Doing some math d700 vs D3

G

Gary Mayo

Guest
I agree with you Rodney, I think this offering by Nikon is a offering that once put to paper makes no sense for many of us.

First of all, to go from a D300 to a D700 for the little extra you get, I don't know. seems odd to me. Then if you spend just a few dollars more, you can get a flagship D3!

To put a target consumer group between the D3 & the D300 is not where I will end up.

Great Post Rodney!
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
537
Location
MA
.....Then if you spend just a few dollars more, you can get a flagship D3.......
Nobody needs a "flag ship" camera in order to capture a great picture.
For one, one can save almost $2K toward glass over a D3. The capability of shrinking your camera without losing image quality is a big plus. And the pop up flash can be very useful for fill lighting in portrait if you know how to use it.
I rather hold a lesser camera and show great images than a greater camera with mediocre images.....

But of course, for you is all about the "flag ship".....
All show....no go...
 
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
667
Location
River Forest, Illinois
Many (most?) of us here probably have a few DX lenses that will need to be replaced with FX lenses if we upgrade to the D700. That needs to be factored into the equation...

The D700 looks like another killer camera from Nikon but the one thing holding me back is the bigger, heavier, more expensive teles that I'll need to get to achieve the coverage I have today.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
3,182
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
I agree with you Rodney, I think this offering by Nikon is a offering that once put to paper makes no sense for many of us.

First of all, to go from a D300 to a D700 for the little extra you get, I don't know. seems odd to me. Then if you spend just a few dollars more, you can get a flagship D3!

To put a target consumer group between the D3 & the D300 is not where I will end up.

Great Post Rodney!
Uh..I'm fairly certain that Nikon's target audience for the D700 was not latest-gadget fad buyers looking to "upgrade" from their brand spankin' new D300 because the Joneses might out-bling them. :confused:

I would hope that their target market were more those portrait/event photographers wondering whether to jump ship from Nikon to the affordable full-frame 5D, but hoping to keep the glass they'd amassed over the last few years. And also those photographers who spent years and years in film, who find that no scene ever sets up the same with a DX sensor "angle of view" and DOF as it did with their 35mm bodies.

I am happy to have a FX and DX camera with good ISO capabilities. If I specialized in events or in photography which did not call for high frame rates at times, the D700 with it's lighter weight and FX sensor would make a great first camera or backup to my D3. Even with all the add-ons (which are certainly not mandatory), it's still a grand cheaper than the D3. $1000 still means something to a lot of folks.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Location
San Jose, CA
I agree with you Rodney, I think this offering by Nikon is a offering that once put to paper makes no sense for many of us.

First of all, to go from a D300 to a D700 for the little extra you get, I don't know. seems odd to me. Then if you spend just a few dollars more, you can get a flagship D3!

To put a target consumer group between the D3 & the D300 is not where I will end up.

Great Post Rodney!
Think about us wedding photographers, Gary. It will be much easier to use a d700 for a 5 hour gig than a d3. And the popup flash will let d700 owners use their speedlights as remotes without having to buy PocketWizards, SU800s, and such.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Im very curious to see some sample's capture's of the D700 with some classic Nikkor AIS glass. Iv got plenty if nikon want to get me to test it.:smile:
I noticed in the brochure that it wont meter with color 3D with AI-AIS.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
4,553
My personal math goes along these lines:

D700 +$2999.95
MB-D10 +$239.95
D300 -$1799.95 (which I didn't want)

only $1439,95 :biggrin:


Kinky? Yes. Self-serving? Yes. Still accurate? Yes.

After I sell my two DX lenses we'll go below the $1k mark which is in the neighborhood of a tank full of gas.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
6,068
Location
Upstate SC
First of all, to go from a D300 to a D700 for the little extra you get, I don't know. seems odd to me. Then if you spend just a few dollars more, you can get a flagship D3!
Gary, your definition of "a few dollars" kills me. Try being a serious photographer on MY budget - you'd gain a profound appreciation for just how much $1000+ actually is.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
1,423
Location
Pace, Florida
I just bought a D3 a few months ago, if the D700 would have been around, I probably would have bought it, but now that I have the D3, I wouldn't sell it for a D700.

There are a few things I have grown to love and the most important to me is shooting RAW to 2 cards at weddings. I love the 2 Compactflash slots.

If I sold to get a D700:

D3 $4200-4300 (I would hope anyway!)
D700 with Grip, En-EL4a and charger ( I had the combo on my D300 and loved this battery, 3100 pictures on second charge) $3495

Seems like about a $700-$800 gain going from a D3 and a D700 w/grip and battery system like the D3, which I don't think is worth it with the D3's VF and Dual Compactflash slots.

I do like the pop-up flash, I know we aren't suppose to like them, but from time to time, I miss it on the D3. :biggrin:

I also like the fact that the D3 has 300,000 shutter life instead of 150K. I will never keep it that long!:tongue:

I think the D700 is a great option that Nikon has added to their lineup.

Now where is the D3X? Not that I can afford it or anything! :biggrin:
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
2,450
Location
Bay Area, USA
I'm willing to bet that the D3 has a stronger and faster AF motor than the D700, which to me is a big deal until Nikon converts all their primes to AF-S.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
159
Location
Dallas Texas
I just bought a D3 a few months ago, if the D700 would have been around, I probably would have bought it, but now that I have the D3, I wouldn't sell it for a D700.

There are a few things I have grown to love and the most important to me is shooting RAW to 2 cards at weddings. I love the 2 Compactflash slots.

If I sold to get a D700:

D3 $4200-4300 (I would hope anyway!)
D700 with Grip, En-EL4a and charger ( I had the combo on my D300 and loved this battery, 3100 pictures on second charge) $3495

Seems like about a $700-$800 gain going from a D3 and a D700 w/grip and battery system like the D3, which I don't think is worth it with the D3's VF and Dual Compactflash slots.

I do like the pop-up flash, I know we aren't suppose to like them, but from time to time, I miss it on the D3. :biggrin:

I also like the fact that the D3 has 300,000 shutter life instead of 150K. I will never keep it that long!:tongue:

I think the D700 is a great option that Nikon has added to their lineup.

Now where is the D3X? Not that I can afford it or anything! :biggrin:

See, to me the differences are worth it. Here was my statement in another thread about it:

Well having a smaller camera is NOT what I want. But what I do want is to have my Metering Mode selector in an ergonomical, easily accessible on the fly, brilliant location as it is on the D200/300. Also, even thought I virtually never use a pop up flash for portrait work, it is nice to have my other flashes free to use with CLS and use a pop up as a commander only. Not to mention that little AF point knob in vertical mode with the grip is absolute genius. Why Nikon didn't build that into the D3 is beyond me! Plus, the D700 has sensor cleaning.

The only thing the D3 has that I would miss is the dual CF card slots and 100% viewfinder. 9fps is great, but seeing as how I almost never shoot a sporting event, I don't need it. 5-8fps is plenty for me. 5:4 framing is something I never use either.

I'm still going to wait to read and see a little more from the D700 I think, but for me, it's a good trade. Plus I'll have money left over for more gear possibly.
As I said the viewfinder and the dual CF slots are the only thing I'd really miss the most from the D3. But concerning the VF, 95% is pretty dang close to 100% and I'm used to that with the D200. Having a large D3 on wedding shoots is NOT a problem with me. I like the bigger cameras. But the placement of the Metering mode selector is for me a HUGE thing. I cannot stand where it is on the D3 and quite honestly for a wedding photographer who's locations, lighting situations, and metering needs change so rapidly, something as simple as that dial's placement can be crucial. Plus with the money I'll have left over I can put it towards more glass, or flashes, or whatever other thing I might need.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom