To D700 or not?

[7006]

I am coming across some affordable D700s and am very tempted to acquire one.
Would I be right in thinking that it would be superior to my D7200 for night landscapes, city and astrophotography shots?
I have enough FX lenses to get me by.
At GBP 300 it is very very tempting...
Any thoughts?

 

[Cslucas34]

Very solid camera and in my opinion it’s one of Nikons best bodies to date. If you don’t plan on making large prints, I think for the price it’s a good selection. Keep in mind it’s only good for about 14 by 9 prints but if that’s not a concern then I’d say you can’t go wrong.

 

[alexf]

I love mine and it is still going strong so many years later.
At a good price, why not?

 

[Pa]

The D7200 has significantly greater dynamic range up to iso400. They are essentially identical beyond iso400. So I disagree, from the image quality perspective the D7200 is a better camera. There may be other factors that are more important for you, however.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[gryphon1911]

While the D700 is a very solids camera and is capable of providing great images, it's technology is a bit old. There are newer APS-C sensors now that best it.

If it were me, I'd save up and look more to a Z6 or D750 to the D7500, D500, Z50 if you want to stay in Nikon.

Outside of that, I'd start looking at the Fuji APS-C. XE3, XT20/XT30 or even the XPRO2.

 

[7006]

While the D700 is a very solids camera and is capable of providing great images, it's technology is a bit old. There are newer APS-C sensors now that best it.

If it were me, I'd save up and look more to a Z6 or D750 to the D7500, D500, Z50 if you want to stay in Nikon.

Outside of that, I'd start looking at the Fuji APS-C. XE3, XT20/XT30 or even the XPRO2.

Thanks for that.
I bought my D7200 instead of the D7500 as I need the maximum compatibility with legacy lenses.
My hobby is to use film lenses (35mm of course) on my digital cameras.
That's one of the main reasons why the D700 is so interesting.
Now if as Pa says there are no benefits in terms of photo quality, no point.
BUT
I do not like the night photos I get from my D7200, D3200, Sony A5000.
For me they look nothing like what I see with my eyes.
While the D7200 captures great light at night, it bears no resemblance to the real conditions.
I am hoping that the D700 would not boost the signal so much.
Non Nikons are not really an option.

 

[7006]

The D7200 has significantly greater dynamic range up to iso400. They are essentially identical beyond iso400. So I disagree, from the image quality perspective the D7200 is a better camera. There may be other factors that are more important for you, however.

View attachment 1654253

Excuse my ignorance but would this also apply in low light condition?
Or are these measures taken under set light conditions? (if so which ones?)

 

[Palouse]

Here's another comparison from the same website: http://www.photonstophotos.net

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[7006]

This is what I am refering to, and confuses me with your charts folks :-(

Low Light ISO 1333 for D7200 vs 2303 on D700

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7200-versus-Nikon-D700___1020_441

 

[Pa]

Excuse my ignorance but would this also apply in low light condition?
Or are these measures taken under set light conditions? (if so which ones?)

Those measurements just measure the fundamental light-gathering properties of the sensor so are not based on any particular light level.

I do not like the night photos I get from my D7200, D3200, Sony A5000.
For me they look nothing like what I see with my eyes.
While the D7200 captures great light at night, it bears no resemblance to the real conditions.

Could you post an example? Are you getting the white balance right?

 

[7006]

Those measurements just measure the fundamental light-gathering properties of the sensor so are not based on any particular light level.



Could you post an example? Are you getting the white balance right?

Thanks for that clarification.
I will look or take some pictures from both the D7200 and A5000, just to make sure that I was not generalizing.
Night has fallen so the time is now

 

[Palouse]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[gryphon1911]

what part of the D7500 is incompatible, where as the D7200 is?

I looked and found that the D7500 is compatible with D type screw drive lenses. The D7500 gives you the same processing engine from the D500 with less of the cost.

regarding the D700...while it is "only" 12mp, those photosites are larger and have less light bleed.

