Canon, Nikon & Sony Prosumer Full-Frame DSLR's

Introduction:

The full-frame digital SLR camera market heats up - by the end of the year three major suppliers, Nikon, Canon and Sony, all the prosumer full frame DSLR's on the market, all at a similar price.

The 12.1-megapixel Nikon D700, based on proven technology from both the Nikon D3 and D300, which was announced in July, and is already available. With an original MSRP of $ 2,999.95, only 3 months after their Announcement street prices have already fallen around the $ 2,750 mark.

Rumored for months, the 24.6 megapixel Sony Alpha A900 was finally officially on 9 Announced September with a MSRP of $ 2,999.95 and should be shipping within the next few weeks.

A few days later, Canon announced the 21.1MP Canon EOS 5D Mark II offers a very comprehensive feature set, and the addition of 1080p HD video, while undercutting both the Nikon and the> Sony, with its € 2699.99 RRP. The camera should ship by the end of the year.

Three very different cameras, all of which are on a very similar price point, an interesting choice for the consumer or Professional with up to 3,000 U.S. dollars on a prosumer DSLR spend.

Nikon D700:

The Nikon D700 is the excellent years old sensor from the Nikon D3 in a body similar to the Nikon D300. With the optional MB-D10 battery pack (which also fits the Nikon D300), whichD700 can reach an impressive 8 frames / s, while the recording is filled by 14-bit files, at least until the buffer.

High ISO performance on the D700 is excellent, like the Nikon D3. The Nikon D700 is also proved autofocus and exposure metering. However, it is the lowest resolution camera in the group, only 12 megapixels, and it has a lot of potential buyers will turn.

Canon EOS 5D Mark II:

The 21.1MP sensor has a resolution similar to the flagship Canon EOS1Ds Mark III, but it has a much broader ISO range. In fact, exceeds the ISO range, the Nikon D3 and D700 at ISO 50-25,600 (vs. ISO 100-25,600) for the Nikon.

The sensor in the 5D Mark II is a year younger than the sensor in the D700, and if in poor light conditions, the ability to come even in the Nikon D700, then Canon has a very impressive camera in his hands with a much higher resolution than the Nikon too close. There are very few sample pictures floating round of the Canon, so it is tooearly to be sure, but the Canon has a lot of potential - we will soon see how much difference another year makes the sensor development.

The big news of the Canon is the 1080p HD video mode. For many, this feature is a gimmick at best, but for some this is a very powerful tool - the ability to a wide range of high-quality lenses, use and control of the depth of field, that just does not exist on the consumer video cameras today. This will be a major selling point for some, and anice to have for many.

Sony Alpha A900:

The Sony has the highest resolution of the three cameras, but falls into two broad categories: The ISO performance is much smaller than its main rivals, and it offers only 12-bit A / D conversion. For the vast majority of shooters, which is 12-bit A / D not much, if any real world difference. The problem is one of perception, a $ 3,000 full-frame DSLR is almost to be expected that 14Bit A / D conversion on the market today.

Comparing the cameras:

You drive in your new luxury car, and asks the first question, your neighbor, "How much HP has this thing have?" With cameras, it's megapixels - right or wrong, which is the main selling point for the average consumer, with ISO function is a very close seconds.

In reality, only need very few photographers for more than 12 megapixels. If you are publishing on the Web, 3-megapixelusually more than enough - my big 1920 x 1200 monitor is about 2.3 megapixels. A 1080p HD TV is less than 2.1 megapixels.

Most high-quality prints with 300 dpi print (dots per inch), 150 dpi print yet still very good. At 300dpi, requires an 8x10 photo just over 7 megapixels. A 16x20 print at 150 dpi requires 7.2 megapixels. How many people go to buy these cameras to print beyond?

The main advantage of more megapixels is the ability to harvest.This is especially useful for nature, wildlife and sports photographers that need as much reach as possible. What matters to them is pixel density - the more "pixels on target" you can get with your longest lens, the more you can crop and the more effective reach you have. However none of these cameras have the highest pixel density out there - if you need reach, you'd be better served with a Nikon D300 or the new Canon 50D. To get the same pixel density as the Canon 50D in a full frame sensor, She had a full-frame camera to almost 40 mega pixels.

Whether you like it or not, the attribute of the camera that makes the headlines megapixel number. From a marketing perspective, that is the Nikon D700 at a major disadvantage for the Canon 5D Mark II. On paper, Canon also wins in the ISO race, but only just. Until the camera is somewhere out there on the market, we will not know for sure how well the low ISO performance is. The Canon also has 1080p video, in which it was said, asbefore, is a key selling point for some, and irrelevant to others.

Where the Canon beats the Nikon is everywhere else that matters: It has a higher maximum frame rate (especially if you add the MB-D10 grip to get 8fps which) more than doubled in the canons, and has on paper a superior AF system and metering system. In the same way, with more horsepower is pointless if the car is not that the power claimed on the street, you (think transmission, chassis, tires, tractionControl), the Nikon D700 is still a very compelling package, especially for those who shoot sports or action.

The Sony A900 will win the megapixel race, but the Canon is very close behind him. However, it loses badly, when you factor in the ISO performance. Canon also has a much wider range of very high quality lenses to back up the camera, and offers 14-bit A / D conversion verses 12-bit on the Sony for those ultimate image quality. It also has video support, and isabout 10% cheaper, so that the Canon actually makes the Sony A900, a non-starter for most people.

Then it comes back to the Nikon versus Canon. Both companies have a wide range of professional quality lenses and accessories to secure the camera. The Nikon is the clear choice for sports shooters. The landscape or studio photographer will incline to offer the higher resolution of Canon. If the ISO performance proves to be both for the Nikon D700 and similarCanon 5D Mark II, then for the wedding photographer and photo-journalists, that in low-light capabilities, the Canon extra resolution there must be at the edge. Unless, that is, they explicitly do not want to have to deal with larger image files (requires more space on memory cards to load more, for a lengthy post-processing etc).

For all other to meet either the Nikon or Canon, or rather on their needs, but Canon has the marketing advantage with the headlineNumber. If you have a lot of time spent shooting in public, then you know someone will come to you at some point and say, "Nice camera, how many megapixels is that thing have?"