dumping Nikon... 5d mark I & 60d or 5d mark II

[5d-creative]

<p>Howdy all, I appreciate any responses to my first post here.<br>

I am having a serious problem with Nikon over a warranty issue on a d700. It's been so bad I am considering jumping ship to Canon. I have recently started a photography business and am doing portrait and commercial work though my true love is more fine art related.<br>

I am seeing a couple of options and as always money is a bit of a concern but I don't want to cheap out.</p>

<p>Option a: 5d mk II with 17-40mm f4, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8 and 70-200 f4<br>

Option b: 5d mk I and 60d with 17-40mm f4, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8 and 70-200 f4<br>

Option c: 5d mk I with better glass than what's listed above.</p>

<p>My fine art work isn't resolution intense so 12mp on my d700 has been working fine. Two more thoughts. One, I'm concerned about not having a second body and being able to have the 70-200 mounted on the 60d seems like a nice option for possible event work. Two, I am really intrigued by the video capabilities of these cameras though I don't see it being part of the business in the near future.<br>

So is the old 5d mk I still up to the task?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your advice.</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>The 5D mk 1 has been discontinued for over a year, but with a little searching you should be able to find a clean used one if that's the route you go. I still shoot with the 5D mk 1 and it's a very good camera, though the mk 2 has a lot of improvements beyond just resolution - live view, better LCD, video, improved low-light performance, etc. So I'd go with option A. If you need a backup body you could add a lower-cost model, like a 30D or 40D, or XSi or T1i.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Option, a. Then save and get a secondhand 50D.</p>

<p>Having said that, I really like the D700, I'd be very reluctant to give up on it over a service issue.</p>

[teneson]

<p>Go for option a. In 3 years, the 5DMII will be the backup camera to a newer body.</p>

[dan_south]

<p>If you want to buy a Canon, buy a Canon for its own merits. Don't ditch a perfectly good camera over a spat with customer service. I realize that you're upset, but it's not a good idea, it will cost you plenty, and having one person jump ship isn't going to teach them any sort of lesson.</p>

[5d-creative]

Thanks for the responses. The problem isn't really a principle one but a pratical one. My d700 is splattering oil on the low

pass sensor at such a rate that a wet cleaning would be needed after every 500 or so shutter releases. I simply don't

want to be cleaning a camera sensor that often (regardless of the right and wrong of the matter). Almost all of my nikon

glass was purchased second hand so there won't be a huge loss there.

 

They have had three cracks at fixing the problem and the camera has been away for service for almost a month and a

half. I've requested a replacement and they may do that but if they don't and fail to fix it I'll need to consider other options.

 

Both companies make fine tools, all I really want to do is use them.

 

Cheers.

[ridinhome]

<p>Out of curiosity - couldn't you use your Nikon glass on the Canon, at least for your fine art and portrait work? </p>

[wgpinc]

<p>It's business. Buy another D700 and try to get them to replace the one you have that is obviously a lemon. I have never heard anyone else with your particular complaint so it must not happen very often. I use the 5D Mark II and it is a fine camera with outstanding image quality, but you should probably stay with the one that you are familiar with. Good luck!</p>

[5d-creative]

Yes I could continue to use some of the lenses and I plan to but honestly I think the 5d ii sensor will out resolve most of

them. But for work related photography I prefer autofocus lenses as my eyes are not exactly L glass if you know what I

mean.

 

It's a bit difficult to step up to the bar and buy another d700 body after the customer service hassle I've been through but it

is an option I'm considering.

 

Cheers.

[ken schwarz]

<p>I strongly recommend the 70-200 f/4 IS over the plain f/4. IS works wonders with a tele zoom and makes it much more practical as a hand-held lens. To pay for it, I'd skip the 50/1.4 or the 85/1.8, depending on your taste.</p>

[wang_erwin]

<p ><a name="00XFyN"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=20739">Ken Schwarz</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /></a>, Sep 10, 2010; 07:59 a.m.</p>

 

<p>I strongly recommend the 70-200 f/4 IS over the plain f/4. IS works wonders with a tele zoom and makes it much more practical as a hand-held lens. To pay for it, I'd skip the 50/1.4 or the 85/1.8, depending on your taste.</p>

<p>fully agree<br>

the IS version is not simply adding IS to plain version.all optical performance improved to high level.<br>

a fifty is always needed.So just forget about the 85</p>

 

[sarah_fox]

<p>How about selling your D700 somewhat cheaply to someone who does mostly sports photography (and uses mostly larger apertures), and buying another D700? I think it's pretty crummy of Nikon not to fix the problem for good, but I have to agree with Dan South that jumping ship is a pretty costly choice.</p>

<p>If you find you must jump ship, I'd also recommend the IS on the 70-200/4, and I'd recommend the 100mm f/2.0 as a better alternative to the 85mm f/1.8 for a full frame camera (more useful focal length for portraiture, very slightly sharper lens, not as popular, approx. same cost). I'd also recommend the 5DII. The 5DI (which I own). The 5DII is so much better in many respects. I look forward to upgrading to it after the 5DIII is released. I'd also recommend considering the 24-105, which is a very comfortable, useful, all-around lens.</p>

[j.r._valenzuela]

<p>One thing that hasn't been brought up regarding the 5D Mark II or full frame DSLRs in general is depth of field. The difference between crop and full frame is quite striking with portraiture and many art applications, so depending on what specifically you are photographing, you would have much more flexibility.</p>

<p>Live View is a great enhancement, especially low light/critical focus. With the 5D Mark I, I often had to reshoot later or spend agonizing minutes squinting through the viewfinder or zooming in on the LCD after the shot to confirm focus. With long night exposures, that got mighty old.</p>

<p>Video has proven its worth with something as simple as recording information and context for a still shot. What were the sounds, what did it look like beyond the frame, can I say something in the video to remind me of something I might forget or don't want to write down?</p>

<p>Lens selection seems good, though I might consider the 35mm 2.0 for lower light on the wide end.</p>

<p>Whatever you choose, good luck and sorry you've had such frustration.</p>

[elliot1]

<p><em>"They have had three cracks at fixing the problem"</em> What have they said is wrong with your camera? Which Nikon repair facility are you using? If you don't get the solution you want, perhaps try sending it do a different location and see if you get better results.</p>

<p> </p>

[frolickingbits]

<p>If you're not doing weddings, I think option A is your best choice, since having a backup would be a good thing, but not as critical for portraits and commercial. I have both the original 5D and the Mark II, and they are both amazing cameras.<br>

That being said, I agree with the others that if you've been happy with your Nikon other than the repair issue, I would stick with that, and get a replacement camera while you try to get the D700 fixed properly. Canon customer service an QC have their problems too, so don't assume that just by switching you will instantly have better service.</p>

[markonestudios]

I understand your reservations. If you do decide the 5D2 is your horse, consider getting a factory refurbished one (like I did). It is still covered by a warranty and will save you some $$$.

[akrider_rider]

<p>I only use canon since 1978, always great results.</p>