kshapero
South Florida Man
Greg, thanks for always bringing me back down to earth.
rya
Established
Akiva,
Would you not sell a D700 for the same reasons that you sold your previous digital nikons? The capture quality may have increased, but were you ever really dissatisfied with it before?
I have come to the current belief that my enjoyment and use of photography is more centered around the how it is done than what image I can get from it. I like using a film leica more than a D300 even though the D300 is comparably extremely versatile.
New nikon digital offerings are so tempting to try, but I am afraid that I will not find it satisfactory as I did before whether it be because of the digital part or the SLR part.
I think weather-proofing on the M9 would seal the deal for me.
Would you not sell a D700 for the same reasons that you sold your previous digital nikons? The capture quality may have increased, but were you ever really dissatisfied with it before?
I have come to the current belief that my enjoyment and use of photography is more centered around the how it is done than what image I can get from it. I like using a film leica more than a D300 even though the D300 is comparably extremely versatile.
New nikon digital offerings are so tempting to try, but I am afraid that I will not find it satisfactory as I did before whether it be because of the digital part or the SLR part.
I think weather-proofing on the M9 would seal the deal for me.
fleetwoodjazz
Established
Reading this thread I have the impression that most of us want a full frame digital rangefinder but can't afford to buy one.
It is also true to my case.
Maybe we need Nikon or Epson to do something here. I'm very sure that if Nikon manage to build a S full frame rangefinder at about 2000-3000 USD, they would kill Leica.
It is also true to my case.
Maybe we need Nikon or Epson to do something here. I'm very sure that if Nikon manage to build a S full frame rangefinder at about 2000-3000 USD, they would kill Leica.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Surely in real world usage the M9 has to be compared to a D700 fitted with a prime and not a "honking great zoom!" Put a Noctilux on an M9 and a fast 50mm prime on a D700 and how much will the weight difference be realstically ... the Noct is a substantial lens I gather. Whatever speed advantage the Leica setup has will be more than offset by the Nikon's extrordinary high ISO performance.
The only professional work I get is shooting in light that barely allows me to read a shutter dial most of the time ... when it comes time to replace my M8 the stop or so advantage an M9 may give me isn't worth the extra investment. I would have to choose the D700 and live with the extra bulk!
The only professional work I get is shooting in light that barely allows me to read a shutter dial most of the time ... when it comes time to replace my M8 the stop or so advantage an M9 may give me isn't worth the extra investment. I would have to choose the D700 and live with the extra bulk!
Last edited:
Fraser
Well-known
If you can afford it buy it!
Value for money no way, would I buy one no.
I just don't need one, for work I use Canon Mk11s and Mk111s, when I'm not at work I use a G9, if it was half the price was decent up to 1600 iso and was autofocus maybe, who knows!
Value for money no way, would I buy one no.
I just don't need one, for work I use Canon Mk11s and Mk111s, when I'm not at work I use a G9, if it was half the price was decent up to 1600 iso and was autofocus maybe, who knows!
Merkin
For the Weekend
Rangefinder focusing is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The EVIL cameras are the modern equivalent of film rangefinders. Sadly, no one has gotten one right yet, and it doesn't look like Ricoh's is going to be much better. Here is hoping Nikon will get em right.
As to schlepping a D700 all day, it is really not difficult at all except with the very heaviest lenses, vertical grip, and flash. I keep my vertical grip on all the time, but if I am just going out to shoot for fun, I only take a 35-70 2.8. It is not at all a burdensome kit, you can shoot all day with it with no problems. Sure, the camera is heavier, and the lens is heavier, but I don't have to carry a bag, extra film, extra batteries, extra lenses, etc. I just grab my camera and go. I don't even have to worry about filters because I can choose what filtration I want in post.
Also, if you are coming from film to digital, a D700 pays for itself very quickly. If you assume ten dollars for film and processing for each 36 exposure roll, a refurb D700 completely pays for itself in 7560 clicks of the shutter. (It would take over 25k shots for an M9 to pay for itself.) Considering I have taken close to half that in the last not-quite-six months, the D700 is the most economical camera I have ever owned (with the Holga being the least economical camera I have ever owned). Yes, the amount of shooting I do has gone through the roof, but I consider this a good thing, especially seeing as how i have been able to maintain my keeper ratio. Even if I was still shooting the same amount as I was shooting on film, the D700 would still pay for itself a couple times over during the 5 year lifespan I plan on getting out of it before it gets IR converted.
