PDA

View Full Version : Nikon D700


bigmac
07-01-2008, 09:43 PM
Nikon has announced the D700. It appears to basically be a D300 with the full frame sensor of the D3. Best guess is it will be about $3000. Expensive, but the D3 is a killer camera for detail and high-ISO performance and it looks like the D700 will certainly be as good.

Nikon D700 link... (http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25444/D700.html)

OK, pretty FAR off-topic for a boating forum, but I know some of you are Nikon users, and this is a significant camera for Nikon as well as the entire digital SLR market. IMHO it signals the beginning of the movement toward full frame digital photography.

http://mccollister.info/D700-2.jpg
http://mccollister.info/D700-1.jpg

trickskier
07-01-2008, 09:48 PM
I love Nikon Camera's.......................I still use my 8008
Looks like only doctors & lawyers will be able to afford that one....................;)

bigmac
07-01-2008, 09:54 PM
I love Nikon Camera's.......................I still use my 8008
Looks like only doctors & lawyers will be able to afford that one....................;)

As opposed to a $60,000 boat, you mean?

Nikon 8008? Is that one of those cameras where the digital imaging sensor was replaced by an advancing roll of acetate coated with a light-sensitive emulsion?

trickskier
07-01-2008, 10:00 PM
As opposed to a $60,000 boat, you mean?

Nikon 8008? Is that one of those cameras where the digital imaging sensor was replaced by an advancing roll of acetate coated with a light-sensitive emulsion?

LOL.......................Well we can't have everything.....................8p

As far as your comments on my Nikon 8008.................I have NO idea what you just asked................:confused:

I can tell you that it uses 35mm film, has auto focus lenses, and can shoot 3.8 frames a second................;)

bigmac
07-01-2008, 10:02 PM
LOL.......................Well we can't have everything.....................8p

As far as your comments on my Nikon 8008.................I have NO idea what you just asked................:confused:

I can tell you that it uses 35mm film, has auto focus lenses, and can shoot 3.8 frames a second................;)

Yeah. THAT'S it...it was called "film"...I remember those days.

trickskier
07-01-2008, 10:04 PM
Yeah. THAT'S it...it was called "film"...

LOL.....................I need another Cutty...................:toast:

stuartmcnair
07-02-2008, 12:27 PM
That is a darn nice camera. Canon better update the 5D soon.

bigmac
07-02-2008, 12:41 PM
That is a darn nice camera. Canon better update the 5D soon.

It's an interesting market now. My suspicion is that the D300 and D3, and now the D700, has taken the market emphasis off of resolution and placed it on high-ISO performance. Looks like the market has spoken that 12 megapixels is plenty - give us less noise. Furthermore, with the D700 at $3000, Canon now has free reign to bump the feature set of the 5D, which is arguably less than the 40D. If the market for that full-frame camera is now at the $3000 range, the 5D MkII could be a real competitor for the D700 as long as it has equivalent ISO performance and feature set. Toward that end, going to a 17mp sensor would make noise a bigger problem, not to mention the higher cost of such such a sensor.

Maristar210
07-02-2008, 01:00 PM
BigMac

I am getting ready to pull the trigger on a Nikon. I am leaning towards the D40 with the extra lens for about the same price as the D60 with the standard lens. Any thoughts?

tia - Steve

bigmac
07-02-2008, 03:07 PM
BigMac

I am getting ready to pull the trigger on a Nikon. I am leaning towards the D40 with the extra lens for about the same price as the D60 with the standard lens. Any thoughts?

tia - Steve

The D40 is a great camera, no question. The only downside to it IMHO is that it will only work with Nikon's AF-S lenses that have the focusing motor built into the lens (that's most of the current zooms, though). The older series autofocus lenses require the older screw-drive motor that's built into all of Nikon's other current cameras. That's not really a big deal unless you are looking at some of the older prime lenses. This point of contention tends to manifest itself most with Nikon's classic 50mm f/1.8 lens. It's a very sharp non-zoom lens and only costs $100, but won't autofocus with the D40. If you're planning on staying with most of the current zoom lenses, you won't have an issue.

FYI, DPR has a very good review here (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page25.asp)....

Here is another opinion (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm) by Ken Rockwell. I'm generally not big Ken Rockwell fan, but his review of the D40 is pretty much in line with the general consensus of camera reviewers.


.

Maristar210
07-02-2008, 03:48 PM
The D40 is a great camera, no question. The only downside to it IMHO is that it will only work with Nikon's AF-S lenses that have the focusing motor built into the lens (that's most of the current zooms, though). The older series autofocus lenses require the older screw-drive motor that's built into all of Nikon's other current cameras. That's not really a big deal unless you are looking at some of the older prime lenses. This point of contention tends to manifest itself most with Nikon's classic 50mm f/1.8 lens. It's a very sharp non-zoom lens and only costs $100, but won't autofocus with the D40. If you're planning on staying with most of the current zoom lenses, you won't have an issue.

FYI, DPR has a very good review here (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page25.asp)....

Here is another opinion (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm) by Ken Rockwell. I'm generally not big Ken Rockwell fan, but his review of the D40 is pretty much in line with the general consensus of camera reviewers.


.


I saw the Ken Rockwell article and thats what was changing my mind towards the D40. I think that is the one for me.

Thanks - I knew you were the man to ask.

MYMC
07-02-2008, 06:42 PM
Bigmac you ever decide if the D3 was the one?

trickskier
07-02-2008, 09:51 PM
Hey Bigmac....................Do you have any "UNUSED" 35mm Film you want to send me??? :D

bigmac
07-03-2008, 01:23 AM
Bigmac you ever decide if the D3 was the one?

I've had this D3 for several months now...several thousand shots. It is an amazing camera, and I absolutely believe there is nothing on the market today that is even close to being its equal as an action/sports camera. It's definitely been the one for me. I can't think of a negative thing to say about it, other than its price. It is an astonishing camera in every way.

As of yesterday, however, the D700 uses the same image sensor and AF system as the D3 in a smaller, lighter body and will certainly perform as well as the D3, with the exception of its slower frame rate, at $2000 cheaper. Body not as rugged. It won't have the same Rolex feel to it.

I can't recommend the D3 strongly enough as an action/sports camera, especially for use getting tossed around in a boat with a bunch of wet people, and for taking action shots of attractive women on wakeboards.

If budget/size/weight are considerations...the D700 will be an excellent compromise. And really, a little farther down the scale, the D300 ain't no slouch either.

bigmac
07-03-2008, 01:26 AM
Hey Bigmac....................Do you have any "UNUSED" 35mm Film you want to send me??? :D

You mean acetate coated with a light-sensitive emulsion? I have some around here somewhere, but it's at least 8 years old...:)

MYMC
07-03-2008, 11:14 AM
All I needed to hear...thank you!

I've had this D3 for several months now...several thousand shots. It is an amazing camera, and I absolutely believe there is nothing on the market today that is even close to being its equal as an action/sports camera. It's definitely been the one for me. I can't think of a negative thing to say about it, other than its price. It is an astonishing camera in every way.

As of yesterday, however, the D700 uses the same image sensor and AF system as the D3 in a smaller, lighter body and will certainly perform as well as the D3, with the exception of its slower frame rate, at $2000 cheaper. Body not as rugged. It won't have the same Rolex feel to it.

I can't recommend the D3 strongly enough as an action/sports camera, especially for use getting tossed around in a boat with a bunch of wet people, and for taking action shots of attractive women on wakeboards.

If budget/size/weight are considerations...the D700 will be an excellent compromise. And really, a little farther down the scale, the D300 ain't no slouch either.

G-man
07-04-2008, 09:02 AM
It is about time the full frame sensor make it to more affordable market. It will be nice to use a ultra wide angle lens and get the full view of the lens.

bigmac
07-04-2008, 12:40 PM
Bigmac you ever decide if the D3 was the one?

Mike, I'm assuming that your interest in such a camera, at least in part, involves high quality images of people being towed behind a boat. FYI, this is an image I shot of my nephew last night about an hour before sunset (this is his second year on water skis). It was shot with the D3 at 200mm with a 70-200VR zoom lens. The ISO was set at 2200 because light was getting low and I wanted a shutter speed of 1/1000th to minimize motion blur. The image is cropped about 40%. I couldn't have made this shot with this sharpness, in this light, with so little noise in a bouncing boat with any other camera that I've ever used. This is right out of the camera with no editing except cropping, sizing, and conversion from RAW to JPEG.

http://mccollister.info/charlie.jpg

http://mccollister.info/charlienocrop.jpg


Here is the original image it was cropped and rotated from

MYMC
07-07-2008, 11:34 AM
Mike, I'm assuming that your interest in such a camera, at least in part, involves high quality images of people being towed behind a boat. FYI, this is an image I shot of my nephew last night about an hour before sunset (this is his second year on water skis). It was shot with the D3 at 200mm with a 70-200VR zoom lens. The ISO was set at 2200 because light was getting low and I wanted a shutter speed of 1/1000th to minimize motion blur. The image is cropped about 40%. I couldn't have made this shot with this sharpness, in this light, with so little noise in a bouncing boat with any other camera that I've ever used. This is right out of the camera with no editing except cropping, sizing, and conversion from RAW to JPEG.

http://mccollister.info/charlie.jpg

http://mccollister.info/charlienocrop.jpg


Here is the original image it was cropped and rotated from

Great stuff...BTW tell him to get some weight on that front foot!

bigmac
07-07-2008, 11:39 AM
Great stuff...BTW tell him to get some weight on that front foot!

I did...he told me that makes him go too fast...:)