tagged 
canon 5d mark 2, compared to, nikon d700, review, test, versus
canon 5d mark 2, compared to, nikon d700, review, test, versus Canon 5D Mark 2 versus Nikon D700 – My thoughts
See the two year update to this article - The Canon 5D Mark 3 for documentary wedding photography and why
Gosfield Hall in Essex is a truly inspiring location for a wedding. There are many opportunities for the documentary wedding photographer so it was a real treat to work there.
Not only does it lend itself to great lighting but its architecturally historical interior is an advantage when framing subjects and layering up images with narrative and context. I could say I'd like to work there all the time but I don't buy into photographers being better at venues they're familiar with, perhaps because they're a featured supplier there.
I personally feel that shooting at many different venues, from fantastic ones like Gosfield Hall to really tricky venues such as Aston Villa football ground or a school in Bedfordshire with poor available light (covering a large Asian wedding), really keeps you on your toes and ultimately makes you more sensitive to the effects of the environment with less potential for complacency and creating a carbon copy of your previous work - a much less personal product for your customer.
In addition to the superb venue, Jane and James are incredibly nice people with complete faith in the documentary style.
For those of you following my recent ramblings regarding my Canon to Nikon switch - this is my first Nikon wedding to be on the blog. My reasons behind the switch were very justified. As with a lot of documentary style photographers I rarely use flash and this is absolutely fine for the majority of the time when you have great venues with good available light. But on the odd occasion when you don't have these things handed to you on a plate, for instance the Asian wedding held at a school in Bedfordshire that I shot several years ago which had appallingly low levels of available light, it really does push your cameras to their limits. Unfortunately, it was during one of these very infrequent occasions that the Canon 5D Mark 2 system was ever so slightly compromised. The particular 5D issues were the high ISO noise capability and low light and contrast auto focus difficulties.
I've used Canon since 2002, so it was a really tough decision to make and I'm sure many other photographers out there are currently having a similar dilemma. It's particularly hard once you've bought into a brand, after all, a switch of brand doesn't just involve your bodies, you have your glass and accessories to think about too, it's costly and there really does have to be good reasoning to justify those costs, not just kit lust. It's also unnerving - after working with the 5d Mark 1 followed by the Mark 2 for so long I can operate them with my eyes closed, I know how to get the best out of them in different environments and ultimately I know the limitations of the camera and exactly what the RAW file is going to allow me to do during post production.
I can already hear Canon users screaming - 'what about the 1D Mark 4!' - a truly amazing camera and a very tempting option which I very nearly took. However, I use primes and I didn't want to stop using primes for my documentary weddings and didn't want to have to alter my system because of the cropped sensor on the Canon 1D Mark 4. I also didn't want the large, 1 series body or the price tag associated with that.
I'm not going to lie either, I'm quite (very) rough with camera kit - it's a tool as far as I'm concerned, not a set of testicles to carry around during trade shows. I'm definitely not camera club material. Whilst I know, having worked with Canon 1 series cameras in the past, both film and digital, that they're tough, I also know that they're not 'Allister proof', so more expensive to repair, service and insure - costs also factored in to my decision. The smaller professional cameras are tough enough and not too expensive to replace regularly. I could have also waited for the replacement to the 5D Mark 2, but when would that be? I'd heard several dates - all after this year's wedding season and I needed to do the switch before a very busy May. I didn't want to be compensating for the shortfalls of the Canon system during my 2010 work which would form my portfolio for next year.
After some trials and many conversations with Canon 1D Mark 4, Nikon D3 and D700 users (thank you, you know who you are), I went for two D700 cameras. In the end it was the obvious choice, Nikon's equivalent to the 5D - a high quality, full frame sensor in a small, more discreet package allows me to use exactly the same set up as before - a 50mm and 24mm and no flash, only this time I have a camera that doesn't hold me back.
However, for photographers looking for a cropped sensor or a large, professional body, I appreciate that the decision making has several more elements involved.
The Nikon D700 compared with the Canon 5D Mark 2 is much more of a photographer's camera - it's more intuitive, more specialised and more customisable. With the introduction of the 5D Mark 2 I felt that Canon were neglecting a large majority of it's users, I don't want to make HD movie footage, I want to make stills, and stills that don't look unnaturally sharp and digital. With the recent introduction of the Canon 7D it appears that this small but professional range within the Canon lineup is going to continue to be Jack of all trades, master of none. I personally like the softer, more film like Nikon files, in fact I'm now able to get similar results to when I used to use the Nikon F100 35mm camera with Kodak and Fujifilm monochrome negative. I find the files more authentic than Canon images straight out of the camera. I also like the more sensitive metering system you get in the D700, I get much more information in the shadows straight out of camera and when I need to can fill a 3200 ISO file considerably before getting bad noise and banding. No more issues with blown highlights in the red channel either - something I will definitely not miss when photographing bands during the evening reception.
