Buy a Used 5D or a New Nikon N7000?

A few years ago I sold my 5D after deciding I wanted to focus my efforts on medium format film for my fine art work. While I still shoot

with my Hasselblad, there are times I wish I had that 5D! It was quite a remarkable camera. My favorite lens was the 50mm non L.

 

Anyway, I see the 5D2 is around 2K and the third generation is even more!

I'm fine with 12 MP and I don't print that big.

I was thinking about buying a used body, since I see they are cheap on eBay,now. It looks like I can pick one up for $700.00. But part of

me feels reluctant buying 4 year old digital technology in this day and age when things are being improved so quickly. I have no qualms

buying a 30 year old Hasselblad film camera! Film is film and it's a constant and unchanging, but digital cameras, I'm not sure.

 

Alternatively, for $1000.00 I could buy the new Nikon N7000 or equivalent non full frame Canon product.

 

I would love some opinions on this.

I dont own the big body ,camera any more,and film u have I would be a failure at using, i only get nerdy stuff,brain wise, so heres my two

cents, I have done much research on both side, Canon n Nikon, and a few more although I primarily use Canon about 6 different Eos

bodies, Junkie i know, well I was going to buy a new entry full body and after dojng much reading and hands on the two comparitvie

cameras is the crop sensor versions are equally as effective and the primary reason is the snesir is still the same size ,but what it see is

not,with th extra processors and etc, the crop new ones are exceptional, I mingle with a lot of shooters who have all these cameras and

we discuss this stuff a lot, most of them make their living form cameras so , they are straight up, i make money to buy equipment, by

usimg the cameras, otherwise Im not driven by money.So to buy the used one for 7 or new one for a K,if I were absolutely 100 perecnt of

how perfect the used one was , and how many actuatins yiu would have and its history in general,id buy the used one from ebay, in fact I

ough a used 40 d last week offf ebay from a pro shooter in San Fransciso, the camera was flawless with 5 k on the shutter ,gave 340 and

15 prioroity mail, was thrilled ,so 340 is wa ways from 700 and further from 1,000 I suggest you physically go to the camera store, for me

its Murphys camera, and put yur memory in a spand shoot in and out of the store they let me do it alot.then i Decide,on what I would buy

,Sounds like im tlelling u many things but my mind has to be sure I was happy with my choice.

Sorry about the typos this ipad , is never right even if iget lucky and am right, the spell checker is almost always wrong.

<p>wow...<br>

Jim's Ipad has given us a moment to breathe... and laugh...and shake our heads...<br>

...and back to the question...<br>

The 5D isn't ~4yrs old. That would be the 5D2 (well, 3.75yrs old any way). The 5D is nearly 7yrs old. For $1000, you'll not find another camera capable of what the 5D can do - full frame, great high ISO imagery (even @ ISO3200). But you'll find plenty of cameras that can do what the 5D cannot - 18mp (or 15, or 16.6, or 17), 5fps (+), better AF, pretty LCDs, large buffers, nice menus, touchscreens, etc.</p>

<p>So, if you have $1000, and do portraiture, or studio work, landscapes, or need pristine high ISO, or shallow DOF, there is only one choice. But for a broad variety of *other* work, get a Rebel, or xxD, or.. a Nikon. And be happy.</p>

 

Mmmm now we see why I dont have a big body camera,Good thing, was I even close

<p>I totally forgot that you can get a FF 1Ds for ~$1000 as well. Though it is even older, and is somewhat limited in capabilities (ISO 1250 max for example). With exception to AF and build, it is significantly behind the 5D in terms of digital imaging capability.</p>

<p>If you can stretch your budget to a refurbished 5D II from Canon, that is what I would do. Otherwise the 5D or the 1Ds. I would not switch to Nikon for a crop body. You can get a used Canon 7D close to your budget or get a used 60D. </p>

<p>John Crowe +1, IMHO.<br>

Not that there's anything wrong with people who shoot Nikons, I still do myself sometimes. </p>

<p>Try both and see, but usually once a person is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprinting_%28psychology%29">imprinted</a> on the control system of either, it's harder than you'd think to adjust to the other.</p>

I've owned both the 5D classic and Mark II as well as a 1Ds and a Nikon D7000. I would take a 5D classic any day over the D7000 if shooting at low ISOs and not expecting the world's greatest AF. It is a tremendous camera. 5DII is of course that much better. I have 133k shutter actuations on mine. D7000 is very responsive and has great low light and action capabilities, as well as very accurate metering, but it can't match the overall look of the 5D in my opinion.

 

The 1Ds is a great camera if shooting at base ISO. If I recall, I really like the look of color matrix 3 on the 1Ds.

<p>fine art, you said? Then 5D is the answer.</p>

<p>On the other hand if you are looking for family, sports, or just general do-it-all Nikon D7000 or Canon 60D are good options.</p>

For pure photographical goodness behest of any doodads, few can best the 5d. It is abit archaic to use and a bit frumpy compared to newer cameras. But the images are superb.

I spent sometime with a Nikon D7000 (I presume that's what you are referring as opposed to a N7000), and I am not impressed with the handling. Small body with buttons cramped on it. It reminds me of a Rebel. I know Dx0 says its sensor is awesome and whatnot. However in actual real world usage, I don't see any different compared to any APS-C images.

 

What makes the 5dc great is its raw files. They are so maleable and takes abuses very well. Don't know why. If you don't need the bells and whistles of newer cameras, the 5d is nice photography device.

I made the switch from Nikon to Canon 5D2 a couple of months ago on the grounds that most of my Nikon DX kit was old and due for replacement. Resolution of the 5D2 is so far ahead of anything I've used and low light performance is impressive. A Nikon D7000 is very good and the resolution is fine for most purposes. I had a few surprises with the 5D2; firstly the Dynamic Range is not as good as I had expected; the Nikon D300S using 14bit NEF files has the edge when it comes to high contrast.

A/F is not so good if you are shooting moving subjects. This is a well known issue and if you are trying to use a 5D2 for sport you are using the wrong tool.

The Video and Audio was one reason for the switch. The video and sound using an external mic is excellent and totally outclasses the Nikon Video in low light high noise situations like a live music bar for example.

Making the Nikon/Canon switch was expensive and using both for a short while has been a nuisance. I'm now selling all my Nikon kit to buy a 2nd canon body.

If you are just into still imaging and have no interest in video, or like shooting in the dark, like I do; I'd stick with Nikon.<div></div>

<p>Sorry the Image was shot at 1/40th Sec F1.4 on a 5D2 in what looked to be almost impossible conditions in a dark bar with the girl singer almost in silhouette. This is straight from the camera.</p>

<p> </p>