Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
After 12 years, the D700 remains one of Nikon's loved cameras; you'll still find enthusiasm for the D700 on Dpreview's Nikon forums. The camera is well built and has had few complaints in the forums overall.
The D700 was my first digital Nikon and I still use it. The Z6 was very tempting, but my D700 satisfies my landscape, cityscape, and portraiture needs very well.
However, if you become a serious "birder", it's hard to beat the optical advantages you'll get with the m43 format.
The D700 was my first digital Nikon and I still use it. The Z6 was very tempting, but my D700 satisfies my landscape, cityscape, and portraiture needs very well.
However, if you become a serious "birder", it's hard to beat the optical advantages you'll get with the m43 format.
sooner
Well-known
I just treated myself to a mint D700 from a fellow RFFer. Although my Pentax K1 does have better high-iso results, the D700 really is special: tank-like, amazing exposure, fun to shoot, and truly great results. It's a special sensor. I am thrilled I got one.
Fujiowski
Established
I've had a Nikon D700 for a couple years now, the prices on these are so cheap now and my shutter has only been used 15% of its life span so it will last me a really long time.
I recently got a Nikkor 105mm 2.5 AI manual lens for it and I love it!
I recently got a Nikkor 105mm 2.5 AI manual lens for it and I love it!
benlees
Well-known
I never really considered Nikon stuff before, but the used prices are quite low. The D800 can be had for less than $600US. That's a lot of firepower per dollar. Aren't Nikon primes also cheap but good? The 50mm 1.8- is there a good cheap 35mm AF? Edit: those D800's seem to be from the same (sketchy?) seller.. $700 + seems a safer bet.
Last edited:
12 megapixel is good enough for 'huge' prints, billboards have been made with half that much... 
But 24 gives room for cropping without losing too much res...
But 24 gives room for cropping without losing too much res...
Contarama
Well-known
Get a tripod for your landscape shots!!! Now go buy a bunch more cheap afd lenses and shoot just to shoot! You're going to become fond of that D700 I bet. What a camera....
Corran
Well-known
I have a 36 x 24 inch print hanging in my house from my D700. Processed in RAW and uprezzed carefully from a tripod-mounted shot at base ISO.
It absolutely does not stand up to somewhat close scrutiny. Of course billboards look fine when they are half a mile away. For larger than 13 x 19 prints or so I would prefer more megapixels.
D800 is not much more expensive these days and so IMO there is literally no reason to go all the way back to a D700. 36mp was/is a game-changer for a variety of reasons. That said, if all you do is 4x6 prints or an occasional 8x12 well sure no reason to bother I guess (though you still get better ISO performance, especially by binning so many pixels).
It absolutely does not stand up to somewhat close scrutiny. Of course billboards look fine when they are half a mile away. For larger than 13 x 19 prints or so I would prefer more megapixels.
D800 is not much more expensive these days and so IMO there is literally no reason to go all the way back to a D700. 36mp was/is a game-changer for a variety of reasons. That said, if all you do is 4x6 prints or an occasional 8x12 well sure no reason to bother I guess (though you still get better ISO performance, especially by binning so many pixels).
willie_901
Veteran
I believe The signal-to-noise ratio improvement you expect is possible.
Here some data that compare the noise levels in unrendered raw files for the D300 and D700. The D700 at ISO 3200 is similar to the D300 at ISO 1006. These data represent the total noise for the data.
Using a similar approach, the low-light sensitivity for both cameras can be compared. These data show the D700 is outperforms the D300 by about 1 1/3 EV. Note: this scatter plot has to be zoomed and the legend has to be modified by clicking on the brand labels in the figure legend to leave only Nikon data.
These data match my anecdotal experience when I switched from a Nikon D300 to the D700 in 2009. I particularly noticed improvements in shadow-region image quality when I selectively pushed shadow regions in interiors photography images.
The Nikon D700 is one tough camera. As with all digital cameras a decade or so old, the D700 may develop connector/switch wear issues. Shutter life is another factor and depends variations in the manufacturing processes. The D700 mean failure time is 150,000 actuations. Half will fail earlier and half will fail later. The distribution is a Gaussian so the actual shutter life for most cameras is mostly a matter of luck.
There is no reason to avoid a 9-10 year old D700. The risk (electronic or mechanical failure) is offset by the reward (low cost). The AF performance on both cameras is essentially identical.