Also, anyone who tells you that you can't do "proper street photography" (whatever that is) with a D700 is a liar.
dfoo
Well-known
Oh, who am I to disagree then? I guess the conversation is over!
Merkin
For the Weekend
I challenge you to disagree. I am just not convinced that it is possible.
Saying that rangefinder focusing is a means to an end and not an end to itself does not mean that there is anything wrong with liking rangefinder focusing as a focusing method, but it is not a magic bullet or a holy grail. Pictures are not made better SOLELY because they were made using rangefinder focusing. If your goal is to just go out and twiddle a rf patch around for a few hours, why bother taking the picture?
As to reasons why the D700 might not be suitable for "proper street photography:-
Some say it is too loud. The difference in volume between a D700 and an RF camera is less than the difference in volume between a point and shoot digital (silent) and a Leica. The fact of the matter is that the sound of a D700 isn't going to "give you away" much more often than the sound of a rf camera.
Some say it is too big, too obtrusive. This depends more on the lens you use than the camera. If you are shooting with a 50 1.8 or a 45 2.8, it is plenty unobtrusive. With an ubertelephoto, it can be quite obtrusive, but if you are shooting "proper street photography" with a lens that big, you are doing it wrong. Besides, it is actually easier to get good hip shots from the D700 than it is from a rangefinder, especially when using the vertical grip, because the extra weight tends to act like a self-leveling device, as well as because of the fantastic and fast autofocus that tracks its subject.
Some say it is slower. The only way a Leica is very fast to operate is using a hyperfocal method- presetting your aperture and your focus so the camera basically operates as a point-and-shoot. You can do the exact same thing on any camera, so that argument is null and void. When you want to achieve precise focus and exposure, however, the D700 is MUCH faster.
In addition to all of this, the D700 can keep shooting in low light long after most any other camera has had to add a flash or quit shooting.
kshapero
South Florida Man
What does this mean? And how does the D700 work with manual focus lens?
djonesii
Well-known
I have used a D300, M6, Contax G1, and Panasonic G1 for street shooting, and each one on them fails me in a diffirent way in some situations. If I were really interested in learning the craft of street shooting, I would stick with the Leicas. IMHO, as I don't get a chance to do it as much as I would like, the Pany G1 is best for me, and the contax G1 the worst.
With the Pany, I set the kit lens to about 18mm ( 35mm on 35mm FF sensor ), flip the screen, shoot from the hip, 1/2 press, and listen for AF confrim, then fire. I'm waiting for the 20mm to become more availble in about 6 months, and will add that to the kit.
The M6 is more work, but at the same time, when I get it right, it's just such a pleasure. As I said, it's me, not the camera, if I were to use a RF for all my street work, and shoot a lot, I'd get proficient at RF focusing, I can do it, and most of the time, pretty fast, but not near as fast as the G1, and never from the hip! As I have read, and do believe, there is something special about a CRF for this applicaiton.
As for the hyper focal settings, it's just a matter of studying how to do it, and then applying the correct technique.
The D300 can be made to work for this, just like the Contax, however, it takes more bending of the way that I like to shoot to make them work in the street setting.
YMMV.
Dave
With the Pany, I set the kit lens to about 18mm ( 35mm on 35mm FF sensor ), flip the screen, shoot from the hip, 1/2 press, and listen for AF confrim, then fire. I'm waiting for the 20mm to become more availble in about 6 months, and will add that to the kit.
The M6 is more work, but at the same time, when I get it right, it's just such a pleasure. As I said, it's me, not the camera, if I were to use a RF for all my street work, and shoot a lot, I'd get proficient at RF focusing, I can do it, and most of the time, pretty fast, but not near as fast as the G1, and never from the hip! As I have read, and do believe, there is something special about a CRF for this applicaiton.
As for the hyper focal settings, it's just a matter of studying how to do it, and then applying the correct technique.
The D300 can be made to work for this, just like the Contax, however, it takes more bending of the way that I like to shoot to make them work in the street setting.
YMMV.
