How will you use YOUR D700?

How will the D700 fit into your kit?


  • Total voters
    45
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
254
Location
Colorado, USA
I've been wondering how those of us who intend on purchasing a D700 intend to use it in their kit.

1- Primary Body only

2- Backup to a D3

3- Primary body with D300 (or other DX body) as back-up

4- Compact "D3 Junior" for travel

For me, it would probably be a combination of #2 and #4, depending on the shoot.

-Jason
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
254
Location
Colorado, USA
Good point. Alhtough the similarity of accessories between D300 and D700 (batteries, grip) makes a compelling pairing.

-Jason
 
S

scooptdoo

Guest
ha ha ha i didnt know i was getting one either?man you just never know!
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
462
Location
Kingsville, Ohio
If I eventually get one, it will be the primary camera with two D300 bodies.

I had thought of ditching a D300 and 17-55, but frankly, that would be stupid. The combo will be worth $1800 to $2000 by late fall, the earliest I could afford a D700. That's just about enough to buy a 24-70, no body. So what's the point? The improvements would be marginal. Same FL range, rarely use it above 400, rarely make prints larger than 8X10 from this combo.

I see a D700 fitting into my outfit, primarily a PJ and wedding outfit, for situations where I'd use a prime. Specifically, I would pair the D700 with a 35 f/2, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.4 and a couple of my favorite AI lenses, the 28 f/2 and 105 f/2.5 and 2.8 micro.

The 28-70 I have is stellar for portraits on the DX format, so I don't see the D700 wresting it from that body. Again, seldom go above 800, which is just beautiful on the D300, seldom do larger than 8X10.

The other use would be extra wide shots -- I have a 14-24 and that will be the perfect range on the D700 as long as I keep the 17-55/D300 combo.

In short, the D700 is of interest because it expands the usefulness of my existing lenses and, in theory, will offer better noise than the D300. This remains to be seen; a lot of assumptions have been made about this camera based on the sensor alone. A lot of assumptions were made about the D300 that didn't pan out: improved color, significantly better noise than the D200, for example.

My cameras are tools that have to earn their keep and return a profit. At this point and at the $3K price point, the D700 probably wouldn't make any more money for me than a D200 or D300. Factor in the really crummy economy and 50-percent decline in wedding bookings over the previous year and 80-percent decline in commercial work, and it's a no-brainer. The price needs to fall significantly or business improve tremendously before I'll spring for a D700.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
544
Location
Australia
Well I've said that I'll use it as my primary body only.

I currently have a D100. Whilst that could be called a backup I don't really think that I will use it as such. I rarely photograph any events where having a backup camera could be warranted. That and because it uses different batteries it would mean having to keep those charged all the time without ever actually using them which I in the end just would end up giving up doing.

I'm actually considering turing it into an IR camera.

The other thing I'm also considering is to sell the 12-24 and the 18-35 and replace them both with the 14-24, but that may be a little down the track. Though I feel the sooner I move on that I'll probably get more for those two lens's. Anyway I'm just thinking aloud here.
 
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