Should I Enter the FF DSLR World with a 5div or a D850?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by hussain_al_lawati, Dec 1, 2017.


Should I Enter the FF DSLR World with a 5div or a D850?

  1. D850

  2. 5DIV

  1. Hi all.
    First of all, thanks to every one who reads and replies to this thread. You are highly appreciated.

    I am looking to upgrade to a full frame system with some marvelous lenses and that would be a serious purchase that would cost me around 7000 $ , so I believe I should wisely and carefully choose which system to go for, since it will last years with me, and mostly the lenses!
    I currently own a canon 650d (t4i) with two crop lenses, a canon 50mm f1.4 and 2 canon speedlites (for almost 5 years!) I shoot events, studio, fair amount of sports, family and travel, and some landscapes. I need a good low light performance. I further plan to enter the field of BIF, and macro.
    With the marvelous 5div and D850 in mind, it's difficult for me to choose among them. It's obvious that the Nikon out stands its counterpart at least on paper, but I am pretty accustomed to canon controls and ergonomics as I have used my friends' 5d iii at a fair rate, and I have a kind of 'emotional attachment' to canon bodies and lenses (thats not a big deal!). I have tried both systems (5diii and an aging D800) and it doesn't seem a big deal in switching systems since both are well ergonomically designed.
    Yeah .. then lenses. I plan to initially get native 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 along with the body, and after almost a year or less I would pick either a macro prime or something on the taller end; depending on the needs.
    The used market in my country is not so good, so I don't think I could buy new//sell old equipments and a good rate.
    Your responses are appreciated
    PS: Sorry if i have any grammar mistakes since am not a native speaker.
  2. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Moderator

  3. I still didn't make up my mind to any system.
    I posted this thread to hear new responses and thoughts.

    From all the search I have done for more than 2 months, I see that if the D850 had an EF mount and DPAF, I would blindly buy it!! But unfortunately that is not the case
    I wonder how D850's video capability is, is it not usable or usable, i.e poor or good?
  4. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Moderator

    I think any good photographer can use either Canon or Nikon or Sony ..., either DSLR or mirrorless ... to achieve excellent results. I just happen to have been shooting Nikon since 1977, some 40 years ago.

    If you have been using Canon, I would just continue using Canon unless there is something you really dislike, but in that case you wouldn't be asking on these forums.
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2017
  5. I agree.

    I was a Canon shooter for a while, and switched to Nikon kind of from the ground up-first from all mechanical SLRs and then grew into my entire workflow. There definitely was a learning curve for modern cameras(and even for older ones) as the buttons and dials are both differently placed and work differently(although a lot of that can be changed to preference-I just go to the default set-up).

    I would consider the OP's lens investment at this point to be basically insignificant so I would advise going with what feels and works best for them.

    If possible, I'd go and fondle both cameras in a real camera store and see which feels most right and natural. Finding a D850 in stock might be difficult(my local store has one on the rental shelf, but it's probably out more than in) but the D810 is at least passingly close to give a feel for the controls and general operation.
  6. Completely Agree

    For me, it is not a matter of disliking something in canon. Its just a critical turning point in my photography life since its a big purchase, and its sequences will be with me for at least 10 years (think about lenses)
    I know that both cameras are beasts, but the issue is that I want something that will be better in future (as well as now) for my needs.
  7. I have tried both. I was comfortable to both control-wise (and that is a big problem since it made the decision more tough!)

    One more concern is the lens performance. Will any of a Canon or Nikkor lens of same level (focal length and f/stop) outstand one another in a big manner?
    (thinking mainly about the 2407- and 70-200 both f2.8)
  8. These are staple lenses for both makers and tend to be refreshed every 5-10 years. You can probably find some metric where one performs better than the other. If one maker releases one of those lenses that's appreciably better in some way than the competition, you can probably expect the other to do even better in another year or two.

    When it comes down to it, the only real reason I see to select one of the big two over the other is if there's a PARTICULAR special purpose lens that one doesn't make or is clearly better in one system than the other. If you fall into that category, choose the system that serves you best with regard to that lens(or lenses).

    Otherwise, for the major lenses-fast midrange and tele zooms and mid-range fast primes, as I said I'd consider them effectively equal.
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  9. To me, Nikon currently have an advantage in dynamic range (and resolution) at low ISO (for landscape), and Canon have a video advantage due to PDOS. They're both extremely capable cameras. The handling philosophy is somewhat different - but then so is the handling difference between the Canon consumer (such as Eos 650D and my old 300D) and pro (e.g. 5D series) bodies (and between the Nikon D3x00/D5x00 series, D7x00/D6x0/D750 series, D300/D500/D700/D8x0 series and the single-digit Nikons). I, too, switched from a consumer camera knowing the handling was going to change anyway (in Canon's case, gaining the vertical rear wheel).

    The Canon vertical wheel always seemed more logical to me, but when I've tried it it slightly dislocates my thumb. I'm sure I'd get used to it. I prefer the Nikon "index finger on the shutter, middle finger for the front dial" approach, but as I described in another recent thread, I believe Canon's design lets you make changes faster, but Nikon's lets you change them without moving away from your shooting position. Take your pick.

    (Sorry, now seen the more recent post.)

    Nikon's current 70-200 f/2.8 ED is probably the best 70-200 on the market, but Canon are very close with the previous generation. Canon's 200-400 is probably better (but much more expensive) than the Nikkor version. The differences aren't huge - though I'm vaguely considering upgrading my 70-200 for better performance at f/2.8. Nikon's 14-24, which was an amazing lens at launch, is getting on a bit now (compared, slightly, to the Canon 12-24 f/4) - but any lens that's significantly behind the competition is likely to be high on the list for a revamp. I'm not especially sold on the Nikkor 24-70, but the Tamron versions are pretty good anyway.

    Canon can do autofocus f/1.2 lenses, if that bothers you. They're not usually optically all that good, however.

    I'm obliged to mention the Sony A7RIII. Sony are getting there with their lens selection, and at a reduced frame rate can use Eos lenses via an adaptor. There are things it can do that the D850 can't (sensor-shift resolution enhancement, phase detect video autofocus) and it's a bit better at high ISO. The D850, by reports, is a bit more responsive, writes data faster, may track autofocus better (but has less coverage and is much worse in video), has a tiny edge at ISO64, etc. There are arguments both ways on the EVF vs OVF debate. I'm still looking at a D850 upgrade for my D810, but I'm going to see a friend who's considering switching from his Eos 350D ("because my TV is higher resolution than my photos") and my advice to him would mostly be between the D850 and A7RIII - unless he has a good reason to go with the 5DIV.

    You have to try to have a bad system these days, and you'd expect significant changes in all the line-ups over time (though Canon have gone a long time with a bit less low-ISO dynamic range than Nikony). We might expect Canon and Nikon to produce high-end mirrorless cameras within the next few years, so bear that in mind if you're buying into a system - although it also won't suddenly turn a good camera into a bad one.

    That probably doesn't help. :)
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  10. Canon 5DMK1V
  11. If there was any big advantage to either Nikon or Canon lenses, one of them would no longer be in the professional camera business.

    You already have one full-frame compatible Canon lens, and two speedlites. It's only a small saving, but at least something.

    Personally, I'd price up the kit you intend to buy in total and see if there's any substantial difference between the two systems.

    What I wouldn't do is leap to buy the D850 before it's been 'beta tested' by real-world users for at least 6 months. Early adopters too often become early regretters.
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  12. None of us have a crystal ball here. We do not know what the future will bring. Some will argue mirrorless is the future, but one can also argue that DSLRs will stick around for quite some time. And do you know your own future needs? Things do change over time, and so will your needs.
    So, you cannot really plan for the future, and most certainly that planning will not depend on the camera you buy today, because next year something better will come out, and the year after somebody else may again raise the bar, etc. etc.

    If you have no reason to switch brands, don't. And for all you've described, you've got no reason to switch brands.
  13. You're overthinking this. You already cleared one hurdle in the process as you seem to be fine with either control layout and ergonomics. Rodeo_joe's and Ben's remarks on optical performance of the lenses you are considering initially should clear another: there are differences but they hardly matter.

    The OP seems to have made up his mind on not considering Sony, so no need to muddy the waters by bringing it up again.

    Two hits squarely on the nail's head.

    And bingo, we have a winner - buy the Canon 5D MkIV and don't ever look back and question your decision - there's only misery to be found going down that path. The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence - which means, it does so again once you cross the fence.

    I need to emphasize a point Wouter made: you should certainly not base your decision on the camera alone as you are buying into a system; so you need to look at the overall picture.
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  14. [Weird. I lost the ability to post there for a bit.]

    tholte: I admire your concision, but could you show your working? :)

    Joe: Certainly true of some recent Nikon (and Canon, and Sony) cameras. I would say that the issues with other Nikon bodies showed up fairly quickly, and the D850 is, as far as I know, mostly free of them. This doesn't guarantee that nothing will come up, but I'd be feeling pretty confident by this stage. Of course, given supply issues, the D850 will probably have been on the market for six months by the time you can actually get hold of one, if you order now. :) (I've stopped hoping for the January sales...) Total system price is relevant, though.

    Wouter: Agreed about crystal balls. However, I'm also sympathetic that a single 50mm f/1.4 isn't really a reason to stay with a system compared with the money being discussed - especially since there's a chance Hussain would be better with the Sigma Art 50mm (or Nikkor 58mm) anyway given the sensor capabilities. That doesn't help much - all I'm really doing is arguing against the one helpful way you've given to pick a solution - but still. :)

    Personally I wouldn't buy a 5DIV right now: I care about the areas where it's weaker than the other two, I don't care enough about its strength in video, and I'm not sufficiently fond of the handling. Technically (unsurprisingly for an older camera) I think it's a step behind the D850 and A7RIII, though it's a small step. Lots of people have different priorities and preferences from me, and that's not something I'll argue with.
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  15. There again, in the "special purpose" category Canon pretty much is king across the board in super-fast primes. Even in the film days they had limited relevance as the depth of field wide open and overall optical performance compared to f/1.4 and slower lenses is usually worse.

    Canon has made a handful of f/1.2 and faster lenses in the EF mount, while with Nikon your only options for f/1.2 are the old pre-AI/AI 55mm 1.2 and the AI Noct-Nikkor. The AI 55mm I have is honestly not a great lens. I've never used a Noct-Nikkor and while it is appreciably better it's still an infant aspherical(back before hybrid and molded lenses, and before even the dirt cheap kit lenses had asphericals) and has some weird artifacts that show up from that.

    Still, like I said the DOF at f/1.2 is tiny and your focus-whether AF or manual-must be dead-on. More normal and obtainable(in a financial sense) f/1.4 and even f/2 and 2.8 lenses can give nice blurry backgrounds with enough DOF to actually keep all of your subject in focus.
    Andrew Garrard likes this.
  16. Hossein: Have you? I only read the other thread belatedly, but it wasn't clear to me that you'd given up on the idea. That one seems to be discussing frame rate and low light performance, at which point we should start talking D5 (or 1Dx-II), but it's not really a landscape camera.

    I agree that, given the rate of advances, the reasons for switching system have to be really good reasons. But I'm afraid I'm going to be with Hossein that having a relatively budget camera and one moderately cheap full-frame lens doesn't - by the standards we're talking about - really constitute "being in a system", especially given how much the ergonomics will change between those cameras. I'd start from scratch EXCEPT that Hossein has expressed an attachment to Canon. Which says to me that switching might always leave a nagging feeling of doubt. In contrast, by the time I'd switched systems from Canon, Canon had annoyed me so much with the artificially crippled firmware on the 300D (compared with 10D) and their delay in releasing a 5D2 that I was prepared to switch just to spite them!

    Switching an entire system is an expensive proposition. I would say, though, that a lens isn't really "for life" any more. Film resolution was film resolution, but there are plenty of lenses that turn out not to hold up when you go to a high res sensor, and get replaced. Since switching to Nikon I've acquired and later disposed of a 28-200 (very heavily used on my D700), 135mm f/2 DC, Samyang 85mm, Sigma 150-500, two 80-200 f/2.8s and a 500mm f/4. In the future I'm already planning to replace my 70-200 and 85mm f/1.8, and I'm vaguely wondering whether Nikon will update the 14-24. Bear in mind that Sigma will switch their lens mounts for you (IIRC) even if you swap again in the future - and I switched a tilt-shift from Canon to Nikon (though not very well).
  17. And the AiS 50mm f/1.2, which possibly is still available new.

    I guess that depends. When (if?) I'm going to get a D850, it will be despite its high resolution, not because of it. The importance of matching lens resolving power and sensor resolving power may be important to some, but sure not all. I'd continue to use my old lenses, knowing they won't come close to generating 36 or 45MP of resolution - but I love how they render an image, and I care far more for that than for some pixel-perfectness. So, personally, I don't buy too much into the argument that lenses need to be replaced if you get a high resolution sensor.

    Since the OP is already overthinking things, the whole point of swapping lenses because the new camera has more pixels is - in my opinion - only complicating things further, and dealing with theoretical possibilities that may never happen.
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  18. I don't have a problem with soft lenses; I have had a problem with lenses that have significant chromatic aberrations and other unsightly artifacts that are much more visible at higher resolutions. Still, no lens is perfect. Since I rarely print, but often view online where I can zoom, I don't have the "enough resolution for a big print" argument going for me, but I've been known to save an image by just shrinking it. Decent lenses stay good lenses, I just think it's been argued that you'll never want to replace decent glass - and I'm not sure that's true.

    I am known for over-complicating things. :) I think I was really trying to suggest that being tied into a system isn't as permanent as it once seemed. (So pick one and go with it.)

    Honestly, we have every reason to believe the D850 is an amazing camera, and I've no reason to believe the 5D4 isn't very good as well (even if my shooting aligns poorly with its weaknesses). I get that there's a lot of money resting on it and you want the best you can get, but it's like choosing between a Ferrari and a Lamborghini - they're very different, but owning either will make you happier than sitting around trying to make a decision.
    hussain_al_lawati likes this.
  19. The fact that Sony isn't mentioned in his post here and doesn't show up in the poll seems a pretty good indication to me that it decision is down to Canon or Nikon;)

    Using myself as an indicator (rather small sample size to be statistically relevant), but it might be that having two systems, each for specific tasks, becomes increasingly a possibility. There was very little reason to have Canon and Nikon alongside each other (though I know people who do) - but having either Canon or Nikon and a Sony (like in my case) isn't that far fetched (or any other mirrorless, for that matter).
  20. Might I ask why the Canon 5Ds/R is not on your list?

    Pick the camera that feels best in your hands and whichever’s meny system seems most intuitive to you. Both are excellent systems and neither will disappoint you.

Share This Page