Nikons and Canon's equivalent

[glowsplint]

Recently I managed to borrow a Nikon D700 from a friend's friend together with a few other lenses including the AF-S 24-70mm f2.8 and the AF-D 50mm f1.4. Full frame quality is really a huge step up from what I am used to with the 1000D and 85mm f1.8 USM. Going back to the 1000D may now be a problem. My experience with the D700 + 50mm f1.4 was really good. Fast and accurate focusing even with outer non-cross type AF points.

As such, I want to know what is the Canon "equivalent" of the Nikon D700. I know that there will definitely be problems in comparison. I know that the 5D2 doesn't really match up to the D700 in terms of specifications like AF points, FPS, etc.

Also, is the EF 50mm f1.4 as good as the AF-D 50mm f1.4 in terms of accurate focusing (I know this varies with different lenses), speed of focus, colour rendition etc? Individual lens reviews can only say so much so I hope to know if they are comparable.

[marinien]

Sorry, no Canon equivalent of the Nikon D700, only a vastly superior one: the 5D MkIII 

[neuroanatomist]

I know that the 5D2 doesn't really match up to the D700 in terms of specifications like AF points, FPS, etc.

Or megapixels...but who's counting?   

I suppose there's no direct equivalent.  The 5DIII is better across the board, though. You could also consider a D600 and Nikkor 50/1.4 - I think that combo is cheaper than the 5DIII.  But if you've got a decent set of EF lenses, and can afford the 5DIII...  Alternatively, if you don't shoot fast-moving subjects, 5DII prices are great right now.

[Bruce Photography]

One reason your question is tough is that the D700 is no longer in the Nikon lineup so the one comparison is the D700 to the 5D (the original) because the MP is quite similar.  Both 50mm 1.4 lenses are comparable (probably will get some flak on this).  Perhaps a more suggested approach would be to compare two current production cameras and make the general assumption that both companies make good and bad lenses depending upon what you want to pay for them.  I have both Canon and Nikon gear and right now I prefer Nikon because of the high MP bodies but I really like Canon glass but I like the size of the Nikon lenses compared to their Canon equivalents.  I have a friend that just bought a D600 and loves it.  Maybe comparing a D600 to the Canon 6D would be worth a look assuming you like the glass available on either brand.

[glowsplint]

I don't really think I have a decent set of lenses (It's really what's in my signature plus the 18-55mm kit lens). I do feel that the 1000D is beginning to be insufficient for what I (try to) do. Being a student, a 5d3 will really be a luxury item since I don't make any profits from my hobby. I really like the look and feel of full frame, but am willing to wait for the 7d2 to come out (if ever) since I don't have pressing needs.

But what surprises me is that both the 5d2 and D700 came out in the same year (2008) and to me the D700 is a better all around camera. (This is definitely not a fair comparison to the 5d2 since I have only used it once.) Specs-wise it does seem like the D700 can also be used for sports as well unlike the 5d2.

[Quasimodo]

I don't really think I have a decent set of lenses (It's really what's in my signature plus the 18-55mm kit lens). I do feel that the 1000D is beginning to be insufficient for what I (try to) do. Being a student, a 5d3 will really be a luxury item since I don't make any profits from my hobby. I really like the look and feel of full frame, but am willing to wait for the 7d2 to come out (if ever) since I don't have pressing needs.

But what surprises me is that both the 5d2 and D700 came out in the same year (2008) and to me the D700 is a better all around camera. (This is definitely not a fair comparison to the 5d2 since I have only used it once.) Specs-wise it does seem like the D700 can also be used for sports as well unlike the 5d2.

Excuse my ignorance, but what kind of sports is it that you feel that I cannot shoot?

[Bruce Photography]

Quote: "But what surprises me is that both the 5d2 and D700 came out in the same year (2008) and to me the D700 is a better all around camera. (This is definitely not a fair comparison to the 5d2 since I have only used it once.) Specs-wise it does seem like the D700 can also be used for sports as well unlike the 5d2."

Are you looking for only used cameras?  I ask this because the Canon 5D2 is now officially discontinued as well as the Nikon D700.  While my experience with Nikon is limited to the D800, a huge difference existed between the 5D2 at 21 MP and the D700 which was 12 MP.  Yes the D700 pixels were bigger but the 5D2 had very good low light performance and whenever you double the MP on a high end camera, the differences are huge when it comes to cropping and large prints.  Even comparing live view against the D700 vs the 5D2, the 5D2 was great.   I used the 5D2 for landscapes for over 4 years until the D800 came out and swept me away with the resolution and increased dynamic range.  However, some of my friends do the the D700 and love them so much that they will not give them up.  I had no trouble giving up my 5D2 for the D800.

[Gino]

I used to own the D700 with the Nikon 28-300mm lens, which made for a fun all in one set-up, which produced some good results, if you're not pixel peeping.

[glowsplint]

Excuse my ignorance, but what kind of sports is it that you feel that I cannot shoot?

Sorry, I don't really get your question. 

Are you looking for only used cameras?

No, but I am looking out for FF cameras which can be used for sports. It's time to upgrade, but I have a major examinations in the coming year which means that I will have less free time to shoot. This also means that I do not really have a pressing want for a new camera.

However, some of my friends do the the D700 and love them so much that they will not give them up.

I understand why they felt that way. I was reluctant to return the D700. For me, high resolutions are not required since I shoot as a hobby. Also, I am comfortable with high ISOs on the D700 (I would go up to 6400 for theatre since no flash was allowed). The small file sizes (lesser MP) were also welcome. My only regret was not having an opportunity to try shooting sports with the D700.

I used to own the D700 with the Nikon 28-300mm lens, which made for a fun all in one set-up, which produced some good results, if you're not pixel peeping.

