Isn't that body yet to be released? Just announced at the moment? If you want to put it that way then the D4 will own that.

November 2009 is new. Canon owned the D700 with the 5d II. The D3s is so new it won't be replaced for a bit

Ok ok, this isn't a Canon VS Nikon topic. No more! Each has their advantages over the other, and both companies make sick cameras!


Edit: I also fail to see how the d700 was owned?

This post was edited by arcadia99 on Jan 19 2011 01:34am

Rumored D4 announcement in April...?


On another note... Yay for me no longer being the only Nikon Zealot.

Both companies make overpriced cameras with old technology :\

Edit: I also fail to see how the d700 was owned?


IQ. Silly online reviews try comparing things like noise. I've used both, and the only thing the D700 really has over the 5dII is AF.

This post was edited by onepagememory on Jan 19 2011 01:35am

is the fps is a lot higher on the D700, so it is better suited for fast paced sports

Canon is better for landscapes, portraits, still life etc.
Nikon is better for sports, animals, etc.

usually pros use 1d series for sports rather than nikons. nikon has better UWA lenses, so nikon would be better for landscapes. portraits doesent make much difference since both brands has good full frame cameras and portrait lenses. i dont understand what makes animal portraits any different from human portraits. and i dont think still life makes any difference whether you use nikon or canon.

I was talking about the d700 and the mk 2.
When i said animals i was meaning MOVING animals, not the random cat or dog shot.
Imo canon has better image quality due to the high megapixels, useful for crops aswell.

As for sports, i'd use a d3s anyday.

This post was edited by Verdena on Jan 20 2011 02:56am

D3s does have the market when it come to fast action sports, due to the fps