# Nikon D300 Or Canon 5D Mk11



## Guest (Dec 3, 2009)

Got a workmate in the market for a new decent SLR. I've got a D300 which I like and he has had a play and also is impressed. He can pick up an older (not D300S) one new for just over a grand. BUT he is tempted by the Canon 5D mk11 with it's full size sensor after reading some good reviews. However it is more like Â£1800. Both need good glass obviously. Any thoughts?


----------



## Tom Radford (Apr 28, 2009)

What about the Nikon D700? Full size sensor, unrivaled Hi ISO, about the same price as the Canon and with fewer reported problems.


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

I disagree, the 5D Mkii seems to shade the d700 in most tests I have seen and it seemingly actually benefits from its large resolution advantage (unlike zillion pixel DX cameras like the 7D). If you want absolute clarity in landscapes etc then the 5Dmkii is your bag, if you want great high iso then the d700 is better (as it has larger pixel pitch) and if you really want sports or wildlife use then a good DX cam like the D300 still makes great sense as you have an inherent pseudo crop factor. I am a Nikon man but would currently go 5Dmkii if starting from scratch, but Nikon will prob have a 18Mpix FX cam out within the next 3 months anyhow.

Afterthought: the Nikon FX lens range is currently woefully short and missing even a basic decent walk around zoom unless you spend over a grand on the 24-70mm f2.8 or put up with the 24-120mm f3.5-5.6 which is universally panned. They will fix this but they haven't yet while Canon already has a comprehensive lens range, something else to consider...


----------



## Tom Radford (Apr 28, 2009)

If I recall the Canon had huge autofocus problems forcing a lot of pros over to Nikon at great expense, and many of them said they would never go back.

A friend of mine who is a pro avaition photog had 5 cameras from canon, and every single one failed. Needless to say he went out and bought a D3, D3x and D700 and has said he has never had such a great time with a range of cameras.


----------



## JTW (Jun 14, 2007)

Any existing lenses? If not then go for the Canon if he can afford it, I would. I have a canon 20D now and it has been a superb camera.

On the other hand any Canon or Nikon is likely to give good results, you just need to be a good photographer to get them though. (I wish I was one!)

Ian


----------



## Guest (Dec 4, 2009)

I did'nt know Canon were still having quality control problems. I know last year they had probs with sensor alignment and focusing issues (1DS?). I had a 10D a few years back with no problems but me being originally a Nikon guy it was nice to get back to 'the family'. The Nikon does seem to have a slight edge in build quality and I have never had one let me down yet (Had a few film ones in the past). My standard 'everyday'lens for the D300 is the Nikon 17-55mm which suits the sensor size well. As I have said to Steve wait 6 months and the game will change again so get the one he fancies in the new year (sales?). He likes landscapes so I think maybe a full size sensor is the way to go. He also likes the idea of the video on the 5D (probably be on the D700 soon?)


----------



## Padders (Oct 21, 2008)

It was the 1Dmkiii, the 1.3x crop not the full frame 's'model which had the issues with autofocus and they issued a recall for affected models to fix it, the rest of the Canon range has been untouched as far as I know. Nikon too have had their share of recalls due to failure in the past so Canon are no better or worse IMO. As I said above, for full frame the deal breaker for me is the lens choice which is why I would go Canon, for DX Nikon have it mostly covered. If you can afford a Nikon D3X though you probably dont need to worry about the cost of pro lenses though!



BathTone said:


> I did'nt know Canon were still having quality control problems. I know last year they had probs with sensor alignment and focusing issues (1DS?). I had a 10D a few years back with no problems but me being originally a Nikon guy it was nice to get back to 'the family'. The Nikon does seem to have a slight edge in build quality and I have never had one let me down yet (Had a few film ones in the past). My standard 'everyday'lens for the D300 is the Nikon 17-55mm which suits the sensor size well. As I have said to Steve wait 6 months and the game will change again so get the one he fancies in the new year (sales?). He likes landscapes so I think maybe a full size sensor is the way to go. He also likes the idea of the video on the 5D (probably be on the D700 soon?)


----------



## stonedeaf (Dec 3, 2008)

Just to throw my two pennuth in







what about the Canon 7D ?

Not full frame but it's had great reviews and built in video and I for one will be searching the January Sales for one to take over from my 10D which has performed brilliantly from new :clap:

I agree about the glass and owning several Canon Pro lenses think they have the edge over Nikon - just.

Whatever you get remember :-

Photography is like a sewer - what you get out of it depends upon what you put into it!! :groan:

Enjoy whatever you buy :cheers:


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2009)

It's quite amusing coz he just can't make his mind up!


----------



## Boxbrownie (Aug 11, 2005)

He will be happy with either......best advice is to handle both extensively side by side and "feel" which one he is happy with, the "in the hand feel" of the cameras are quite different.


----------



## itsguy (Nov 16, 2009)

Stonedeaf makes a good point - the 7D is cheaper and has much more useful video that the 5. It's a pity it's not the full 35mm but as a film maker I'd have it anyway since it shoots with a range of useful frame rates, not just an annoying 30fps. If video isn't important to you then maybe it's not a factor, but all DSLRs and 4/3 cameras with video are really an in-between generation, leading up to some true grail cameras that will come in the next 2 or 3 years. All the current generation shoot pretty amazing video, but have achilles heels of one sort or another due to the compression of the video, the rolling shutter, low light performance and so on. They are all pretty great already, but the ones that come out without these problems, and in particular with no detectable compression artefacts in 1080p at high frame rates in low light, cameras that will make hugely expensive professional HD video cameras almost redundant for a lot of serious uses - these are coming very soon.

Consequently, I think it's not worth spending too much at this particular time - what you need is a stop-gap that will tide you over until the next generation and still hopefully be sellable second hand to less fussy people. Which is why the 7 makes a lot of sense, and is also why I got the Lumix GH1 before the 7 was on the horizon. It's a joy to use, the video in 720p mode is generally stunning, and the results of bolting on cheap old eBay manual primes via an adapter are fantastic.


----------

