Nikon equivalent of Canon EOS-5D

[Rubycon]

What would it be?

 

[OdiN]

There isn't one right now.

 

[kaizersose]

i would say the closest thing is the D200. it is not a full frame sensor, but everything else is pretty similar.

 

[Rubycon]

The 5D is incredible. Saw someone taking pictures and had to bug them about it. Amazing camera!

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
The 5D is incredible. Saw someone taking pictures and had to bug them about it. Amazing camera!

Then get one.

 

[ProviaFan]

The D200 has almost as good resolution as the 5D, and for many photographers, a 35mm sensor doesn't matter (costing half as much as a 5D does, OTOH). </wink>

In other words, there's no reason that Nikon users should feel sad about the 5D. My experience with the D200 has been nothing but excellent, and I can't see myself wanting anything other than better quality (professional) glass to put on it.

 

[tfinch2]

I can't see spending 3k on a body that's not even weatherproof (5D).

 

[squirrelman]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
I can't see spending 3k on a body that's not even weatherproof (5D).

I couldn't see spending $2000 on a body that isn't Full Frame. When you are using Leica lenses via an adapter the only way to get wide is by using Full Frame.

 

[jpeyton]

D200 is the closest competitor.

Pros
Photo quality is similar.
Build quality is similar.
Price is A LOT less.
Non full frame sensor means more flexibility at telephoto.

Cons
Non full frame sensor means less flexibility at wide angle.

I won't get into a debate here about full frame vs. non full frame, but there are pros and cons of each. You have to ask yourself whether lens selection at wide angle or telephoto is more important. I personally shoot more at telephoto, so I prefer Nikon's smaller sensor. I can carry smaller telephoto lenses and get longer range with the crop factor. Noise and photo quality between full frame vs. non full frame are a toss-up.

 

[Mrvile]

There probably won't be either. Nikon has left the FF field, so the closest thing would be either the D200 or its predecessor.

 

[squirrelman]

Originally posted by: Mrvile
There probably won't be either. Nikon has left the FF field, so the closest thing would be either the D200 or its predecessor.

Not exactly, while Nikon hasn't made a FF there has been a FF 14mp f mount for years. Its the Kodak 14n/nx and SLR/n both are FF. Now they have there own problems, but in good lighting its supposed to be a wonderful camera. Every few months you see rumors about nikon finally doing full frame, they have started up again with Carl Zeiss releasing their ZF lenses.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
D200 is the closest competitor.

Pros
Photo quality is similar.
Build quality is similar.
Price is A LOT less.
Non full frame sensor means more flexibility at telephoto.

Cons
Non full frame sensor means less flexibility at wide angle.

I won't get into a debate here about full frame vs. non full frame, but there are pros and cons of each. You have to ask yourself whether lens selection at wide angle or telephoto is more important. I personally shoot more at telephoto, so I prefer Nikon's smaller sensor. I can carry smaller telephoto lenses and get longer range with the crop factor. Noise and photo quality between full frame vs. non full frame are a toss-up.

I wouldn't say the Nikon has more flexibility at telephoto. You can just crop the Canon if you want, and it'd give you the same "telephoto"

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
I wouldn't say the Nikon has more flexibility at telephoto. You can just crop the Canon if you want, and it'd give you the same "telephoto"

The extra resolution of the 5D cannot overcome the crop factor advantage that the D200 gives you in all cases. Yes, maybe with shorter lenses. But for example, if you were using a Sigma 70-200/F2.8 on either camera, the 100mm additional reach the D200 gives you at full telephoto can't be matched by cropping with the 5D.

But if you shoot a lot of landscapes, the 5D will give you a much better selection of wide angle lenses.

Here is a good specs comparison between the two.

 

[yhelothar]

12.8 MP vs 10.2MP.. so it works for about 1.3x crop
Not to mention the Canon 5D has better image quality at 100% crop to boot. So I'd say they're pretty similar if you cropped the 5D.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
I can't see spending 3k on a body that's not even weatherproof (5D).

I've talked with people who have used both the 20D and 5D many times in full on rain and have never had any problems.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: OdiN

I've talked with people who have used both the 20D and 5D many times in full on rain and have never had any problems.

That's great.

I'm a Canon person myself whereas most of the pros here are carrying Nikons. I've used both and have better feel for the Canon EOS cameras. I want one of my own.

Next question: the Sigma lenses are a lot cheaper than Canon (Japan) glass. Are the differences readily apparent?

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Next question: the Sigma lenses are a lot cheaper than Canon (Japan) glass. Are the differences readily apparent?

Depends on the usage, but yes. I have a Sigma 70-200 2.8F and the Canon L version is a ton better lens. The Sigma is soft at 200 or 2.8 and is even too soft for me at 3.2. It isn't as quick at focusing as the Canon version either.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn

Originally posted by: OdiN

I've talked with people who have used both the 20D and 5D many times in full on rain and have never had any problems.

That's great.

I'm a Canon person myself whereas most of the pros here are carrying Nikons. I've used both and have better feel for the Canon EOS cameras. I want one of my own.

Next question: the Sigma lenses are a lot cheaper than Canon (Japan) glass. Are the differences readily apparent?

Totally depends. Not just on individuals brands but also on individual lenses and quality control. I own or have owned Canon, Sigma, and Tamron lenses. After reading the Canon Lens Forum at DPreview.com, you begin to learn which lenses are great or just a good value or neither. Early adaptors tend to be safer with Canon lenses, though that is not always the case, like the recent 24-105 F4L. Many regard the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 as a sharper lens than the Canon 24-70 F2.8L at one-fourth the price. I can say it's a terrific lens in that sense. Though no Sigma nor Tamron lens I've owned comes close to a Canon lens in terms of auto focus speed and accuracy.

 

[ultimatebob]

If you think that the EOS 5D is cool, you should see the EOS-1Ds Mark II! 16.7 Megapixels of full frame goodness at 4 frames a second (drool)

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
If you think that the EOS 5D is cool, you should see the EOS-1Ds Mark II! 16.7 Megapixels of full frame goodness at 4 frames a second (drool)

Imagine how much of a headache it is to post process 16.7 MP images. None the less, I wish I had one.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
If you think that the EOS 5D is cool, you should see the EOS-1Ds Mark II! 16.7 Megapixels of full frame goodness at 4 frames a second (drool)

Imagine how much of a headache it is to post process 16.7 MP images. None the less, I wish I had one.

If you have money for that camera, you should have no problem buying a PC that can quickly handle files of that size. Something like an AMD X2 + 4GB RAM should do the trick.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
If you think that the EOS 5D is cool, you should see the EOS-1Ds Mark II! 16.7 Megapixels of full frame goodness at 4 frames a second (drool)

Imagine how much of a headache it is to post process 16.7 MP images. None the less, I wish I had one.

It isn't any worse than doing a 20D. Sometimes it's an advantage to bump up resolution in PS on a RAW file. I have sometimes converted to the equivalent of 24MPs.

Would I like a 1Ds? Sure! Because it's almost 17MP? No. That's secondary. The primary reason is weatherproofing, and it's rugged. The MPs come in handy when cropping, but I'd take a 20D class camera with more dynamic range than any DSLR currently on the market.

 

[GTaudiophile]

As everyone knows, the EOS-35D will be out very soon! Canon is being VERY tight-lipped about it and some feel that means it's going to be more revolutionary than evolutionary. Full-Frame for under $2K? Weather-sealed for under $2K? It's anyone's guess at this point.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
As everyone knows, the EOS-35D will be out very soon! Canon is being VERY tight-lipped about it and some feel that means it's going to be more revolutionary than evolutionary. Full-Frame for under $2K? Weather-sealed for under $2K? It's anyone's guess at this point.

Full-frame for 2k would be great. Weather-sealed for 2k wouldn't be anything new. Olympus already did that with the E-1 (I'm not trying to start a fight, just pointing out a fact).

 

[Koing]

Nikon PROBABLY won't have a FF DSLR. Look at the mount they use. It is TOO SMALL to support a FF sensor. Canon changed mount and that has proved very wise for now. Nikon didn't and people are shafted now.

Koing