Scott Kelby On Nikon D700

Excerpt:

Things I Really Liked:

* Besides the really obvious stuff (like High ISO and Full Frame, and the inclusion of a pop-up flash for triggering wireless flash), I really like how you access the memory cards -- there’s no annoying memory card door button to push first -- it’s just a simple slide of a panel (more like you have on some Canon models)...

* I like that you can use the same batteries as the D300...


What I Didn’t Like:

* I could only come up with one thing that I didn’t like about the D700, but to me, it’s pretty significant. I don’t like the feel of the shutter. To me, it feels soft and kind of mushy (compared to either the D3 or the D300)...

* There is one more issue, but it’s not a D700 issue; it’s a full-frame issue. The problem with the D700 is the same problem as with the D3; to really experience the full frame sensor advantage, you really have to have lenses that were made to take advantage of the full-frame sensor. If not, and you put DX format lenses on the D700, you get a 1.5x cropped image that’s only around 5 megapixels. If you have a lens like Nikon’s 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens, then you’re in luck -- it works great with full frame, and doesn’t do the “DX Crop” thing. However, if you have the popular 18-200mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 VR lens, then your image will be cropped down to 5-megapixels. Hey, better you hear it from me, than learn it the hard way. I guess what I’m trying to tell you is this; you’re probably going to need more than just the D700 body. You’re probably going to need to buy a lens (or two) to make it worth your investment. If you shoot portraits, the incredibly crisp new 24-70 f/2.8 FX lens runs around $1,700. If you shoot landscapes, Nikon’s fabulous 14-24mm f/2.8 FX lens costs around $1,550. In short; you’re going to need the money you save from not buying a D3.

The Bottomline:

The D700 just takes a better looking photograph than the D300... The new sensor, the autofocus, the low noise -- it all adds up to photos that just beat the D300...

Then, who should buy a D700? It’s for anyone who wants to shoot handheld in low light (at higher ISOs than you would ever consider with a D300, like 6400 ISO). It’s for anyone who really wants the advantage of shooting with a 35mm-sized full-frame sensor, and it’s for anyone who just wants better looking images than they’re getting now with a D300 or lower...

Read Scott's complete review here.

Nikon Digital SLR Comparison Guide

Nikon Digital SLR Comparison Guide (pdf)

Moose Peterson: Nikon D3 Versus D700

Moose Peterson Writes:

"The D3 or the D700? Since both use the same sensor (as in exactly the same), it is a very good question.

"...the D700 isn’t really that much smaller than the D3. Attach the MB-D10, it’s the same height. The D3 weighs in at 3.16lbs and the D700 at 2.62lbs (battery included). So just going by size and weight, not a huge difference. The fps of the D3 is 8, the D700 is 5 and goes to 7-8 with the addition of the MB-D10 (depending on battery) so there is a little difference there. Stock D3 & D700 have the same buffer size but now with the buffer upgrade, the D3 doubles that of the D700 (and adding $500 to the cost). So looking at just the specs it’s real easy to see why folks are wondering which way to turn.

"That’s until you look at the price. Yeah, the D700 saves you bucks and in this day, that is an important factor. Do you loose something by spending less? You do lose the dual CF slot, you do loose the faster fps going with the D700 but you gain the sensor vibration which so many seem hooked on. You can read the Nikon DSLR comparison brochure or the D700 IB which might help with your decision making.

"My answer for most folks is, go with the D700 as dual CF and fps isn't mission critical for most photographers..."

Read complete article.

DPReview: Nikon D700

Excerpt:

"The D700 joins the D3 as a fully-fledged 'professional' model; it has the same tank-like build quality (though we're sure the pop-up flash will cause a few raised eyebrows), and gets you the full pro service from Nikon. And the pricing (around $2999) reflects this; anyone hoping for an 'affordable' semi-pro full frame Nikon SLR will have to wait until the cost of producing such large sensors falls considerably."

Read complete preview.

Ken Rockwell: Nikon D700

From Ken Rockwell's website:

"The Nikon D700 is Nikon's top new amateur camera. It's mostly a D300 with the larger FX sensor of the D3. Thus it has image quality mostly identical to the D3, but D300-class handling, which is a notch or two below the D3 for sports and action.

"The Nikon D700 adds a cleaning system and a separate new rear INFO button. Beyond that, I'm not seeing anything life-changing that isn't already in the D3 and D300.

"The function button can be assigned to do more more things, probably including the Picture Control option, but if you do, you lose what you could have programmed the FUNC button instead. I already have to swap my FUNC button among FX/DX digital zoom, non-CPU lens swapping or virtual horizon.

"Don't get too excited; the D3 is no sharper than the D300. The only reason to love the FX sensor over the DX sensor of the D300 is for much cleaner images at high ISOs and for ultra-ultra-wide shots. For ultra-ultra wide shots, you'll also need to buy a 14-24mm, 14mm f/2.8 AF-D or 15mm f/3.5 lens, each over $1,000.

"For sports and action, the D3 is still king. I don't see that the D700 is any faster than the D300.

"Then again, the D700 has a built-in flash and remote wireless flash controller. Honestly, with the D3 and therefore the D700, you just don't need flash anymore except for fill.

Lens Compatibility

"Thank goodness, the D700 works with all conventional AF, AF-D and AF-S lenses.

"It also meters with AI and AI-s manual focus lenses as does the D3, and if you enter the focal length and f/stop, gives matrix metering and correct EXIF data. Whoo hoo, this mean you can use the full catalog of manual lenses."

Read Rockwell's complete review. Includes images, illustrations and camera specifications.