I have seen hundreds of photos of 5D2 and D700 on the forum, and I think most of them are much better than D700?

That's total nonsense! Did you compare the photos on the forum? You probably don't know that your computer LCD screen has a color cast, do you? In addition, the viewing angle of the LCD screen is problematic, and the color seen by a bad LCD screen at different angles is different. The color gamut of LCD screen is also a problem. .

The second factor: it is still ridiculous to compare the camera through photos. It is not only the camera but also the lens that affects the photo effect. Different lens sharpness and color reproduction are very different!

The third factor is the camera. In addition to the performance of the camera itself, you need to adjust the color curve to take a photo that suits your aesthetics. The effect of the same camera under different color curves is very different, so it is a bit frivolous to compare the cameras of two different manufacturers. .

In addition, don't go out and say such layman's words, saying that the camera image quality is much better, it will be laughed at! You said that you had seen hundreds of photos, which made people think that you were probably cross-eyed. . . This photo is a waste of electricity!

In addition, to popularize it for you, there is actually nothing to talk about on the somewhat weak topic of image quality. Great works are not won by image quality, and the real value of SLR is not or mainly not in image quality. In the past, D300 and d3000 used the same photosensitive chip, both of which were 1200 pixels, but the price difference was several times. Obviously, image quality is far from the only factor. . . The value of Quan Huafu SLR D700 is mainly reflected in its unparalleled photosensitivity. In weak light, 5d2 is very different. Have you seen hundreds of photos and didn't see them?