Canon EOS 5D Mark 1 vs Nikon D700

Yes, I thought that would get some attention. But not for the reasons you might have thought.

I am, for this week at least, on a crusade to champion the cause of "old" cameras.

Jealous because I do not have Nikon's D850 in my bag next to Canon's 5D Mark IV? Yes, possibly to some degree. Even more so if that included all the landscape and portraiture glass I could possibly lust over.

But here is the thing. I have been around long enough to know that camera bodies upgrade often. In regular English this is also described as the concept of plummeting value. If you are not making a good living out of your equipment this is a rather poor investment.

For that reason I bought myself a third 5D Mk1 when the opportunity came up. I stupidly sold the first two during random acute attacks of upgraditis. There REALLY is such a word AND recognised condition, I kid you not! I am happy to report that, contrary to the authoritative link supplied, it was not terminal in my case. Needless to say, when the "old" D700 jumped into my bag I did not lose much sleep or cry many tears.

But how good is a 12 Megapixel camera really in this day and age of 40+ megapixel cameras? There are some very real concerns such as ageing batteries and parts availabilty. Then there is the issue of service agents which makes me very sorry that I did not go Nikon from day 1.

Back to the actual story...the images you are about to see are absolutely as-is off-camera jpegs with the only alteration having been cropping down to 800 pixels x 1200 pixels to fit better and use less data.

The two cameras were set up as similarly as possible in terms of sharpness, saturation and contrast being as neutral as possible. Since the Nikon does not have 100 ISO in it's unexpanded range the Canon was shot at 200 ISO.

Exposure info was often bumped up to 800 ISO but never higher. Aperture was mostly around f/4. Exposure compensation of -1 EV was mostly used shooting in Aperture Priority mode. Given all this I left shutter speed to the camera. They both performed well with this.

Now, comparing these two cameras might look like a fair competition. They are both 12 Mp full frame 35mm D-SLR camera bodies. This means that practically everything else will be the same, right?

In reality the D700 is about 3 years newer than the Canon 5D Mk1 or Classic or whatever you want to call it. Three years in camera technology equate to a few geological eras if you choose to believe those millions and billions of years fables. It has live view and it shoots video. These are things the Canon 5D Mk1 is not capable of.

The Nikon D700 also has a rather intimidating menu system if you are new to D-SLR cameras. I believe that the 5D Mk3 has a much less intimidating menu and it does take you a while to get your head around it.

What the Canon 5D Mk1 has is a putrid rear screen. This was fixed in the Mk2.

What must also be said is that the 5D Mk1 has a certain quality to it's images that does stand out and if you have ever owned a 5D Mk1 you will know. How?

You simply will...trust me on that.

The 5D Mk1 really surprised me with the images I got with the plastic fantastic 50mm/1.8. The 5D Mk1 really just works and you must get it very wrong to make bad images using one.

So how will the Nikon compare?

Nikon has always had the lead in rear displays. I have never seen a bad rear display on a Nikon. I am sure they probably got even better over time but most of the early Canon rear screens were REALLY bad.

But enough about that stuff for now.

For those who want to know more have a look here at a side-by-side comparison on www.dpreview.com .

Now let it be said that I am a Canon fan boy even despite Canon SA's decision to farm out service to CameraTek. I am sure that they (CameraTek) are not always bad but my dealings with them left much to be desired. My very limited exposure to Nikon SA on the other hand was nothing but happy, rosy and pleasant. These are stories for another day though.

Fair enough. Ultimately the resolution of the files is practically the only if not one of precious few aspects these two cameras really have in common. These are hand-held macro snapshots at wide open apertures with two rather dissimilar lenses.

Nikon's lovely Nano-Coated 60mm/2.8 macro is much wider than Canon's original EF-100mm/2.8 non-IS.

The 100mm Canon works from a greater distance than the up-close-and-personal Nikon 60mm. A nice thing when you snap bees and other critters with sharp ends.

The reality of the matter is that, pretty as they may be, pretty flowers at large apertures do not show off the potential of the camera.

All things being equal it needs to be said that I really like having a D700 again. I am a Canon fan boy yes. I have been shooting Canon D-SLR since 2005 and I am a sentimental fool but the D700 is a really capable camera and an absolute breeze to use.

So, later today I am picking up a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 from a friend so the serious tests can begin. Up to now I snapped some flowers in the garden yesterday and they were really no more than handheld snapshots.

I will share some thoughts on the 50mm lens in my next 5D1 vs D700 article. Whether you shoot full frame or crop sensor, this is a cheap and amazingly versatile little lens any photographer should have in his or her bag.

Time to go hunt some 'scapes...

Happy shooting!

Anton