Dave
Merkin
For the Weekend
I am not sure which bit you are referring to, so here goes-
As to paying for itself, I mean that it pays for itself compared to shooting film. In my calculations, every 36 shots I make with the d700 are roughly ten bucks I don't have to spend on film and processing, so after a certain number of shots, the amount of money i have saved by not having to pay for film and processing is equal to the amount of money I spent on the camera. I expect that I will save several times the amount I spent on the camera over five years.
As to getting it IR converted, after 5 years, once I have bought a new camera, I will send my d700 off to have its built in infrared filter removed, so it will be a full time IR camera.
It works great manual focusing in my experience, although some say that it is hard to manual focus lenses at apertures faster than f2.8 because of the design of the screen. I've not had any problems though.
djonesii
Well-known
D300 and MF
D300 and MF
The D300 which I own, and the D700 which I do not, but functions the same, work great with MF lenses. They must be Nikon AF mount, and at minium be AI converted, it's a thing abut the linking bits and damaging a tab if the lens is not an AI lens.
The focus confirmation, and AI work if the lens is a true AI lens, and the firmware is desigend to put the correct aperature information in the EXIF if the correctet settings are entered. This is a fully manual process, and must be set each time a lens is changed.
Of course, the D300 applies a crop factor to all lenses!
I shoot the 55 1.2 which has been AI'd, awesome at F2.0 and above, a 28 2.8 which is great from 2.8 on, and an 85 1.4, which very good from 1.8 on.
Not the same drawing as their Lieca counterparts, but still qutie nice.
Dave
D300 and MF
The D300 which I own, and the D700 which I do not, but functions the same, work great with MF lenses. They must be Nikon AF mount, and at minium be AI converted, it's a thing abut the linking bits and damaging a tab if the lens is not an AI lens.
The focus confirmation, and AI work if the lens is a true AI lens, and the firmware is desigend to put the correct aperature information in the EXIF if the correctet settings are entered. This is a fully manual process, and must be set each time a lens is changed.
Of course, the D300 applies a crop factor to all lenses!
I shoot the 55 1.2 which has been AI'd, awesome at F2.0 and above, a 28 2.8 which is great from 2.8 on, and an 85 1.4, which very good from 1.8 on.
Not the same drawing as their Lieca counterparts, but still qutie nice.
Dave
dfoo
Well-known
Apparently if I disagree I'm a liar. So I'd prefer to avoid that thanks.
Merkin
For the Weekend
See, now I am curious as to why you feel it is not possible to do "proper street photography" with a D700.
*pops popcorn for breakfast*
dfoo
Well-known
Rationalization, and your calculations are not generally applicable. If you shoot slide film, they are too low. If you shoot black and white, they are too high. If you shoot C41, then they are also too high
You cannot compare the number of shots on film with digital shots anyway. In the years I had my 5D I shot 30-40k shots. With film, I simply don't shoot that way.
dfoo
Well-known
What is "proper street photography'?
Merkin
For the Weekend
I don't know, but I have seen countless people across the internet claim that it can't be done with an SLR.
dfoo
Well-known
I don't see how I can say something is or is not possible, unless I know what that "something" is.
I can tell you that I've done street photography with both a 5D and Leica, and I know where I get better results. The Leica is simply better. For me. And no, that doesn't make me a liar!
I can tell you that I've done street photography with both a 5D and Leica, and I know where I get better results. The Leica is simply better. For me. And no, that doesn't make me a liar!
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
The D700 works well with manual focus lenses. If you want to learn how that works here is a link to the owners manual in pdf http://www.nikond700.com/2008/07/d700-user-manual-and-quick-start-guide-online-now/ .
Bob
Merkin
For the Weekend
I don't see how I can say something is or is not possible, unless I know what that "something" is.
I can tell you that I've done street photography with both a 5D and Leica, and I know where I get better results. The Leica is simply better. For me. And no, that doesn't make me a liar!
You are correct, that does not make you a liar, because you acknowledge that street photography by whatever definition is not the sole purview of rangefinder cameras- you acknowledge that it can be done with a camera such as the D700. As to personal happiness with methods or images, individual results certainly vary. I personally get better results with my D700 than I did with my Leicas. With the exception of a very few extreme applications, the idea that only camera or style of camera x is acceptable for photographic application y is nonsense.