Some questions for satisfied D700 users.

monochromejrnl said:
$2400AUD is an awful lot of money to spend if you're not sure. Why not rent?
Click to expand...



The camera will generate a small income over the year as has done my M8 up until now which cost me more than twice as much, so $2400.00 three years on is not a huge amount compared to the Leica.

I don't actually doubt that the D700 will be more than capable of doing what I need and having had a D70 for several years (sold it) I have a high opinion of Nikon DSLRs generally.

My main consideration will be deciding the future of the M8!
 
Keith said:
Now that the D700 truly appears to be the camera that will make my life easier in gloomy gallery shoots there is the next problem to overcome of course.

I've been back to the Oz site that has the camera in stock @ $2400.00 AUD with my cursor hovering over the 'checkout' box numerous times now ... but keep getting spooked at the last minute and coming back here to re-read this thread for reassurance that I'm doing the right thing.

This is the part I really don't like! 😱
Click to expand...

Keith, once you start seeing the results the D700 is capable of, all that doubt will fade away to be a distant memory. The D700 is THAT good.

Thinking that there couldn't possibly be that much of a difference in performance, I put off upgrading from the D200 to the D700 for over a year. Now that I have upgraded, I'm kicking myself for not doing it sooner.
 
jonmanjiro said:
Keith, once you start seeing the results the D700 is capable of, all that doubt will fade away to be a distant memory. The D700 is THAT good.

Thinking that there couldn't possibly be that much of a difference in performance, I put off upgrading from the D200 to the D700 for over a year. Now that I have upgraded, I'm kicking myself for not doing it sooner.
Click to expand...


I'm a chronic sufferer of 'buyer's remorse' ... whether it be a fifty dollar item or a five thousand dollar item!

I do get over it quickly though luckily! 😛
 
Keith,

I got rid of a D2X and a D300 in favor of my D700. It's the camera existing-light shooters have been dreaming about for decades. ISO3200 shots are absolutely publishable. In fact, Steve McCurry is now shooting the D700. It's his digital F100...it is my digital F6.

I'd say images I shoot at ISO3200 on the D700 have less noise and far better dynamic range and color fidelity than my D2X had at ISO800. It's made it very stress-free to get usable existing-light captures.

As far as manual focus...I honestly have to say "why bother?" Part of what makes the D700 such a great machine is it's AF. I can fire off a publishable snap shot as quickly as raising the VF to my eye...it's THAT good. Auto ISO set at 3200 max, minimum shutter set at 1/60, aperture priority at about 2.8 or so on fast lenses...it hums.

As far as size...it's not so big and bulky if you consider that you're getting medium-format-sharp images in a small-format SLR body. for casual shooting, I bring a 50/1.4 and a 24/2.8...if I want to go lighter, just a 35/2.

At the end of the day, is it as fun as strolling with an M6? No...but i've never taken technically better pictures in my career.

3687798884_0bcb36b4f6_o.jpg


3687813640_858b58d72f_b.jpg


4029717741_05a85c3f11_b.jpg


3687018561_ec828a45ee_b.jpg
 
I don`t think my D40/200/700 can touch a leica digi, but they are very close for 99% of what I do. 8 months ago i got a FE2 and a F2S last week. Ordered 200 feet of Tmax 100 &400 also.

Leica digi is simply way too expensive. Maybe someday. Still have all the M and R cameras and a few dozen lenses.

At least I have a system with one set of lenses that can be both digital and analog. Nikon.
 
Ronald M said:
I don`t think my D40/200/700 can touch a leica digi, but they are very close for 99% of what I do.
Click to expand...

Can you explain this? Reading this thread should tell anyone that a D700 is way ahead of Leica digital in high iso perf' apart from physical size. If you want to make a misleading statement could you please quantify it and back it up with some info. There are plenty on here who use both m8,9 and d700 or who have. Image quality wise especially at the high iso Keith's original post was about, the D700 just leaves Leica digi BEHIND.
 
I think where the D700 really leaves the M8/M9 in it's wake is mainstream usage. There are people out there, and we've all seen the posted images, who can get some pretty amazing high ISO results from the Leica courtesy of their own comprehensive post processing skills.