The autofocus is much more sophisticated too, operating well in much darker and often backlit and low contrast situations, in fact you get the same AF system in the D700 as the flagship Nikons - it doesn't have a much weaker, watered down system to it's big brother, something that can't be said for the Canon 5D Mark 2.
The lenses were my main sticking point I had before the switch - were they going to be as good as Canon? Well, I can safely say that they are, the only lens I feel Nikon need to hurry up and produce is a 50mm 1.4 replacement, something to rival the Canon 50mm 1.2 USM. Other than that Canon and Nikon primes are so closely matched, for my style of photography anyway, that it's simply not an issue to factor into the equation when deciding on whether to take the plunge and switch, other than the cost involved of course. The decision needs to be based on the camera system alone.
So, am I happy now that I've shot around ten weddings, some portraits, a couple of documentary projects and some personal work with it? Absolutely. I'm not suggesting that the system doesn't have it's weaker points compared to the Canon. I'm not biased and am not guilty of any 'brand loyalty' that I've discovered discussing this topic via twitter and the blog, can be a little 'Mac or PC'. The preview screen, for instance, isn't accurate and the compact flash card door gets pulled open by the palm of your hand, especially when using the camera one-handed, not good. However these aren't issues that have a direct impact on image quality.
For me, the most important improvement has been that the Nikons are not at the forefront of my mind when shooting, they're completely in the background because I know they will allow me to capture and reproduce what I see, in almost any environment. The cameras are now a seamless link in my image making process.
If you're considering the switch, have an interest in or completely disagree with what I've said, I'd be interested in hearing your comments on the blog.
To subscribe to this blog, simply click on the following link to open a new page and then bookmark: feed://www.allisterfreemanphotographyblog.com/feed/
Reader Comments (102)
Having shot the D700 and 5D Mark II side by side at a lot of events, I mirror your sentiments. I love the way high ISO files look coming out of the Nikon, and much prefer the general look over the 5D. I don't shoot primes (other than the 50 1.4G) so I can't comment there, but I love my Nikon 24-70 2.8! Are you using the 24 1.4? I would love to test it out, but I would prefer a 35mm 1.4 like Canon has.
Thanks for your comments Aaron.
Yes, I shoot with the new 24 1.4, it's had a bit of bad press lately re focus issues but my copy seems to be fine - just as good as the 24 1.4 Canon I used for several years. I'm similarly waiting for the 35 1.4 from Nikon, as I bet thousands of others are too!
Well written and eloquent article. Making some good valid points.
May the D700 serve you well - I'm interested to hear what making a camera "Allister proof" means - I'd think the lenses are the weak link?
Allister, a great article and some very interesting reading. I'm using Nikon at the moment and not sure of the move to either a D300s or sod the investment and go for the D700 with the 24-70 F2.8. Nice to read about using primes, not considered those, but will have a look in to them. I was interested in the Canon 5D Mark ii but after reading this against the limited noise you get with a D700, I think the decision will be a lot easier... Keep up the good work.
Neil: I shot the D300s at a wedding a couple of weeks back and was very happy with the performance, but I would not put it in the same league as an FX sensor camera for ISO performance. Plus it keeps your wide lenses wide. I kept putting the 70-200 on it for quick candids, but not much else. The high ISO performance of the D700 keeps it locked in for me.
Also been with Nikon from the D1 to my current D300s superb cameras Grant
Great post... I love my D700's and prime lenses, I use the 35 f2 a lot more than the 50g which feels a little sluggish in terms of auto focus. I would love a 35 f1.4 but honestly I am not sure cost would be worth the extra speed. You can pick up a 35 f2 very cheap... you should try it Allister, its so small and unobtrusive, sharp and has lovely Bokeh.
Hey Allister
Another fantastic post, before the camera debate though I must say how fantastic I think the images are, the black and white conversion really makes them stunning. I absolutely love the 4th picture; from a photographers point of view because you have so many angles and you have captured so much it makes you stare at the picture for ages, but from a former brides point of view I would have just loved a shot of me like that on my wedding day to see all angles of the dress in one shot would have make it my favorite shot I'm sure.
Thanks also for sharing your thought process with regard to the camera switch, I have been very canon loyal since starting in the photography world (longer ago than I care to admit I still feel 21 after all), but I am certainly swaying towards the Nikon, the potential for wedding photographers seems to be immense with the Nikon. Im not completely converted to make the swop yet so will look forward to more posts from you! Thanks for sharing.
Thank you for the interest and kind words Lesley.
Black and white processing has been an area that I've really been analysing a lot recently, mainly making sure it's a unique style that remains traditional enough to stand the test of time but still has a fine art feel.
The Nikons are also providing me with a more film like range of tones to work with in the RAW file, so a much better starting point for my post production. And I feel it really shows. I can now get detail across the entire tonal range if I want - in the same situations where the Canon would simply fill the shadows and record no detail in them at all, not just silhouettes like some of the images featured in this post but situations where it really shouldn't happen. This was a particular aspect of the Canon sensor that I felt increasingly unhappy with.
Make sure you keep an eye on the blog, all work from now on will be Nikon so will be a good resource if you decide to make the switch.
I'm not going to get into the camera debate. I have my colours well and truly (and expensively) nailed to a certain manufacturers tree. What I can say though is that the images are stunning. The shot of the guys smoking outside is wonderful as is the chap in the library.
Great stuff Al.
Hi Allister
Good to see the change in equipment hasn't changed the stunning images you produce!
Very interesting reading - having decided that Pentax make beautiful lenses but rubbish bodies I think that a change may be likely and it's really useful to have a useful comparison (if a little one sided but guess that's why you changed in the first place!).
Enjoyed hearing your views. I shoot with a D3 and wished I had got the 700.....two D3s strapped to you on a long wedding is a killer! The 700 is just a cut down D3. I got seduced by the D3S, now that is when you can really see the difference in low light. Id say it has a one and a half to two stop advantage. However I love the film like look of the D3 at 3200 ISO which shows up the 5D. I think more people are looking to switch brands, but its down to money for most of us. I think deep down Canon users secretly envy the D3/D700 family. I may get booed :)
Good article Allister - I hope my advice was of some use at the time.
Really cool article. I'm really glad the switch worked out too. I chose the D700 over the D3 for size etc and have never regretted it. Really nice to see Gosfield Hall again, great venue and fabulous shots!
Pete
Hi Allister,
Great and very informative article for a baby tog like me. Add in the "usual" stunning shots... Cor!
Anyway, I'm currently in the Sony camp (eek!). Umm... noise: I have to live with it at anything shot over iso 400. I have exotic dreams at night about the eagerly expected Sony replacements for the 500 range and the rumoured new A850/900... sad, aren't I.
Fantastic words and images, again I am learning from you (for free).
:) May I start calling myself, Grasshopper?
Cheers,
Paul
I had quite the same situation about a year ago. I was shooting weddings since 2000 using Canon gear and after testing out Nikons D700 a year ago, it didn't take long for me to make that decision.. I sold a bunch of Canons lenses, bodies and flashes and switched to D700. And I must say I am still very happy about my decision. It wasn't so easy to get used to Nikons controls and menu's, but after I managed that... I have never been happier with my wedding photos, especially because I don't use flash at all, because Nikon's low light performance is simply astonishing. Even if it has noise, it is much more film-like and in some cases I even turn up the ISO to have that nice grain..
BTW, nice wedding capture, Allister. Keep up the good work!
I shoot with D3 bodies because the D700 was not available at the time I went to FX. Now I probably would buy the D700 but my D3's are absolutely fine and too expensive to change here in NZ.
I do like the larger battery in the D3 - I have shot all day for 3 days before changing a battery before now! I know you can put that one into a D700 with the grip, but then you may as well have a D3.
Also, two CF card slots is just astonishingly useful.
I would like a higher eyepoint though as I wear glasses and seeing all the edges of the VF can be tricky - not a problem I had with the D2Xs which has a smaller VF screen.
Out of interest - why do you not like the (relatively new) Nikon 50mm 1.4 G ?
Thanks for your interest Daf - I do currently use that lens
[...] photographer Allister Freeman discusses his experience shooting weddings after moving from a Canon 5d Mark 2 to a Nikon [...]
The only thing stopping us from switching is the money aspect. I am still using my 1ds Mark II, not happy with the 5DII and went through 3 1D Mark III bodies with focus problems. We will wait for the next generation of Canon's to see what they come out with and then make the final decision.
Very interesting read. I moved from Canon back to Nikon after 5 years a couple of months ago. I had two 5D original bodies and changed to 7D's last December but it just didn't work out for me. The autofocus and tracking just didn't work as advertised and one of the bodies main control dial failed during a wedding. My Canon 24-70L also wasn't sharp wide open on either body and was sent to Canon for calibration. It came back the same. So I sold everything Canon and bought a Nikon D700, Nikon D300s, 16-35 F4 VR, 24-70 F2.8, 70-200 F2.8 VRII, 60mm F2.8 micro, two SB900's, SB400, SU800 and stands, brackets, brollies etc. Everything works as it should do. The 24-70 is a real standout lens, but the other lenses are great too. The D700 and D300s compliment each other well as they are so similar in layout and menus with the D700 great for low light and subject isolation and the D300s for reach and outdoor work. Like you I don't need to think about the camera when shooting - they just work.
Very interesting read, I've always been Nikon just because it was the first camera I ever bought. My tempation has always been the other way... to Canon -specifically the 5D. That was until I saw the 5D mark II and I knew that
video wasn't where I wanted to go. I waited and have just completed my first wedding and portrait with my D700, 50mm, 85mm and I'm blown away by the high iso features of this camera. This changes everything for me.
I love my D200 and its still my backup camera. The D700 is just pushing me to be a better photographer right from the word go. I can't wait to see where I end up with things.
Fascinating reading guys! I have never used a Nikon so am not able to add any comments regarding their comparative merits. Would love to try the D700 though after having read how much you all enthuse about it! I can't imagine how you were able to switch though as guess the "controls" are quite different! Your selection of monochrome images are exquisitely expressive too.
I do wonder though whether removing colour to make an image more cohesive is always the solution to creating an impressive image and feel that in many instances it is a shame to lose the beautiful rich colours we see around us when glowing light unites them - but then that's another subject...
Thanks Elaine, it was certainly a concern but the Nikon layout is very easy to adjust to - quite intuitive really.
I like your input with regards the colour work - an area that I'm looking at discussing soon. Colour is incredibly important - for both narrative and composition, but I only use it when necessary and when, in particular, it adds something to the image. I like the simplicity of monochrome and that the image is required to be strong in order to work on those restricted tones and for the right documentary image, monochrome gets straight to the point - to the moment, without distraction. That said, colour can do this equally as well, it just needs to be the correct image. It's very subjective.
Well, all I can say is, you can shoot great pictures with those two incredible cameras :)
We actually use both cameras and like you said they both have their pros and cons.
I've had the 5D MkII pretty much since it came out and have yet to use the video function for a wedding or anything like that. I do like having the option to make little movies for the blog though.
The biggest issue we've had, which to be fair is a pretty rare one, is dead battery syndrome with D700. It has only happened with third party lenses and of course Nikon won't do anything to fix it..... which is a little frustrating!
I'll also echo Kevin's favourites..... they did make me smile and that's what's really important right?
Switched back to Nikon with D3's about 3 years ago, would like to see an update to the 135 f2 and 85 1.4, mostly for CA and SWM if nothing else.
Try the Sigma 50 1.4, its much better wide open than the Nikkor 1.4 G which I had, plus the new nikkor focuses fast enough for funerals but not weddings.
Just tools, I only romance invoices:)
I shoot D700, my brother 5DMK2. I'm permanently in the 'should I switch' camp to the 5DMK2. I've done back to back tests time and time again and for high ISO, in my opinion, there is absolutely nothing in it. The biggest gripe I have with the 5dMK2 is the autofocus, it has nothing on the D700. If you are a focus and recompose shooter using the center AF point then you've got nothing to worry about as that's cross type but for everything else in anything but good light I found it hunted too much for my liking where as the D700 locked on pretty much all the time.
Still the size of the 5DMK2 images do give you that extra room to crop.
Thanks James, I've really tried to keep it as balanced and honest as I can, these are my personal opinions of why I feel the Nikon system better suits my style and will not mirror everyones views.
A polite note: if you're planning on commenting on this post and would like me to publish it then please be aware that I'm not personally trying to insult you if you use Canon cameras. I would genuinely like to hear all opinions on this but will not post comments on here that are rude, immature and plain geeky.
