should i buy a d300 or d700

Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
321
Location
Boston, MA
Need help to make the final decision, honestly long story short...

I used to own a d300, when I bought it was kit, which is include the 18-200 vr and get the 350 off deal, but too bad, the len die after use it for 2 months :frown:

Well so luck out I can return it to Costco...

Now the d700 is out, and d300 is around 1700, and d700 is 3k, should I go for FX or just use DX?

Well, I know that is depend what I use it for right? I do part time wedding job, and have some AF-D len already, if I go for DX, I need dx len, like the 17-55 2.8, but if I go for FX, I think I should be fine for the len right?

I know this is a silly question (which I'm the only one who has the answer to) but I really wouldn't mind someone's opinion.

And the bottom line is how long the D700 going to last, I mean tech. way and the shutter life, as I find out that D300 shutter life should be longer than D700 right? But how long d700 12m file size going to last?

Heard that a new 24M camera going to be anounced at the end of the year, really need some opinion, thanks for any input...
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
502
Location
Georgia via Long Island, NY
I know you'll get a lot of opinions on this; mine is just one, so...FWIW. I have shot medium format, 35mm, and DX. It really doesn't matter. You will have an image after you shoot and it will be one you like or one you don't...format aside. I was very hesitant to go to digital because I was so used to the 35mm format. Several years later...it doesn't matter to me anymore. Any of these high end cameras are capable of capturing gallery quality images from an IQ standpoint (as are many of the older "obsolete" models). Issues such as wide angle lenses aren't issues any more...there are enough good ones to choose from in any format. Yes, you get a "little help" from DX with long lenses, so that is one possible benefit of DX, but I was fine with the same lenses on 35mm cameras (just had to plan a bit better...and you never have enough length in any format anyway right :) ? If you have some really good wide lenses or the need to shoot at ISO 6400 and above I think you can make a pretty good case for the FX cameras.
I guess my advice would be that you aren't going to get "better" images from one camera or the other (not in any practical, print viewing sense) once you get to a certain quality level. Don't chase technology unless you have a specific, tangible purpose. There are too many people out there spending thousands of dollars for the wrong reasons. Take a look at the beautiful prints that people have hanging in galleries that were shot with cameras that would never even be considered today. They didn't just get ugly because a newer camera was released.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
771
Location
Greater NYC
Going back to the "It's the person that takes the photo, not the camera......" I'd agree with jbear.

Personally, I'd think the choice is more a matter of other factors - personal situation (eg finances - what can you readily afford), what you already have in the way of lenses and other more 'pragmatic' issues. There will ALWAYS be something 'better' on the way. From my pov, I'm happy with DX format sensors for now and have a significant investment in lenses that are geared towards DX. My primary 'carry' kit is gradually morphing over to professional level lenses (FX format) but givenwhat I currently have and the cost of Full Frame bodies, I expect I'll be staying with DX bodies. With four people in the family interested and carrying a variety of bodies, it's just simpler to keep things relatively 'standard'....... Would just love it if I didn't have to worry about CF AND SD cards
 
S

scooptdoo

Guest
I know you'll get a lot of opinions on this; mine is just one, so...FWIW. I have shot medium format, 35mm, and DX. It really doesn't matter. You will have an image after you shoot and it will be one you like or one you don't...format aside. I was very hesitant to go to digital because I was so used to the 35mm format. Several years later...it doesn't matter to me anymore. Any of these high end cameras are capable of capturing gallery quality images from an IQ standpoint (as are many of the older "obsolete" models). Issues such as wide angle lenses aren't issues any more...there are enough good ones to choose from in any format. Yes, you get a "little help" from DX with long lenses, so that is one possible benefit of DX, but I was fine with the same lenses on 35mm cameras (just had to plan a bit better...and you never have enough length in any format anyway right :) ? If you have some really good wide lenses or the need to shoot at ISO 6400 and above I think you can make a pretty good case for the FX cameras.
I guess my advice would be that you aren't going to get "better" images from one camera or the other (not in any practical, print viewing sense) once you get to a certain quality level. Don't chase technology unless you have a specific, tangible purpose. There are too many people out there spending thousands of dollars for the wrong reasons. Take a look at the beautiful prints that people have hanging in galleries that were shot with cameras that would never even be considered today. They didn't just get ugly because a newer camera was released.[/QUOT


100% CORRECT.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
321
Location
Boston, MA
jbear, i am agree with you, last years i still using my film camera to do wedding job, but i really did loose couple jobs becasue client asking do i use digital or not. and the answer is i really have on choice to it. i do have medium format camera and use it too...

i just want a camera that have the film camera function and that is, and there is nothing wrong with my film camera, it help me to make money in the past nine years, unbelievable good, but now, digital everywhere.... and no more film, only resolution / file size of the photo. what really wrong with it.

dx and fx, that is a really interesting subject, and a tough decision too
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2006
Messages
6,903
Location
On a Big Island Down Under...
Really, the only big advantage IMO for you getting the D700 over the D300 is the better high ISO shots for doing weddings....
Other than giving you a better use of wide angle and a better DOF the D300 will do it all...
So you got to say to yourself is the $1300 extra going to be justified, if so get the D700...
If not go for the D300... Just my 2 bits worth... ;o))
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
321
Location
Boston, MA
The only fact for me is the different in between DX and FX.
 

Latest threads

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
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom