August 1
D700 + 35mm f/2,0 jpeg from camera.
Same photo processed in Lightoom 2 (with beta profile D2X mode 3)
After getting some recommendations about Lightroom 2 i tried downloading the beta camera profiles from Adobes website. While these makes it slightly better, I’m still not happy. The problem is how the colors from skin-tones and all the way to yellow are rendered. I think they look flat and unnatural in Lightroom, and no matter how much i try to adjust the HSL, i still can’t get it to look the way i want. The above example is not really a good one, but have a look at the yellow tones in the upper left corner and also the difference in color of the drivers face, and you might get a hint of what I’m talking about. Also note the blown highlights in the bottom image, even though they could probably have been recovered with the recovery-slider. With some tweaking it would probably be possible able to make adjustments to make the bottom photo look more like the upper one, but having to do that with more or less every photo is not really my idea of fun. I should probably also mention that I’ve done some slight curves adjustments and added USM in Photoshop to both photos. The comparasion is by no means scientific, but rather boils down my experience as a user of the software currently avaliable to process the NEF-files from the D700. Processing the files from the 5D in Lightroom gives me similar results, both now and last time i tested it (when Lightroom 1 was released). My point is simply that Capture one 4 gives me results more like how i want them to look with less work, that’s why I use it.
And yes, i prefer to boost the contrast and colors in my photos quite a lot, as you might have noticed.
On photos without these colors however, i think Lightroom 2 is a joy to use.
D700 + 70-210mm f/4-5,6 For this kind of (boring) shots, Lightroom works fine
D700 + 24mm f/2,8. This guy was sleeping so hard he didn’t even notice that i processed him through Lightroom.
I used the D700 all day both today and yesterday, and I’m quite convinced that it will be the camera I’ll keep. Not so much because it’s image quality, but rather because of its handling and because the speed of the D700 makes it possible for me to take shots i might have missed with the 5D. One feature I’ve really enjoying is the fn-button, on the front on the camera next to the lens. I’ve assigned it to spot metering, so whenever there’s a tricky lighting situation, i just keep it down while pressing the shutter. Simply a great feature, and i don’t understand how I’ve survived without it before.
D700 + 70-210mm f/4-5,6 (and contrast pushed slightly too far)
Remember back in the film days? When there was no difference what so ever in image quality no matter what body you used. The only difference between the cheap Eos 1000 and the 10+ times more expensive Eos 1 was the handling, speed and build quality. The difference between the 5D and the D700 is somewhat similar, even though the price difference is less dramatic this time.
July 31
Just a quick update. Adobe recently released version 2 of Lightroom, their software for raw development, and the first third party software with support for the D700. I downloaded the demo just to discover that it still is what i consider near to useless. I really like the interface of Lightroom, and it seemed really quick browsing and editing the files from the D700. Lightroom also has the best tools for recovering details in blown highlights out of the software i’ve used. The big problem with Lightroom however, is that it uses Adobes Camera Raw-algorithm that renders skin tones in a ugly way. People gets a disguisting orange tint that just looks awful. This occurs in most lighting conditions, and even if it’s possible to somewhat correct this by adjusting the white balance and in post processing, I find it really hard to get satisfying results. My raw converter of choice, Capture One 4, gives by far better results straight without any tweaking what so ever, unfortunately it doesn’t support the D700 yet. Nikons own software, Capture NX 2, gives good results but is so slow i wouldn’t even consider using it even if it was free.
D700 with 35mm f/2,0 wide open, one of few shots i managed to get to look alright after processing it with Lightroom 2
July 30
5D and the 16-35mm “L” f/2,8. I love the FOV of this lens, but i dont love the (lack of) sharpness when wide open. This shot is at f/4. If i’ll decide to “go Nikon” i will probably get the 14-24mm f/2,8 soon.
After using the D700 for the last couple of days i decided to bring my 5D today. I was going for a hike in a nearby mountain with a friend, and thought the 16-35mm would come in handy in case we came across some interesting scenery (unfortunately, we didn’t).
5D and the Tamron 28-75mm f/2,8.A great lens for a great price!
It did really feel awkward to use the slightly flimsy 5D after getting used to the tank-built D700, and i also really missed the lovely screen. It is really hard to judge the exposure by using the screen, usually the pictures look overexposed on the 5D i always have to look at the histogram to confirm that is actually correct.
When coming back home it was already dark, so i pushed the ISO up to 800 and did some low light shots with the 16-35mm and the 50mm, and they did actually come out quite OK, i would say that the low light capabilities of the D700 is not really that much better than on the D5. On really high ISO its another story though, but for demanding work (magazines, stock photography) i think ISO 1600 is still not usable. ISO 800 is probably the upper limit for both cameras.
After editing the pictures you see here, i must say that i’m not really sure if i’m ready to replace the 5D. The D700 is more fun to use, feels better, is quicker and more reliable exposure-wise, but when it comes to the final image the differences are really really small. I will use the D700 a couple of more days before i make a final decision…
5D at ISO 800, color rendition is slightly less impressive than the D700
5D: Another ISO 800 shot, noise levels are impressive on the 5D, considering its 3 years old.
… Or one week to convince me.
July 29
I recently got a comment on one of my Flickr uploads from a guy asking me to share my impressions of the Nikon D700. Nikons new (and in my view first really interesting) DSLR. I’ve been using a Canon Eos 5D (and prior to that a Eos D30 and Eos 10D) before i got the D700.
Ever since i started doing digital photography I’ve been looking for an affordable full frame camera, the 5D has been the only camera living up to that until now. Will it be worth switching from a 5D to the new D700? that’s what i’m going to try to find out.
But to make this whole text make any sense, i think you need to know a bit more about me, and what i find important when it comes to using a camera. I’m a freelance journalist and photographer currently living in Tokyo (at least for another week). I bring my camera everywhere i go, since i never know when i might stumble upon something that might end up as a sell-able photo (that can be anything from stock photography to feature articles aswell as news stories). Since i carry my camera around all the time, i prefer it to be as small and light at possible (that’s why I’m not even remotely interested in the D3 or Eos 1 series, i want my back to keep working until i get old…).
The 5D has been serving me well. It delivers top class image quality, but still its small enough to keep in my bag all day. I’ve been perfectly happy with it for those 3 years it has served me, so why even consider replacing it, i hear you ask. Well, 3 reasons:
1: Most importantly, I’m not really happy with my lenses, i own a Canon 16-35mm f/2,8, a Tamron 28-75 f/2,8 and a Canon 50mm f/1,8. The widangle feels really good, well built and great ergonomics, but the image quality does not live up to the price tag, at least not as long as its not stopped down 2-3 stops. The Tamron doesn’t feel as well built but it’s image quality is good even wide open . It’s also so much smaller than the 24-70 f/2,8 by Canon, something that along with the L price tag of the Canon lens made me rule it out as an option. The 50mm feels cheap and is not really usable unless it’s stopped down to 2,8 or smaller, therefore it hardly gets any use. For a long time i’ve been wanting to switch to primes instead, finally I’ve got a good reason to actually do so.
D700: 35mm f/2,0
Reason 2: The D700 seems sweet in many ways. Most importantly it’s supposed to handle high ISO much better than the 5D. One extra stop of sensitivity would be reason enough for me to upgrade. I think ISO 400 is the highest usable setting on the 5D to make sure that the pictures live up to the high technical demands of some stock photo agencies. For newspaper work it’s another story, they are far less demanding, and even a ISO 1000 picture is usable for that purpose. (But usable doesn’t equal good looking, and i prefer if my photos are actually looking good rather than just “usable”).
D700: ISO 800 seems to work better on the D700 than the 5D
Reason 3: I’m in Japan right now. Cameras are much cheaper here than in Sweden. Since i will be able to sell my 5D kit for about the same price as i paid for my D700 kit, makes it easier to motivate the switch…
So, now i’m going to use both of the cameras during my last week in Japan. When I’ll return to Sweden i will part from one of them.
I’ve already had the D700 (along with Nikkor 24mm f/2,8, 35mm f/2,0 and 50mm f/1,4 lenses) for a couple of days, and my first impressions are:
- D700 feels much better in my hands than the 5D. Superior build quality, and even if the button layout takes some getting used to, I’m sure i will work as fast or even faster with the new camera. It also feels as the D700 would withstand more bumps and accidents than the 5D.
- More buttons on the D700, it’s confusing at first, but will probably be a good thing in the long run.
- 5D is a bit lighter than the D700, when it comes to weight less is more for me, so that’s to the 5D’s favor.
- The screen on the D700 is nothing short of lovely. Razor sharp, compared to the 5D it’s actually usable. It’s easy to see if a photo is good or bad by using the screen.
- Autofocus is better on the D700. More focus points and the joystick on the back makes choosing the point easy and quick. The auto selection mode also works much better, shooting from the hip is much easier with the D700 than the 5D.
- Viewfinder blackout and serial shooting is faster with the 700D. 5fps vs 3fps, quite nice, but not in any way a dealbreaker for me
- Exposure is better on the D700. Many of my shots with the 5D turns out overexposed, im not sure if that’s because of me, my lenses or the camera, but the D700 seems far far far far far far far more reliable in this regard (this is a big thing!!!).
- Built in flash on the D700! Great! I almost always use available light, so being able to not have to carry around a flashgun all the time is a great thing!
- The Nikon primes are great, they are a joy to use, but I’m a bit annoyed by the rotating focus ring. Too bad no other than the really expensive primes have the Nikon equivalent of USM… Image quality is great too. The 35mm seems to deliver razor sharp pictures even at f/2,0. 24mm lens is not as impressive, and the 50mm is quite soft wide open (this wasn’t really a surprise though). I also picked up a 70-210mm f/4-5,6, because i found a ridiculously cheap second hand copy in great condition, it might come in handy someday…
D700: Accurate focus and metering makes it easy to shoot candids
For more photos, check my Flickr Photostream
That’s it for today, i will keep reporting here every day this week.
またね！
English
Svenska
Recent Comments