Nikon d700 and canon 5d?

I noticed that d700 is generally considered better (for photographic and not videos features) than 5D by expert photographers.blog comments as well as real conversations.
but I also noticed that most of the pro or semi-pro users actually choose the canon 5d.
what's the reason in your opinion?

Apples and oranges. Other than the price range and being full frame those two cameras have little in common.

The D700 has insane high iso performance and a crazy autofocus system, marking it as a journalism and sports camera. The 5Dmk2 (i assume that's the one you're talking about) has extremely high resolution and a comparatively low grade autofocus system, making it more suitable for studio or portrait work.

Simple answer - if you have Nikon system, then it's d700. If you have Canon, then it's 5D Mark II.

Not so simple answer:

I, too, assume that you meant 5D Mark II.

It's focusing system works, but like the first answer stated, it's not for sport or anything like that.

If you need to blow up the prints, its files are more than usable. I have printed 30 x 40 inch poster with no problem with it. This ( ) was printed on a large format (13 x 17 inch) and it looked fine, too.

Canon 5D is an older 12Mp model, with an AF system and drive rate geared very much towards the enthusiast market.

D700 is a stripped down version of the D3 cameras. Very similar AF and IQ. A real powerhorse.

Between the original 5D and the D700, I'd probably take the D700. And I'm a canon man.

The Canon 5Dmark2 complicated matters. Still pedestrian speed and amateur level AF, but much more resolution and quite excellent video mode. For sports or nature the D700. For anything else the 5D mark 2.