Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Should I buy a Nikon D-700?

  1. #1
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Millington Md.
    Posts
    2,513
    Threads
    365
    Thank You Posts

    Default Should I buy a Nikon D-700?

    I currently own a Nikon D-300 and shoot mostly landscapes, macro and wildlife. I was wondering if anyone could advise me as to buying a D-700 full frame. I am under the impression that my macro shots and my landscapes would show a noticeable difference and i would also enjoy the higher ISO advantage, and possibly faster and more accurate autofocus. I would appreciate any comments regarding....
    1) my impressions noted above
    2) How much ISO advantage would I actually see?


    thanks!

  2. #2
    Co-Founder James Shadle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Valrico, Fl
    Posts
    5,108
    Threads
    1,419
    Thank You Posts
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    Buy the D700!!!

    It is a faster camera producing images with better than a full stop noise advantage.

    If your main photographic experience is with a crop body, you'll notice the full frame D700 has shallower DOF at the same magnifications.

  3. #3
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Nashua, New Hampshire, United States
    Posts
    1,280
    Threads
    260
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    The only way you would be "harmed" is if you need the reach of the crop body for your wildlife shots. That is the only thing that makes me keep my D300s.

  4. #4
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Maryland's Eastern Shore, beside Fairlee Creek near the Chesapeake Bay
    Posts
    1,961
    Threads
    344
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    For landscapes and macro, the D700 would be good -- especially if you have FX lenses. It would not be so good for wildlife compared to your D300, because you would lose the 1.5X "crop" advantage.

    If you use a DX lens with the D700, the camera will automatically adjust to accommodate it. But that will provide only 5.1MP! Not a good situation IMO. For that reason and because my wife and I have some DX lenses, we opted against the D700 and bought two D300's instead.

    Finally, the D700 has been around for quite a while. A successor in the relatively near future is likely. If you purchase a D700 this late in the game, you may be disappointed when you discover the enhanced capabilities and cost of the successor.

    For example, my wife and I recently acquired a D7000 to complement our D300's. By doing so, we added 4MP of resolution and other significant improvements at substantially reduced cost, and we now have HD video capability to boot! :)

    In sum, the D700 is an excellent camera, but it might be wise to wait a bit longer.
    Last edited by Norm Dulak; 11-27-2010 at 11:29 AM.

  5. #5
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,940
    Threads
    288
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Miller View Post
    I...shoot mostly landscapes, macro and wildlife.
    You're talking about subjects that could be a few centimeter from the front lens element to subjects that are way, way, way out there. So, which one mostly?

    1) my impressions noted above
    I've got the same impression, too. The tone gradation seems to be better.

    2) How much ISO advantage would I actually see?
    I'd say up to ISO 1600 you don't need noise reduction for the D700 files. Anything higher you likely would like to, but it also depends on how you use your images. If you zoom in 100%, you will see the noise especially when the exposure is off.

    Many people say you would lose the "crop" advantage when shooting wildlife and birds. But then, there're still photographers who do that with their D3s. I think it really depends on where and how you shoot.

    Here's one that uses full-frame bodies:

    http://www.odpmagazine.co.za/index.p...r=84&Itemid=11


    It's possible that a replacement for D700 is out soon. Then again, who knows. I've read that a local nature photographer just bought a D700 instead of a D7000.

  6. #6
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    1,797
    Threads
    248
    Thank You Posts

    Default A new option, the D7000

    I just got mine, love it! And, it's cheap!

    The ISO advantage of the D700, which I used to own, is now essentially gone, with the release of the D7000.
    For macro, the DX format has a DOF advantage, at the cost of a smaller viewfinder. For wildlife, again the 1.5 crop factor is an advantage for reach. For landscape the advantage goes to FF, for its use with wide angles.

    Agree with the comments about the the D700 being long-in-the-tooth. You could get a used one cheap, though if you are primarily are interested in full frame. I now shoot a D3s, which enjoys about a stop and a half advantage over the D700. But I still prefer the DX format for just plain reach. Personally, I wouldn't buy the D700 now.

    I do a lot of macro, and I am in the process of testing the D7000. Early results are very promising. You should check out this camera before you buy anything!

    So far, the sharpness of the D7000 is just plain great. Look at some of Mike Moats' new stuff with his D7000............he seems to love it. Also, I would not chase the FF idea unless you are prepared to shell out major bucks for the pro-glass to go along with it. Your current DX lenses will be essentially useless at 5.1 Meg.
    Last edited by Jay Sheinfield; 11-28-2010 at 08:28 AM.

  7. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Millington Md.
    Posts
    2,513
    Threads
    365
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks for all the advice...I am now leaning toward waiting for Nikon's next DX format and perhaps buying some quality glass now!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics