Canon EOS 5D Mark II versus Nikon D3

Boys and their toys...

Jerry, the original poster, just now mentioned that stitching is an option for the occasional large print - to

paraphrase, "big vista landscapes." If the goal is highly detailed output on par with LF film, none of the

current small format digital cameras provide nearly enough spatial resolution when used for single capture.

A big DSLR kit has considerable practical liabilities the moment serious high resolution digital compositing

becomes a considered technique. All the accoutrements, from tripod through robotic mount gets heavier, slower to

deploy, and much more expensive. The typical DSLR advantages of low self-noise and higher capture dynamic range

are no longer so compelling when the constraint on aggregate exposure time is removed.

If single capture really is still important, medium speed 6x7 MF film and a Nikon 8000/9000 or better will give a

better image file than small format DSLR, even now.

Mr. Gardner,

I don't know how your procurement went, but I ended up buying a 5D Mark II myself ! Expecting delivery early in the 4th week of December.

Hopefully, I'll be able to take some decent pictures! I'd be happy with a result half as good as you professional people!

I'll probably look around this forum a bit more and get some tips when I have my camera.

Cheers!

:)

<p>just an fyi... in case anyone is interested, tallyn's out of Illinois, has the new canon 5d mark ii lp-e6 batteries in stock (as of jan 16, 2009). they're $75 each. i just ordered 3 of them. they've been backordered and very difficult to find.<br>

<a href="http://www.tallyns.com/tpp/amazing/itemdesc.asp?ic=3347B001&eq=&Tp">http://www.tallyns.com/tpp/amazing/itemdesc.asp?ic=3347B001&eq=&Tp</a>=</p>

<p>Wow talk about your Canon and Nikon wars! I was afraid someone was going to start pulling hair and scratching, some of you girls were really going at it.<br>

Go Medium or Full Format film if your serious! If you want a body that you can drive nails with and take pictures of things that move go with the the D3. If it stands still and you want to put it under a microscope go with the Canon 5D MK II. As far as optics go both are fantastic, you have to make that decision. Art is best viewed at a distance. Your all kidding yourselves if you think you can tell the difference between 10 separate images made with both bodies and you were 12-15 feet away from the work. I don't even know why I replied to this nonsense of puffed up, prissy, better than you know it alls. I'll never do it again I can assure you of that!</p>

<p>Pixels, pixels, pixels! why is everyone so obsessed by pixels? There is little or no mention of lens quality, hardly any contribution on pixel quality and how Nikon/Canon have different ideas on what is 'realistic' and nothing whatsover on the old tired argument from the days when I was a freelance photo-jounalist, 'Sharpness v grain'. Translated this all becomes a tedious, unecessary waste of breath and keyboard time. OK the grouse gremlin is now despatched and I can add a few thoughts!<br>

The idea of big numbers resolution being the objective is clearly over-emphasised. Most of the current crop of 12-14meg digi cameras will produce 16 x 20 size prints equal to if not better than prints shot using Fuji Superia Reala 100ASA film shot through a Contax RTS (yeah I know it's as old as the hills!) + Zeiss Sonar 135 F1.8 mm portrait lens. I guess some of you will blanche and cry rubbish!....BUT pause and consider that the latest digital improvements are way way better in terms of resolving power than even my trusty old Contax or the shots we have all come to admire from the hands of masters like Penn, Bailey, Avedon, McCullin. BTW, I come with years of experience with 35mm and med format working with Blads, Nikon and Canon. In the last 15 years I have owned a Nikon D100, D200, and now a D3 with prime lenses. The D3 is for me the best all rounder but there again I need it's ruggedness and motordrive. Canon's 5D MkII is superb (I've seen A2 prints and they are 'sharper' LOL than those from the D3!) It is an excellent landscape/portait option but forget it for sport events! <br>

So what am I saying? Jerry...be less concerned about Nikon v Canon and the pixel/resolution war and try to analyse whether you would be a good/great photographer with any camera. If so go for a less expensive option with enough clout to extract your idea of a good 16" x 20"(most will do this..so look at other things like comfort, lens range, durability etc and concentrate of your style) On the other hand if like so many others you are simply obsessed with sharpness and believe that 'pixel power' is your thing, then go with the Canon...All IMHO of course!</p>