissan and say we ran them up Pike Peak. Of the 5 Toyota's, one failed while the other 4 functioned as expected. The single Nissan also performed without any failures. From that, would you conclude Nissan is superior to Toyota? I would hope not. If you did, then it is your logic that is faulty.

Let's make it clear.
First of all the story which you call as anecdotal is a real experience and IMHO is more valuable then a lab test. And that is not surprise because D700 is water sealed and 5D MKII is not (actually Sony A900 isn't either). This trip is made every year. In 2007 D200's gave no problem but Canon 5D's failed (I can find it too). 5D MKII shoots 3.9 per sec (because of high resolution) but D700 shoots 8 per sec (by battery grip). Now IMHO for adventure usage or under hard conditions D700 is the winner. But if we compare them under studio I guess 5D MKII takes the top. Both cameras have got their advantages to each other so none can be called as superior than the other. Or can be called that it depends on the users needs.

Errr Tharmsen, click the link for DxO test results.
DxOMark Sensor

 

[inTempus]

Let's make it clear.
First of all the story which you call as anecdotal is a real experience and IMHO is more valuable then a lab test.

Your opinion is just that, an opinion. If you want to learn something about Scientific Methods and Statistics, these links should help.

With that being said, I made it quite clear that the 5DMK2 is not weather sealed and if you wanted such a feature on a Canon you should opt for a 1D. So I'm not sure why you're arguing with me.

The OP more than likely doesn't care what our opinions are regarding the Antarctica trip.

And that is not surprise because D700 is water sealed and 5D MKII is not (actually Sony A900 isn't either).

Oh, right. You agree with me. So why are you arguing this point again?

Both cameras have got their advantages to each other so none can be called as superior than the other. Or can be called that it depends on the users needs.

I know, I've said as much. So again, why are you arguing this with me?

Errr Tharmsen, click the link for DxO test results.
DxOMark Sensor

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. I've been to this site many times, and I'm 99.9% sure they don't have an Antarctica test category. I'll double check though.

If you're trying to make the point that the 12MP sensor of the D700 has a slight advantage in various categories over the 21MP sensor of the 5DMK2, that's pretty much common knowledge.

I can assure you of this, if I were to show you two different images taken by two different professional photographers, one with a Nikon and one with a Canon - you would not be able to pick which image was shot with which camera (no cheating with the Exif data either).

So, if you have a point, feel free to make it. Otherwise we're just bantering back and forth with no real purpose and wasting storage space.

 

[Tayfun]

Your opinion is just that, an opinion. If you want to learn something about Scientific Methods and Statistics, these links should help.

Not only my opinion, it is also the applicants of that trip opinion. Actually I buy a camera to take photos, not to tell people that my camera designers cheated technology (I think they cheat users) or not to show scientific or statistics techniques. Though don't worry I know what statistics or scientific methods are (maybe more than you), I am a mechanical engineer

With that being said, I made it quite clear that the 5DMK2 is not weather sealed and if you wanted such a feature on a Canon you should opt for a 1D. So I'm not sure why you're arguing with me.

No there are better choices than 1D like D700, D3 or D3h Yeah really arguing with a blind Canon fan seems to bring nowhere.

The OP more than likely doesn't care what our opinions are regarding the Antarctica trip.

Be sure the OP will more care about a real trip results which ended with Canon's failure than lab results which does not make sense in real world. If your camera isn't robust enough, 21MP will give you nothing.

 

[ANDS!]

Apparently you disagree.

I disagreed with your statistical logic. That's NOT how "sample sizes" and error rates work: "Oh well, failed - yea but Y didn't! WOOHOO!" Qualifying that more of Product A survived than Product B even had available is not how you support Product A. 25% of the 5D's failed, along with the intermitent failures amongst the other Canon bodies. 0% of the Nikon bodies failed. The sample size isn't small, and perhaps there would be a failure rate had their been more Nikon bodies, but anyone who has taken entry level stats should know that a sample size that small suffices (use your google-fu on T-scores).

I'm still waiting for a Canon user to effectively critique their bodies. We already know some of the limitations of Nikon's line, lets bring this back on track and help the OP with a critique on Canon's side.