Canon 5D or 5D Mk2?

[CrackedButter]

Crackedbutter:
wow... your message was like a wake up call

Well let me explain the overall reasoning:
I went with nikon because simply the picture quality in the price range that I had when I bought the D90 was the best.
After I borrowed the 2 full frame cameras I was really amazed by the richness in color and contrast of the pictures that came out without doing any additional "post processing".
In terms of investment so far, I have to say this is the most compelling part against switching.
Why Canon? well as I said the D700 , while ISO was amazing the color richness was just not there which disappointed me.
I have FX lenses except the 17-70mm which is DX. in this case I am now selling the D90, grip and the 17-70mm in hopes to get the D700. While I am not "a tourist", I am also not a pro and there is always the feeling of "the grass is greener on the other side"

Thanks for all your input.

//FR

What are you looking for when it comes to 'colour richness'? What are you shooting RAW or jpeg?

 

[epicwelshman]

What are you looking for when it comes to 'colour richness'? What are you shooting RAW or jpeg?

Agreed... something as arbitrary as "colour richness" is easily corrected in post processing, something that every serious photographer should do.

Frankly, your photos will not improve with a 5D, 5D Mk. II, D700 or even a D3X. Your D90 is fine for what you do.

If you really want to improve, keep shooting and practice basic post-processing techniques (levels, curves, etc.). Or, if you insist on spending money, buy some really nice glass (which will do far more than a new body).