Used to? What do you use now then?

On an unrelated note, is it possible to shoot sports with a 5D2? How much harder is it compared to using a 7D?

[neuroanatomist]

On an unrelated note, is it possible to shoot sports with a 5D2? How much harder is it compared to using a 7D?

Of course it's possible.  People shot sports before autofocus. The tracking in the 5DII is ok for subjects crossing the FoV and moving at a pretty constant speed.  With subjects heading toward or away from the camera, the tracking does a poor job, even keeping up with my toddler was too much for the 5DII's servo mode.  Still, if you know where the subject is heading, you can prefocus there and get the shot.  The 7D does a much better job of tracking, sideways, toward/away, varying speed, etc. - not perfect, but much better (the 1-series is even better, of course). 

...means that I will have less free time to shoot. This also means that I do not really have a pressing want for a new camera.

Interesting.  I sort of feel the opposite - I also have limited free time, so I want the best gear possible, to make the most of the time that I have. 

[Quasimodo]

Excuse my ignorance, but what kind of sports is it that you feel that I cannot shoot?

Sorry, I don't really get your question. 

Are you looking for only used cameras?

No, but I am looking out for FF cameras which can be used for sports. It's time to upgrade, but I have a major examinations in the coming year which means that I will have less free time to shoot. This also means that I do not really have a pressing want for a new camera.

However, some of my friends do the the D700 and love them so much that they will not give them up.

I understand why they felt that way. I was reluctant to return the D700. For me, high resolutions are not required since I shoot as a hobby. Also, I am comfortable with high ISOs on the D700 (I would go up to 6400 for theatre since no flash was allowed). The small file sizes (lesser MP) were also welcome. My only regret was not having an opportunity to try shooting sports with the D700.

I used to own the D700 with the Nikon 28-300mm lens, which made for a fun all in one set-up, which produced some good results, if you're not pixel peeping.

Used to? What do you use now then?

On an unrelated note, is it possible to shoot sports with a 5D2? How much harder is it compared to using a 7D?

It was a rhetorical question. You might need a 1Dx to shoot sports, but I and many others can shoot sports fine with the 5D II. Are there better cameras for sports, yes there are, but if you are unable to shoot sports with a 5D II, I would venture that it is related to your skills rather than the camera.

[Aglet]

As such, I want to know what is the Canon "equivalent" of the Nikon D700. I know that there will definitely be problems in comparison. I know that the 5D2 doesn't really match up to the D700 in terms of specifications like AF points, FPS, etc.

no real direct comparison; 5d3 for speed and AF, 5d classic for resolution

Also, is the EF 50mm f1.4 as good as the AF-D 50mm f1.4 in terms of accurate focusing (I know this varies with different lenses), speed of focus, colour rendition etc? Individual lens reviews can only say so much so I hope to know if they are comparable.

both of those 50mm f/1.4 lenses are quite good, color rendition is subjective and editable so a moot point to me.
I prefer the Canon one for slightly better border and corner performance, tho on the lower rez D700 the Nikon lens' slightly reduced performance is not likely even noticed.  On a D800 the extra sensor rez could allow an even greater effective overall system resolution.

On a good Nikon body, like the D700, AF speed of the Nikon's screw-drive lens could be a little faster than the USM Canon lens. Nikon's AF accuracy is also very good, altho I've not used the D700 myself.  Those who do shoot with the D700 love it for various reasons and the AF is one of them.
Nikon's D-series lenses are reputed to be very fast focusing when used with high end bodies.

[Gino]

@glowsplint:

It appears that you like the Nikon D700, so why not just get a D700?  If you're going to shoot sports/action, the D700 can shoot 8 fps with a battery grip, and the the 51 point auto-focus system is better than the 5D MarkII for action.

Take a look at the photos in the link below....this photographer takes some impressive action photos with the Nikon D700 and 28-300mm lens combo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mingthein/5166294336/#in/photostream/

Personally, I'm just an amateur and I don't have a brand loyalty to either Canon or Nikon...you can see in my signature that I currently own the 5D MarkIII, but I've owned both the Nikon D800 and D700.  If I was on a budget to get an all around great full frame camera, that can be used for both landscape and action photography, then I would probably purchase a used Nikon D700 with a battery grip, along with the Nikon 24-120mm f/4, or the Nikon 28-300mm, and the Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.8 ($200) for low light.  You should be able to get all of this equipment for around $2,500.

[glowsplint]

...I would venture that it is related to your skills rather than the camera.

I have very limited experience shooting sports so it's definitely my skills that I need to improve on. I've never had anyone to teach me to use a camera so I had to learn through trial and error.

...I also have limited free time, so I want the best gear possible, to make the most of the time that I have. 

It's awesome to be able to maximise your free time with your collection of equipment. I wish I'll be able to do that one day (perhaps in 2 or 3 years) but not in the near future. My priority is my studies for this coming year.

It appears that you like the Nikon D700, so why not just get a D700?  If you're going to shoot sports/action, the D700 can shoot 8 fps with a battery grip, and the the 51 point auto-focus system is better than the 5D MarkII for action.

My original post was made out of curiosity; I wasn't looking for purchase recommendations. Thanks for sharing those photos!

[bow26]

If you are concerned about the camera's capability to shoot sports, don't be. Sports photography relies more on the photographer's knowledge of the sport and photographic techniques. I have been shooting volleyball and basketball games for my school with my 550D and have managed to get some keepers. Sure it may be frustrating at times, but any dSLR can shoot sports.

As for your affinity to the D700, I would recommend that you pick up the D600 if you can afford it. The D600 has a better sensor and you won't have buyer's remorse.