A great read Allister and very balanced. Having only really ever shot canon I cannot offer anything constructive to the debate, only the negatives I have experienced from the canon camp. My 5DMKII is now with H.Lehmanns in Stoke for yet another go at fixing it, it failed (err30) right at the start of a wedding. Luckily it came back "online" but proved erratic throughout the day. I managed to get through the shoot with "fudging" the exposures and winging it on the histogram (thank god for the histogram). Unknown to me at the time an err30 indicated mirror/shutter failure (at 2months old!!), and indeed the whole camera was flying in and out of synch with it's shutter. I do have another camera I use, so the back up of a 5DMKI and 40D proved invaluable that day. Having said that I am still seriously considering the move to Nikon and the D700.The hands on reviews such as yours, only serve to make it even more tempting. Perhaps I will wait to see if the camera comes back (3rd time lucky) fixed, and then I will make the decision. Many thanks again for an informative and honest review.
Phil
Many thnks for writing such a fascinating article. All too typically you see the same point above and over so this makes a refreshing change.
Hi Allister
Sorry to see you go! I have been a Canon user for many years and love my dual 5D Mark II's.
Autofocus has never been a problem - I always use centre spot and recompose (it is the way I was trained) though I can see that if this isn't your style it may be a problem.
Also really interested to hear you speak of the better images at higher ISO - I have a friend who shoots with D700's at weddings with me occasionally and I always find his files to be more noisy than the 5D Mark II.
Anyway, that aside - your images are fantastic! Clean, sharp and the guys face in the library is outstanding!
Andrew
Your post brought up an interesting issue that I've wondered about for a while now: how is it that both Canon and Nikon have chosen to not be directly competitive in the body/price niches that the D700 and 5DmkII are holding? Both companies could make counterparts to each others' offerings (higher megapixels or better ISO) in this market segment and satisfy their base, and yet so far they will not. This would seem to prevent the brand migration that you've experienced.
At other, more defined segments these companies are rather directly competitive so this one baffles me.
Nice read I switched from Canon to Nikon a year ago and could not be more happier :)
Hi Allister,
Interesting to read all about your thoughts and the big change from Canon to Nikon. Love your last shot.
Best Wishes,
Lindsay
I'm in love with your style, Allister. I'm a die-hard Canon fanboy and shoot with the 5D2, but the D700 sounds like a fantastic camera and I'd love to try one out. I was stunned to get the 5D2 and find out it had the same AF system as my Rebel XTi before it. I readily admit Canon is way behind the curve when it comes to autofocus, they need to take that ancient 9-point system out behind the shed and shoot it.
Paul...
Both could, but I think they went their own respective routes, Nikon going with IQ and High ISO over megapixels and Canon going with MP over high ISO [not to say it's not good].
Still, too many other factors come into play between the two that it can't be a simple "high iso get nikon, high mp get canon" debate. Allister touched on the AF, color, image rendering, and difference in flexibility between both RAW formats. There's still the lens debate as well.
I've shot with the D700, later switched to the 5d2 which I am using now, and am still longing to switch back to the D700. At this point, I'm going to stick it out for a little while to see if a D700 replacement will be announced soon. [driving d700 prices down and seeing what the replacement offers]
Allister, thanks for your thoughts here, now I can convince my partner to switch ;) Very insightful and what I've been feeling all along, greatly worded and shown through your work. Keep it up.
Autofocus reliability and performance in low light / low edge contrast situations is very important for event and wedding photography. Unfortunately, it rarely gets enough attention from reviewers out there who seem to focus on shooting test charts at various ISO settings.
I don't care how clean/noisy a camera is at 6400 ISO. If I can't get AF lock on a subject when I need it to, none of that matters. If my subject is out of focus because I'm using release priority to just get something, that's simply not good enough. As a professional, you have to get the shot and nail the focus. No excuses.
This is personal for me too because we recently got our proofs back from the photographer we commissioned to shoot our wedding. What did I see? A surprising number of blurry and misfocused shots. We paid how much for that? Not happy.
I recall the shooters were using the 5DMkII and Nikon D80 mainly. Not sure if the equipment had anything to do with it, but just as Allister says, as a professional, you have a duty to get the shots. If you or your equipment are having trouble nailing the focus or preventing motion blur, you have to sort that out.
Allister,
Thanks for the insight re: D700 vs 5D MkII, which I found very interesting.
More importantly I thought I should say I find your photography "gobsmacking" as we say in the Midlands :O)
Things have moved on since I was doing weddings on a Rolleiflex to help pay the bills while at college in the early 80s :O)
Nice work, friend.
Great post Allister. I am a Nikon D700 shooter myself, though I have been editing a few weddings shot with Canon 5D MK II's - so I feel like I have seen my fair share of files coming out of both cameras.
I think that you nailed it when you said that files out of the Nikon's are more "softer, more film like" and more "authentic." I have noticed that as well. The Canon's, on the other hand, tend to look more processed right out of camera, and cooler on the color temperature. The files still look beautiful though, and stunning in the hands of a good photographer.
Thank you again for an in depth post on the pros and cons of the D700 and 5D MK II. Much love from Chicago.
I'm not one for debating and not one for thinking I know everything, but one thing Im sure of is...I love my new D700. Have only had it a week and a half and I'm a huge fan :D Particularly with the 24-70, 2.8. I have just upgraded from a D300 and I can't get over the fact there is so little noise!! That makes me so very happy. I'm a Nikon User and I'm proud! :D x
Great post! I've been thinking about making the move as well. Do you have any fav glass for the Nikon?
Wonderful post; I'm upgrading to a d700 in the very near future, and can't get enough write-ups like this telling me exactly what to expect.
I'm curious what your workflow is after a RAW shot? Forgive me if you've discussed this, it's my first visit. Are you willing to discuss how you achieve the particular b/w conversion you've used in these wedding photos? I spend a lot of time in lightroom trying to achieve the "perfect" set of b/w filters, but am always looking for expert opinions. =)
Thanks again.
Hi Allister
We just wanted to say thank you again to you and Josh for the amazing photographs!
We knew we would get beautiful images from you capturing the emotions & story of the day, however it was not untill we saw our photos that we really understood just how well you captured this.
You really have documented the day from our point of view, capturing our personal memories. (I'm not sure if you noticed but during our viewing with you there were a fair few tears running down my cheek because you brought back the emotions & memories of the day so vividly!!).
We really can't thank you enough and are delighted with all the images. Our only problem is which ones to select for the album!!!!!
Thank you!
Jane & James
As a D700 user, with a friend who works at Canon, I've used both cameras and I must tell you I agree with you. Although I liked the jpegs coming from the MarkII (maybe because I was using the 50mm F1.2...?), the AF was nowhere near what D700 could do. I shot some pictures in a dark, almost candle lit cafe, and I ended up using manual focus for the Canon. On the other hand, D700 was dead on every time.
[...] Another pro photographer switches to Nikon. [...]
Hi, Allister
I was very pleased to read your thoughts because, after 28 years, I decided to switch to Nikon, obviously for the reasons you explain here. Following a lot of problems with my 5D and 7D bodies, I took the opportunity to test a D700 and a 70-200 VRII. I was so astonished by the quality of the pictures, the AF and exposure systems, plus the camera handling, that I took all my Canon gear to my reseller and ordered the D700 and lenses.
Yes, it is a difficult and expensive decision. I just bought the 17 TSE, the 7D and the 24-105, but I will drop them with no regrets. The D700 is a much more balanced camera, I don't need to think about the performance and the sensor size factor before shooting, I can do everything with the same camera, action or relaxed shots. With my Canon gear, I need to choose between high-quality files (5D) or speed (7D), and to be careful on what lens needs to be on what camera.
Rgds.
Gilles.
I had the chance to use one of the first Nikkor 24/1,4 and ! played around in a forest (for contraty light, strong facing light, dark spots, etc) only using f/1,4 on my D700. So i can tell that the combination of both camera and lens are simply astonishing. The lens has no flare, a contained distortion never seen before, same for the vignettage (corner fall offs), incredible sharpness, rendering of color totally accurate, etc. The D700 is no more in need to be presented as the best camera along with the D3 much heavier. I put the new nano lenses from Nikon as close to the optical quality as to my favorite brand Leica. I haven't try the Summilux 24 but I am sure that the Nikkor is darn close to it !
So, if like me, you hate using flash in any circonstances, the D700, even at 6400 iso jpegs, will totally do the job and if you put the Nikkor f/1.4 lenses they already have (50 and new 24) and will come up (the long expected 35 and the renewed and also expected 85) you can consider yourself King of the World....
The D700 is a fantastic camera. It's great to read about your experience with the difference, and the change over to Nikon.
Besides the gear talk, these are some fantastic photos! I love the feel and the slightly toned black and white processing. They have a very classic and rustic feel to them. The venue does look superb too, I would love to have a chance to shoot a wedding or two there.