1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Response From Nikon Re:D300 vs D700 AF

Discussion in 'Nikon FX DSLR Forum' started by jfenton, Jul 10, 2008.

  1. jfenton


    Jan 26, 2005
    Haverhill, MA
    I won't post whom I got this from, but it's a real Nikon USA person who knows these things.

    I was advised via email that the D700 AF "similar" to the D300 AF.

    I guess I wait and see what the High Res version has specs for the time being.
  2. That is what I thought it would be - a full frame in a D300 body - not exactly, but I think the power of a D3 processor comes at a price.
  3. Well that will make D3 owners happy!
  4. 12 mp is good enough for me as long as I get high iso of D3 and better af of birds in flight. However, Nikon probably won't make a D3X with 12 mp. Thom Hogan has said he doesn't think DX will go over 16 mp.
  5. Tosh


    May 6, 2005
    Not this one. I was hoping to move to the smaller form body. :frown:
  6. I doubt the processor has much to do with the image processing. Image processing is one task that must be accomplished very quickly and that job is well suited to a dedicated ASIC. There are a bunch of other functions in the camera which require processing like metering and exposure, flash metering and flash control, AF processing, display info, button monitoring, etc. and those jobs are well suited to a typical microprocessor.

    More powerful processors use more power which means two things....a bigger battery is needed (or accept shortened battery life) and more heat. Heat is bad because image sensors get more noisy as they get warmer and the smaller area (more confined space) of the D300 means isolating the sensor from internal heat (and dissipating that heat) is more difficult.

    IMO, the D300/D700 still has the best AF system in Nikon's digital lineup (past and present) for that size camera. And as with most everything, there is room for continued improvement. Since the D700 and D300 share similar AF processing it may well be that any improvements in the D700 code will eventually filter down to the D300.
  7. Eye Spy

    Eye Spy Guest

    Yes, and the D300 AF is "similar" to the D3. Just too vague of a statement from which to draw any conclusions. We must wait and see...
  8. I think there has been discussion on the D3 and D300 processors because many people don't think the D300 focuses as well as the D3 (slow acquisition) even though they share the same af system.

    So, we would want a D700 to have the processor power of the D3 fot fast acquisition.
  9. jfenton


    Jan 26, 2005
    Haverhill, MA
    Hello Minday

    My specific question to Nikon was whether the D700 AF was a fast and precise as the D3 or was it the same as the D300.

    I do agree that no matter what anyone states, the truth won't be known until after the camera is actually tested.

    For example...the D300 AF was thought by many before release to be the same (with the obvios difference of FX / DX notations) prior to release.

    Time will tell.
  10. Since I have tested both on flying birds I categorically state that for me with the same lens on (in my case 400mm AF-S II) The D3 is better in focus aquisition and lock on then the D300. Hands down better.

    Now the question is why? I doubt that Nikon has more then one sets of electronic cirquits for the CAM module in the D3 and D300 and coming D700. It is just not cost effective. The firmware could be slightly different but probably from the same codebase.

    I speculate that it has to do with 1. the crop factor in some way that is beyond me, mayeb the increased shake from the 1.5 multiplier makes it harder to aquire and lock-on, what do I know. 2. The batterypower from the big battery.

    So my (continued) speculation tells me that the D700 should be pretty close to the D3.

    But then again what do I know.....

    In the meantime I'm happy for you all that are waiting for the D700, looks awesome.

    I'm not in the waiting crowd though I already have a D3, no need for a D700. I sold my D300 as I wasnt using it and kept my old D2X as a backup, you get nothing for them now anyway...

  11. Triggaaar


    Jun 15, 2008
    The AF system has nothing to do with the sensor. It doesn't know if there even is a sensor, so how many MP there are is irrelevant.

    Is it possible that the circuitry in the D3 is too big to fit in the D700? Maybe it's to do with the D3's AF motor (does the body only ever use the lenses motor when it has one?)
    The increased shake shouldn't apply if you compare like with like (200mm on the D300 vs 300mm on the D3). It would make your 400mm an unfair comparison, but I assume users would have noticed if that's all it was. Likewise, users should notice if the D300 suddenly improves with the battery pack (which I assume it doesn't).
  12. TonyBeach

    TonyBeach Guest

    My AF always works better when I zoom in on the subject. There could be a difference in acquisition just because there are more AF sensors on the subject using the CAM3500FX rather than the CAM3500DX (based on the same FOV). Untangling the density of AF sensors on the subject from the processing power; or perhaps quantifying the role of each in acquiring subjects will be largely resolved when the D300, D700, and D3 can all be directly compared. If I was considering a D700 for improved AF over the D300, I would definitely wait for someone I trust with experience with all three cameras to render a verdict on that.
  13. jafo


    Jun 11, 2008
    Chatsworth, CA
    This is not surprising. They are not going to make the D700 exactly like the D3. If it were exactly the same in every respect (minus the grip), you could just buy the grip and have a D3. Big deal if you get 8fps instead of 9fps. It isn't THAT big a difference. Why would anyone buy a D3 any more? They've slowed it down on purpose, to keep D3 the premier FX camera.
  14. Triggaaar


    Jun 15, 2008
    I'm not convinced. If it was easy (read cheap) to manufacture cameras to the D3's spec, everyone would do it and they'd be cheaper. Perhaps you are correct, but only if Nikon are so far ahead of the competition that they are drunk with laughter. Only then could they afford to just remove functionality from a camera (with no manufacturing cost saving) knowing that their competitors wouldn't gain an advantage. Nikon don't know what Canon's new fx body will be like, so to impare the D700, just to keep D3 owners happy, doesn't make sense to me.
  15. wilvoeka


    Jul 4, 2008
    According to Nikon spec sheets on the AF systems.

    The D300 has the CAM3500DX

    The D3(and the D700) have the Cam3500FX

    Someone posted it over in the D700 forum.
  16. jafo


    Jun 11, 2008
    Chatsworth, CA
    In my mind, Nikon has nothing to worry about, especially if they release a D3x as well. The only thing at that point in Canon's favor is their better variety of lenses. Something Nikon needs to invest in and take the lead on as well.
  17. But as Trigaaar has said AF speed has little to do with the AF system. AF is just how the system goes about acquiring focus. Circuitry in the body determines how fast this works.
  18. But many no longer think there will be a D3X. They thing DX will just beon the less expensive cameras on as a crop on the FX pro models.
  19. jafo


    Jun 11, 2008
    Chatsworth, CA
    I don't think anyone doubts they are doing a D3x. And it's an FX camera, not a DX camera (the name is a bit deceiving).
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.