I used the D700 for a lot of jobs in all kinds of light. It was great for years, but I did run into some metering limitations when shooting in back lit conditions. The newer cameras are smarter and handle the tricky lighting better.

Here is an album with examples of stuff I took with the D700. 500+ images, so a bit overwhelming - however, you'll see some night shots in there which should help you decide if that FX sensor is something you would benefit from:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gryphon1911/albums/72157629347168394


Just to give you an example, here is the D500 album. Many more images, but the same spread of lighting conditions. All the exit data is there for both albums pictures.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gryphon1911/albums/72157674859122181

 

[Pa]

This is what I am refering to, and confuses me with your charts folks :-(

Low Light ISO 1333 for D7200 vs 2303 on D700

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7200-versus-Nikon-D700___1020_441

I had not noticed that discrepancy before. Looking further down in Bill Claff's web page, I see he does address that, but without much explanation. He seems to be saying that he thinks his measurements are more reliable.

 

[Butlerkid]

I would think that there will soon be some D750's on the used market at very reasonable prices.....but probably still a bit more than a used D700. Personally, I'd prefer to spend the money to get a used D750 and take advantage of improvements since the D700.

 

[7006]

what part of the D7500 is incompatible, where as the D7200 is?

I looked and found that the D7500 is compatible with D type screw drive lenses. The D7500 gives you the same processing engine from the D500 with less of the cost.

regarding the D700...while it is "only" 12mp, those photosites are larger and have less light bleed.

I used the D700 for a lot of jobs in all kinds of light. It was great for years, but I did run into some metering limitations when shooting in back lit conditions. The newer cameras are smarter and handle the tricky lighting better.

Here is an album with examples of stuff I took with the D700. 500+ images, so a bit overwhelming - however, you'll see some night shots in there which should help you decide if that FX sensor is something you would benefit from:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gryphon1911/albums/72157629347168394


Just to give you an example, here is the D500 album. Many more images, but the same spread of lighting conditions. All the exit data is there for both albums pictures.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gryphon1911/albums/72157674859122181

Thanks for your help,

The D7500 does not matrix with the E Series, AI, manual lenses. "and there is no aperture-ring feeler so no metering or auto exposure with old manual-focus lenses".
I use these a lot, I simply love them.

I will look at your album.
I have seen many astrophotography pix with the D700 that I like.
To be fair to my D7200, I have not been able to travel to Anza Borrego or Idaho this year so unable to test it.
I am going to Chamonix in Feb and will see if the light pollution is a problem or not.

 

[7006]

OK, Thanks Pa for suggesting I post some pix.
My D3200 is abroad so could not test it but it seems I have a Sony A5000 problem, not a Nikon D7200.
In fact, out of the 4 pix it is the one closest to what my eyes/brain see and interpret.
So....
It still does not allow me to compare it with the old FX sensor of the D700 but is making me think now...

Order is D7200, A5000, D40, D50
View attachment 1654256 View attachment 1654257 View attachment 1654258 View attachment 1654259

 

[7006]

I would think that there will soon be some D750's on the used market at very reasonable prices.....but probably still a bit more than a used D700. Personally, I'd prefer to spend the money to get a used D750 and take advantage of improvements since the D700.

That's a good point.
At the moment the D750s are about 2x the price of the D700s on MPB.
That would be stretching it (but is sooo tempting).
I am not even looking at D600/610.

 

[7006]

I had not noticed that discrepancy before. Looking further down in Bill Claff's web page, I see he does address that, but without much explanation. He seems to be saying that he thinks his measurements are more reliable.

Thanks for that,

The table at the bottom seems to be saying that the measured values between the D700 and D7200 are a lot closer than the ones I quoted.
What is intersting is that the D600/610 get way higher marks, and the D750 almost on a par with the D850.

The more I look at everyone's feedback, the more I think I would not be gaining much (if anything at all) with the D700.

 

[Randy]

it was a gripless D3 and was a superb body