Author Topic: second hand d300 or second hand canon eos 5d?(equal price) (Read 7113 times)

nehbitski · « **on:** August 09, 2009, 15:12 »

let me explain a bit. I am a nikon user with two lenses(one 18-55, one 50mm prime) and I am inclined towards build quality of d300, but I am not sure it's best bang for buck. I shoot events and concerts, and I need a good high iso performance. I know d300 is good, but 5d is full frame. dpreview does not have a direct comparison, and on most discussion boards people seem to be polarized about the issue, which is definitely bad for a real confrontation of abilities. people talk about d300's far superior color rendition, does that hold in raw?
I also want to contribute to alamy, but so far I have been rejected because of inferior file quality(d50 is 6 megapixels) will 12 megapixels suffice? I am also worried about full frame problems such as "Edge softness / falloff / chromatic aberrations, needs good lenses" (dpreview) if anyone does have an idea about them, I'd be grateful. do full-frame really make a solid difference in image quality? I suppose a full frame body needs quality lenses. should I expect full-frame lenses to be more pricey than APS-C lenses? one of the reasons for thinking full-frame is the ability to use old secondhand(metal lens era) lenses if possible. but if they are absolutely equal, I'd be more inclined towards nikon, I have nikon lenses. if you have other suggestions also, I'd be more than happy to listen.

sincerely
burak

edit: well, I found this kenrockwell article
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-11/index.htm

that does have 5d versus d300 iso comparison, but unlike ken, I am not that sure about definite 5d victory. i mean, we all see 6400 is unusable(in print, microstock is locked to iso100) but under that it seems it's a tradeoff. 5d gets more detail in, but d300's noise is more unobtrusive like film grain. 5d's noise is disturbing even when there's not much. and for ken's shame, he didnt turn off d300's noise reduction, which renders his article totally inconclusive. any thoughts?

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #1 on:** August 09, 2009, 16:05 »

I just switched from 30d to 5d and would never use anything less than full frame anymore. Not only pixel quality is better, but you will also have a more shallow depth of field, which can be a nice effect if you take photos especially of people. Corner sharpness really can be an issue if you need the corners sharp. I had problems with corner sharpness even on the 24-70 L. But I could get them sharp with almost any prime I used, even the cheap 50mm 1.8. But if you take photos of people that should not be an issue.
I believe the most of canons Primes are good enough for full frame.

The screen on the old 5d is not really the best and I bet the autofocus on the Nikon is better, but for me the focus on the 5d is good enough (I have the Mark II version though).

Both cameras are more than enough for Alamy, but you still have to resize the images, before submitting.
But probably it is less hassle if you stay with Nikon since you already have Nikon equipment.

nehbitski · « **Reply #2 on:** August 09, 2009, 16:13 »

my nikon equipment consists of a kit lens and 50mm good ol' prime, so, not much worrying about change of brand. do you have any idea about their viewfinders, like which is bigger or better or so?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Poll

second hand one year of studio use canon 5d or second hand like new d300? price is equal($1400)

Author Topic: second hand d300 or second hand canon eos 5d?(equal price) (Read 7113 times)

nehbitski

Freezingpictures

nehbitski

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors