People already complaining about the D700!

Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
599
Location
Pennines UK
My take is this.
Nikon buy sensors in batches, so nikon have 2 million say 12mp FF sensors. The D3 isnt going to dent that figure too much so to shift the inventory nikon release the D700 a year after the D3 once demand has been run down and inventory stable.

This frees up D3 production for a new sensor package D3(?), Nikon are always careful that a new body shouldnt completely replace an old one, so the D700 isnt as good in some areas but better in others (usability for non pro's is the main one).

We have seen this in the past, remember the D70, D70S, D50, D40? All to my knowledge had the same 6mp sensor.

We may see this with the FX 12mp sensor too. Pro->Pro(ish)->amature->beginner?

So before people bash the D700 think about the bigger market! The 12mp FX sensor is still rocking the photographic world, with it's ISO and image quality so even if it is 18months old, your still getting one of the best sensors in the market for your (considerably less) money.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Thats where I think Nikon is going with this D700. Which I think is great. $5000.00 are are out of reach for a huge portion of the buying public. If nikon can get the price down for a 12 meg (and I think they will) to about $1,200. Than count me in for at least three.
Im not fussy, slap that big sensor in a FM2 and throw a screen in the back. Its all I need. Call it DM2.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,116
Location
Los Angeles, USA
My only problem with the D700 is that it puts a dent on my purchase plans. I was ready to pull the trigger on a 200mm F/2 VR, now I can't decide! Ugh.
 
P

PeterRH

Guest
No complaints here but just wondering why the camera is being pushed with the 24-120 variable aperture zoom.

Does this lens gain anything in use with FX sensors? Everything else I've read gives it a poor review for critical work, and as this is being marketed as a pro-body it leaves me wondering what the reasoning is.
 
P

PeterRH

Guest
Peter,
I think at Nikon they know it and before next PMA we'll see a newer and better 24-120 or similar lens, maybe F/4.

A new constant f/4 24-120 with VR and nanocoating would be a very nice pairing with the D700.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,830
Location
Newtown, PA
No complaints here but just wondering why the camera is being pushed with the 24-120 variable aperture zoom.

Does this lens gain anything in use with FX sensors? Everything else I've read gives it a poor review for critical work, and as this is being marketed as a pro-body it leaves me wondering what the reasoning is.
Camera manufacturers always do that. I never saw the D2x being marketed with the 17-55 2.8 ;)

I think it's to help the camera stores sell all of the "Uncle Bob's" with more money than brains the newest and bestest camera.
 
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
60
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Reading all this D700 hype reminded me few proverbs...

"It is not the size of the camera but how you use with what you have matters the most".

"Two most important things in picture taking: Lens and Light". Rest is just details.

"3 Ls of picture Taking: Lens, Light, Location"

Over 4 decades ago I was seeing pictures taken by pinhole cameras and they were absolutely great. Now with $10k worth of equipment and technology we are tyring to take the same type of pictures.

<end of rant>

HAPPY CANADA DAY to fellow CANADIANS... Otherwise just a nice sunny day to the rest of the World!
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
997
Location
Los Angeles, California
A new constant f/4 24-120 with VR and nanocoating would be a very nice pairing with the D700.
Why do people keep mentioning these non-existent lenses? One look at Nikon's lens lineup shows they make three kinds of lenses: primes, very expensive F2.8 zooms, and cheap to moderately expensive F3.5-(4.5/5.6) zooms. Why would they change? They've "got" people in the sense that if you want a zoom, and want to upgrade, you have to shell out for one of their F2.8's. If there were that much to be made in F4 zooms (rather than allowing customers run to third-party F2.8's), wouldn't they have done it quite some time ago?
 
P

PeterRH

Guest
Why do people keep mentioning these non-existent lenses? One look at Nikon's lens lineup shows they make three kinds of lenses: primes, very expensive F2.8 zooms, and cheap to moderately expensive F3.5-(4.5/5.6) zooms. Why would they change? They've "got" people in the sense that if you want a zoom, and want to upgrade, you have to shell out for one of their F2.8's. If there were that much to be made in F4 zooms (rather than allowing customers run to third-party F2.8's), wouldn't they have done it quite some time ago?
Because....wait for it....that's what I'd quite like to see Nikon making.

Who knows, maybe with enough effort we'll persuade the company that not only is there a market, but that it is the right thing to do.

There is some good reasoning from Thom Hogan which explains why such lenses need to be part of Nikon's arsenal despite it being unlikely given their history.

Have a read of his D700 announcement summary, and then if you still feel that talking about lenses that some of us want Nikon to make is unpalatable...well then I'd click past these threads when you find them, and concentrate on those that only refer to the here and now.

Fair?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
61
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I've seem more angst and teeth gnashing with this release than anything recently. Or it sure seems that way to me. The list of things people are complaining about (on other boards) is quite long. It almost makes one wonder if this particular camera is going to be a success.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,830
Location
Newtown, PA
I've seem more angst and teeth gnashing with this release than anything recently. Or it sure seems that way to me. The list of things people are complaining about (on other boards) is quite long. It almost makes one wonder if this particular camera is going to be a success.
I think the problem isn't the camera, it's that people want a D3 for 1/2 price. The people who really want or need this camera are just going to buy it. The people who aren't are just going to ***** that it doesn't do everything THEY want it to do.

What is to complain about? It's a full frame D300, pretty much everything everyone asked for. It even uses the same battery grip! Of course it's going to cost 2x more than the D300, just as the 5D costs (or used to) 2x what the then current 30D cost. Full size sensors simply cost a LOT more to manufacture and not much can be done about that right now. You get far less sensors off of an expensive silicone wafer and with the scrap rate, yields are even lower.

You just have to accept and understand the limits of technology and a companies need to turn a profit at the end of the day.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
409
Location
Phoenix, Az
I've seem more angst and teeth gnashing with this release than anything recently. Or it sure seems that way to me. The list of things people are complaining about (on other boards) is quite long. It almost makes one wonder if this particular camera is going to be a success.
In every endeavor, thre are always those that will complain about something, no matter how small or trivial it is. They do this without even having seen, tried or tested the thing they are complaining about. It's just human nature.

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

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