However ... I and many others don't have such abilities and to have a camera that can produce relatively clean 3200 or even 6400 ISO files without the need for extensive PP is where it's at for many of us!

I spend freakin' hours in front of my computer after each gallery shoot agonising over blown highlights and noisy shadows ... it's time to move on!
 
Keith said:
it's time to move on!
Click to expand...

probably, but perhaps not quite yet... judging rate of new products shown in DPreview almost daily, next round of camera announcements should be behind corner. if nothing else, it should drop D700 prices also ?
 
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10020901nikon24mmf14.asp


24mm f1.4 AFS released today. I'm willing to bet that it will be at least as good if not better than canons 24mm 1.4L. on dcwatchimpress.co.jp they had an interview with a nikon executive, and he said that this year they will be concentrating on super fast prime lenses.

I actually had a play with a d700 in a camera store today. I have to tell you, the d700 is quite a bit nicer than the canon 5d/mk2 body. The AF blows the 5d away. The only thing really keeping me with the 5d at the moment is the fast primes canon make, but that's all changing.

According to the press release that 24mm 1.4 has a magnesium body too... as opposed to the canons plastic body....


hmmm...
 
jarski said:
probably, but perhaps not quite yet... judging rate of new products shown in DPreview almost daily, next round of camera announcements should be behind corner. if nothing else, it should drop D700 prices also ?
Click to expand...



You're right here of course ... Nikon's next full frame pro-sumer camera will probably have another six megapixels and quite likely video function and who knows what else. I guess like all manfacturers of mass consumer items they have to keep upping the ante to keep the public buying the latest and greatest. 😀
 
fdigital said:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10020901nikon24mmf14.asp


24mm f1.4 AFS released today. I'm willing to bet that it will be at least as good if not better than canons 24mm 1.4L. on dcwatchimpress.co.jp they had an interview with a nikon executive, and he said that this year they will be concentrating on super fast prime lenses.
Click to expand...

sssshhhhweeeeeettt sounding lens!!! this lens combined with the D700 (or later?) body will make for an incredible low light combo! suffering GAS already .... :bang:

AFS_24_G_ED_l_001.jpg
 
Last edited:
I honestly can't see why this is needed. The 24 2.8 afd is a great lens, sure if you want more shallow dof at this focal length but not for available light reasons
 
Last edited:
I suppose for those that can justify it is has some advantages but as you say with a sensor that can produce clean files up to 3200 ISO or more, it's hardly needed really.

But no doubt Leica aren't having too much trouble selling ten thousand dollar Noctilux's ... so what's expensive? 😛
 
I saw prices being much lower (2199 US$ for 24, 1259 US$ for 16-35)
Pay attention that is a G-lens so on the FM3a it won't work 🙁
Passing from D to G mount is of course meaningful for newer bodies, much less for older
However a 24 F/1.4 means having a 5 MP (dx crop readily selectable on camera) 36 F/1.4 lens at hands anytime that work just like a rangefinder lens. Actually, I'd have preferred a 28 / 42 but that's me, I'm sure many people out there were waiting for such lens !
 
Last edited:
Hi Keith —

I haven't been by here lately. What a surprise, the interest generated by your question and the informative replies thus engendered. I can't add too much of value. Maybe my personal experience.

You have your 5D protagonists, and it is a great camera. I've had one. But for me, the Nikon D700 is the best camera I've ever had, including all the Hasselblads, Nikons, Leicas and other assorted brands owned by me over the last 60+ years. I guess that's an unqualified endorsement!

Also, the Sigma 50 has as good a reputation as the Nikon 50G.

Let us know what you've decided.
 
Keith said:
I'm a chronic sufferer of 'buyer's remorse' ... whether it be a fifty dollar item or a five thousand dollar item!

I do get over it quickly though luckily! 😛
Click to expand...

Keith, you might want to enquire how much it would cost to rent the camera for that one job. As others have said Nikon is (apparently) likely to release a successor to the D700 soon. As soon as the new camera is announced many people who want to 'update' will start putting their gear up for sale so you'll have a)a wider choice of used D700 and b)probably a lower price.

Also, renting the camera first will give you enough time to fall in love with it so you won't feel even a bit of remorse when clicking that "buy" button 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom