nobbylon
Veteran
Keith,
You seem to be wanting a 35mm 1.4, is there a reason for this as it's not great wide open. f4 ish onward. I settled on a 35 afd f2 for this focal length and find at f2 it's pretty good but at 2.8 on it's great. This is the point though with the D700. You don't need all the fancy expensive large aperture glass because the sensor is so good. Pick up the manual primes that have proved themselves over time, add a couple of autofocus for convenience if you like and your set up.
My lens list for the D700 is,
24 f2.8 AFD
28 f2.8 AIS
35 f2 AFD
50 f1.4 AFD
50 f2, H, HC, AI
85 f1.8 K series
105 f2.5 AI (longer focus throw than AIS for better focus on D700)same glass
gavinlg
Veteran
For a 35mm nikkor, the 35mm f2 AFD is really quite a good lens, and cheap!
The zeiss 50mm would be good as well, but you'd want to make sure you're okay manual focussing on the d700 before you use it for real work... I love manual focussing but wouldn't use an MF lens personally on the job (even with the ee-s manual focussing screen in the 5d) - AF is just significantly quicker and more reliable.
The zeiss 50mm would be good as well, but you'd want to make sure you're okay manual focussing on the d700 before you use it for real work... I love manual focussing but wouldn't use an MF lens personally on the job (even with the ee-s manual focussing screen in the 5d) - AF is just significantly quicker and more reliable.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
You're probably right ... I think I'm a little locked into being so limited with ISO and will take a while to get used to being able to shoot comfortably at 6400 or higher ... so maybe f2 will be sufficient!
If this is the case I would like a 35mm Zeiss lens to match the 50 1.4 Planar I already have if I go that way.
Jamie123
Veteran
I think shooting 'comfortably at ISO 6400 or higher' is a bit exaggerated. Firstly, anything higher than 6400 will not be real ISO, but a software boost/push. Secondly, I haven't used the D700 but on my 5DII ISO 6400 is somewhat usable for b&w. However, I'd still rather not go over 3200.
nobbylon
Veteran
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
thats the difference between a 5d ii and a d700, 6400 is usable
To be honest some of the stuff I've handed the uni arts dept on disc after these shoots has been pretty ordinary in regards to noise and general image quality. Luckily for me they seem to be interested in the artistic aspect of them far more so than the technical qualities.
I think 6400 with the D700 will blow them away!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
And I meant to ask ... a 35mm f2 AF-D would function on my FM3A normally I gather?
I've been staring at the lens compatabilty charts on Rockwell's site and it appears to be compatable with a manual focus body such as the FM3A!
I've been staring at the lens compatabilty charts on Rockwell's site and it appears to be compatable with a manual focus body such as the FM3A!
Jamie123
Veteran
thats the difference between a 5d ii and a d700, 6400 is usable
Actually, if you look at the comparisons (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page21.asp) the two cameras are pretty much on par as far as noise is concerned.
What is or isn't 'usable' really depends on your own standards.
nobbylon
Veteran
yes it's compatible Keith. As long as whichever lens you mount has the cut outs on the outer edge of the aperture ring you will be fine. I think a couple of the extreme wides have a problem on the d700 but not much. As long as the manual lenses are ai'd it's ok. I use all my AF lenses on my F2's and F.
nobbylon
Veteran
You're right of course and at this level of performance I think it makes no difference which camera you choose. Just a decision on which other cameras and lenses you have. I like Nikon's, that's all.
gavinlg
Veteran
thats the difference between a 5d ii and a d700, 6400 is usable
I know that was a lighthearted comment, but:
ISO 5000 (3200 + just over half a stop in PP)
(bigger - http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2794/4036079868_894e98c917_o.jpg)
ISO 6400 (3200 + 1 stop in PP)
Both with the 5d "classic" with only chroma (color) noise reduction.
The 5dII definitely is better in this regard, so i'd expect iso 6400 would be fine with it. The d700 is definitely the better of the two in terms of high ISO noise, but it doesn't have the resolution of the 5dII or even the original 5d due to it's thicker AA filter.
pawel glogowski
Member
No idea, i'm not selling mine
Depends - for moving subjects i cant imagine manual focus on D700's original focusing screen (or any other DSLR's). I guess Katz Eye is a must.
For still subjects, and when You have time - green dot is fine :]
I have slight vison defect, and never use glasses for shooting, so it's even harder for me.
Yes, they are as good - there is only one camera that can do better - D3s (the matter if it's acceptable for You is a different thing
)As to sample photos - i guess i've never needed ISO 6400 in low light situations, concerts or ever.
ISO 3200, I used with no restrictions when needed even in poor lightning conditions, like in this documentary.
Very heavy, but fortunately comfortable at the same time.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
No idea, i'm not selling mine
Depends - for moving subjects i cant imagine manual focus on D700's original focusing screen (or any other DSLR's). I guess Katz Eye is a must.
For still subjects, and when You have time - green dot is fine :]
I have slight vison defect, and never use glasses for shooting, so it's even harder for me.
Yes, they are as good - there is only one camera that can do better - D3s (the matter if it's acceptable for You is a different thing
As to sample photos - i guess i've never needed ISO 6400 in low light situations, concerts or ever.
ISO 3200, I used with no restrictions when needed even in poor lightning conditions, like in this documentary.
Very heavy, but fortunately comfortable at the same time.
pawel,
Thanks for the comprehensive reply.
Great slideshow by the way ... I gather it was done wth a fairly wide lens in what looks like a rathert tight environment. Really got the atmosphere of what was happening there!
Cheers ... Keith
jky
Well-known
The 35mm f2 + D700 is a nice walk-about package. As compact as the set can get without getting into the Voigtlander SLII pancakes...
Makten
-
I've had the 35/2 AI, 35/2 AF-D, 35/1.4 AIS and CV 40/2. I bought a Zeiss 35/2 Distagon today, and even if I haven't even tried to stop it down more than to f/2.8 yet, I can tell you that it beats the **** out of the others at f/2-2.8. The Ultron is second best at wide apertures.
Edit: But it sure ain't small or light.
venchka
Veteran
Welcome to the Dark Side Keith. I worked a 3-way deal with Bubba for a Canon 1D Mk III. I already had 3 Canon zooms. I got a super deal on the 1D and found a good home for Bubba. I haven't used the digital Machine Gun much yet. I did use it enough to really like ISO 3200+.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
www.keh.com
Here in Europe a very clean D700 will go for about 1400 Euros
The standard focusing screen is clear and not very good for manual focusing. It is very fine and doesn't 'pop' in to focus like the coarser screen in something like an SL. You get focus confirmation, but it's really no good for anything but static objects. You can't focus on a moving subject and keep your eye on the green dot at the same time.
I've read that this is the best focusing screen and will not screw up the metering system, unlike some others. Installation seems pretty easy.
http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/item--Nikon-D700-Focusing-Screen--prod_D700.html
I would also give Nikon a call and check if they have a split focus screen available.
The viewfinder itself is very bright and has excellent contrast. Not quite as good as an R8/R9, but what is? You also get that nice, big, round eye piece. It's not as big as on the F3, but much better than most cameras out there.
I used to shoot mine between 1600 and 3200asa with a Zeiss ZF Planar 1.4/50. 1600 is astonishingly good. It looks like 400 asa from cameras of the previous generation. 3200 is very, very good, but I could notice some loss of dynamic range. 6400 was perfectly useable. Above that things got interesting. 25000 asa was very grainy, but had an interesting look. Imagine TMAX3200 in color.
Keep in mind that this camera will see far deeper in to the shadows than any film camera and most digital bodies at the equal asa. I was consistently amazed at how little light this camera needed to make a useable picture. With a fast prime 1600/3200 was all I ever needed and I mostly shot at 1600-2000.
It goes without saying that it dwarfs the M8/9.
Remember the Canon EOS 1-V with a 1.4/50 or the Canon 5D with a 50?That's about how big it is.
It's bigger than my R8/Winder/50 Cron and heavier.
It's bigger than a F100.
While the D700 body is on the beefy side, it's not a monster either like the big bodies with the built in vertical grip.
I only shot the D700 with primes (2/35, 1.4/50), but frankly after 12 years with the M series and Nikon F/F2/F3 I felt like I was lugging around a miniature Speed Graphic. Keep in mind that there is no fast AF 1.4/35 from Nikon, unless they release one at PMA. Of course you can use the MF 1.4/35 and the Zeiss 2/35 (highly recommended). Note that some of the older Nikkors with cause purple fringing. My old 2/35 fringed like crazy and really wasn't useable on the D700.
My other beef was that it's not exactly a cheap looking piece of gear. I sometimes shoot in some less than ideal areas and I always felt like a target with that thing. I would much prefer an M8/M9 that looks like an analog camera and can be concealed in a jacket pocket.
That right there is one of the main reasons why I sold the D700.
I have no idea what I am going to replace it with, since I can't swing an M9 and have my doubts about the quirky M8.2. The idea of shooting with a big red IR filter on every lens seems less than ideal... And as you mentioned earlier 1250 really is pushing it with the M8.x.
Regardless of the above, I have to say that the D700 was hands down the best DSLR I have ever used and not by a small margin.
It's 'only' 12MP, but the image quality is off the scale good. Noise is not an issue up to and including 6400. The camera is blazing fast and responsive. The AF is dead on. The ergonomics are close to perfect. This camera was designed by photographers, not a marketing committee. The 3D color matrix metering system is incredibly accurate and blows away anything I have ever seen from another maker.
The Nikon pro series is also the only DSLR that really supports manual focusing lenses. Yes, you can now also get the Zeiss glass for Canon EF, but I do not feel that the Canon ergonomics are set up for working like that. Nikon on the other hand offically supports manual focusing and it show in the menu options and ergonomics.
If I was a working photojournalist I would buy myself a pair of D700 and run them with Zeiss ZF primes (28/35/50)
Last edited:
agricola
Well-known
Keith -
* I second the idea of using the D700's AF at the gallery opening rather than MF - it will be more accurate and much quicker, particularly if it is an AFS nikkor, and you can concentrate on other things and not miss shots
* a bit of spot metering on things you don't want to be blown out will work wonders
* at f1.4 the dof is so shallow, very tricky to focus manually even in good light - and you don't need to be that wide open when you have the D700 - a modern Nikkor zoom with a max. aperture of f2.8 will be fine - in fact, from my experience, bloody marvellous
* depending on the lighting you may find such a Nikkor can give you satisfactory shots at f4 or 5.6 at 35mm (satisfactory in the sense that a good dof at functions such as these is sometimes a Good Thing) - after all, from what I read, the D700 can go to 3200 easily, maybe 6400!
* I have only the lowly D200 but one good AFS zoom and a couple of others - I'll PM you about a loan
* btw, if you are purchasing a nikkor to go with the D700 get as modern as you can afford - but as an old timer myself I steer clear of the gelded G series lenses; I like to see apertures and dof scales - finally, the modern zooms and primes will work just fine on your FM3A, I use them on an FE.
best
Dan
P.S. Harry Lime has said a lot of wise things about making a commitment to something as expensive and large as the D700. I don't know if I can bring myself to go bigger than the D200 which is smaller and yet, for me, too big most of the time.
P.P.S. Now that I have seen the announcement of the Nikkor 24mm f1.4 AFS-G I may, like Fagin, "have to think it out again!"
* I second the idea of using the D700's AF at the gallery opening rather than MF - it will be more accurate and much quicker, particularly if it is an AFS nikkor, and you can concentrate on other things and not miss shots
* a bit of spot metering on things you don't want to be blown out will work wonders
* at f1.4 the dof is so shallow, very tricky to focus manually even in good light - and you don't need to be that wide open when you have the D700 - a modern Nikkor zoom with a max. aperture of f2.8 will be fine - in fact, from my experience, bloody marvellous
* depending on the lighting you may find such a Nikkor can give you satisfactory shots at f4 or 5.6 at 35mm (satisfactory in the sense that a good dof at functions such as these is sometimes a Good Thing) - after all, from what I read, the D700 can go to 3200 easily, maybe 6400!
* I have only the lowly D200 but one good AFS zoom and a couple of others - I'll PM you about a loan
* btw, if you are purchasing a nikkor to go with the D700 get as modern as you can afford - but as an old timer myself I steer clear of the gelded G series lenses; I like to see apertures and dof scales - finally, the modern zooms and primes will work just fine on your FM3A, I use them on an FE.
best
Dan
P.S. Harry Lime has said a lot of wise things about making a commitment to something as expensive and large as the D700. I don't know if I can bring myself to go bigger than the D200 which is smaller and yet, for me, too big most of the time.
P.P.S. Now that I have seen the announcement of the Nikkor 24mm f1.4 AFS-G I may, like Fagin, "have to think it out again!"
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
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!
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!
monochromejrnl
Well-known
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!
$2400AUD is an awful lot of money to spend if you're not sure. Why not rent?