Nikon D700 - what think we?
Discussion
Had my D7000 about a year now and love it, but would like to start thinking about moving to full frame.
If I were starting from scratch I'd go for a Canon 5D MKII or MKIII, but of course I have Nikon lenses so no good.
Am I right in assuming that the D700 is the Nikon equivalent of the 5D?
And are there other Nikon full frame cameras I should be considering?
If I were starting from scratch I'd go for a Canon 5D MKII or MKIII, but of course I have Nikon lenses so no good.
Am I right in assuming that the D700 is the Nikon equivalent of the 5D?
And are there other Nikon full frame cameras I should be considering?
Step away from the precipice!
Save yourself some time a put all your cash in a shredder....
Seriously FX will have you spending £1000s on lenses amd then some!
I have two D700s and they are fantastic. I considered the D800 but in mainly portraiture I dont need the resolution / file size overhead and the D600 is a step back in contol / functionality. So, I'm sticking to the D700s until death do us part. For now anyway.... Might consider a D3x if I could get at a good price.
You can get little used D700s on eBay for a grand or so. Bargain.
Save yourself some time a put all your cash in a shredder....
Seriously FX will have you spending £1000s on lenses amd then some!
I have two D700s and they are fantastic. I considered the D800 but in mainly portraiture I dont need the resolution / file size overhead and the D600 is a step back in contol / functionality. So, I'm sticking to the D700s until death do us part. For now anyway.... Might consider a D3x if I could get at a good price.
You can get little used D700s on eBay for a grand or so. Bargain.
Thank you Ian, that's great to know. I'd seen the 600 and considered that too, but it sounds like the 700 is worth the extra.
Simpo, good question! I thought so, but your query made me check, and of the two more expensive/useful ones, one is marked "DX", so I guess not, that's a pain. It's an AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm 1:4 G ED. So what happens if I put that onto an FX camera?
The other is an AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G. It doesn't mention DX so I guess that's good for either (although I realise it'll be a true 300 rather than the effective 450 it is on my crop sensor camera).
Simpo, good question! I thought so, but your query made me check, and of the two more expensive/useful ones, one is marked "DX", so I guess not, that's a pain. It's an AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm 1:4 G ED. So what happens if I put that onto an FX camera?
The other is an AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G. It doesn't mention DX so I guess that's good for either (although I realise it'll be a true 300 rather than the effective 450 it is on my crop sensor camera).
Ari said:
Thank you Ian, that's great to know. I'd seen the 600 and considered that too, but it sounds like the 700 is worth the extra.
Simpo, good question! I thought so, but your query made me check, and of the two more expensive/useful ones, one is marked "DX", so I guess not, that's a pain. It's an AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm 1:4 G ED. So what happens if I put that onto an FX camera?
The other is an AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G. It doesn't mention DX so I guess that's good for either (although I realise it'll be a true 300 rather than the effective 450 it is on my crop sensor camera).
The 12-24 will work on a D700 but not fully. You have two options, first you can run in 6mp crop mode which basically turns the D700 sensor into a DX sized one by ignoring the outer edges. Your other option is to run it in normal mode and experience vignetting on a biblical scale Simpo, good question! I thought so, but your query made me check, and of the two more expensive/useful ones, one is marked "DX", so I guess not, that's a pain. It's an AF-S Nikkor 12-24mm 1:4 G ED. So what happens if I put that onto an FX camera?
The other is an AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 G. It doesn't mention DX so I guess that's good for either (although I realise it'll be a true 300 rather than the effective 450 it is on my crop sensor camera).
The bad news here is that quality FX ultra wide zooms cost big money, the nearest equivalent is probably the 16-35 F/4 VR but that is about £900. Slippery slope this full frame stuff.Your 70-300 will be fine, I use one of those myself with my D700, makes for a nice light telephoto set up and very good IQ.
I love my D700, it really is excellent and decent value these days but as mentioned previously, quality FX lenses can be expensive. If you're frugal though there are loads of older high quality lenses that will work well or you can get a decent bag of primes without spending a fortune...
What do you shoot, mostly?
- Race cars and/or wildlife in good light: Stick with the D7000 or get a 300s
- Anything moving indoors or in low light: D700 (or D800 if not too fast moving)
- Static subjects, where image quality is critical (e.g. for large prints / glossy media): D800
Had a play with a D800 recently and no use to me at 4 fps (that actually felt like 2 fps shooting RAW), but image quality awesome
I use D700 and D300s - prefer DX outdoors in good light (lens reach, mostly), but it's almost useless for indoor action photography - so noisy at 3200 ISO, it's noticeably worse than the D700 at 6400
For fast moving objects, D700 focussing is also much better than D300s
HTH
- Race cars and/or wildlife in good light: Stick with the D7000 or get a 300s
- Anything moving indoors or in low light: D700 (or D800 if not too fast moving)
- Static subjects, where image quality is critical (e.g. for large prints / glossy media): D800
Had a play with a D800 recently and no use to me at 4 fps (that actually felt like 2 fps shooting RAW), but image quality awesome
I use D700 and D300s - prefer DX outdoors in good light (lens reach, mostly), but it's almost useless for indoor action photography - so noisy at 3200 ISO, it's noticeably worse than the D700 at 6400
For fast moving objects, D700 focussing is also much better than D300s
HTH
Ari said:
I need it for fast moving outside stuff and internal photos. Both need to be as professional a quality as I can get.
OK, are the internal shots fast moving or static/slow moving?Image quality between D300s and D700 will be very very similar, unless you are pushing the performance boundaries... i.e. Low light / max telephoto.
Don't forget, if you are shooting a distant object with the D700, you either need a heavy crop or a teleconverter, to get the same size final image - so either you don't really have 12.3 Mp, or you have more glass in the way and a slower shutter speed.
ian in lancs said:
As well as the D700s I also use a D300s with a 18-105 and 70-300 lenses. The D300s is a fantastic camera and controls / menu is essentially the same as the D700. I use it for holidays and walkabout
Yep, me too now (and as emergency backup - saved the last gig, when my D700 went bang with 1.5 days to go on a World Championships, 1,000 miles from home!If it had the high ISO capability (and focussing accuracy) of the D700, I personally wouldn't bother with FX.
I know I know... 
It's also about trying to get as pin sharp as possible with the action shots. I look at what colleagues are getting with their 5D MK2's, and even zoomed right up to 100% they are absolutely pin sharp! Now I appreciate the lens has a lot to do with it, but surely the base line has to be there first, ie the biggest and best possible sensor?
It's also about trying to get as pin sharp as possible with the action shots. I look at what colleagues are getting with their 5D MK2's, and even zoomed right up to 100% they are absolutely pin sharp! Now I appreciate the lens has a lot to do with it, but surely the base line has to be there first, ie the biggest and best possible sensor?
I have a D7000 nad have similar thoughts....however I would dismiss the D600 so easily. Anyone that has a D700 will tell you it's better built, has better controls, better AF BUT the D600 has got a better sensor.
This is a good review of the D600
http://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-d600
In the comaprisons tab there is a piece on the D600 v D700. To summarise they say it's better at ISO's above 1600 and has a better dynamic range.
Used D700's are about £1000 and D600's are £1500 new. You pays your money and makes your choice!
For me I take a lot of pictures of my children indoors so the sensor wins I think....the controls/durability I can live with. Main question in my mind is the AF.
This is a good review of the D600
http://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-d600
In the comaprisons tab there is a piece on the D600 v D700. To summarise they say it's better at ISO's above 1600 and has a better dynamic range.
Used D700's are about £1000 and D600's are £1500 new. You pays your money and makes your choice!
For me I take a lot of pictures of my children indoors so the sensor wins I think....the controls/durability I can live with. Main question in my mind is the AF.
Ari said:
I know I know...
It's also about trying to get as pin sharp as possible with the action shots. I look at what colleagues are getting with their 5D MK2's, and even zoomed right up to 100% they are absolutely pin sharp! Now I appreciate the lens has a lot to do with it, but surely the base line has to be there first, ie the biggest and best possible sensor?
Well first I'd check it's not a focus or technique issue. Sometimes the suject is slightly soft but you'll find something just behind or just in front is sharp - especially at wide apertures.It's also about trying to get as pin sharp as possible with the action shots. I look at what colleagues are getting with their 5D MK2's, and even zoomed right up to 100% they are absolutely pin sharp! Now I appreciate the lens has a lot to do with it, but surely the base line has to be there first, ie the biggest and best possible sensor?
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff