POLL - AP's choice of Product of the Year

[beejaybee]

FWIW I've just checked up on the inflation effect since I started in photography in the mid-1970s. The street price ot the D700 today is pretty much equivalent to the street price then of one of Ebenezer Roberts' ( ) favourite ever cameras - the Olympus OM1 (with a 50mm f/1.8).

Yeah, that puts it into a sensible perspective.

Personally I think the D700 is a worthy winner, even though there is very little chance I will ever buy one.

[daft_biker]

Personally I think the D700 is a worthy winner, even though there is very little chance I will ever buy one.

Same here. It's not a camera that interests me but given how long it's taken Nikon to produce something like this and how many people want them I can see why it won.

[Terrywoodenpic]

I have no need of a D770 class of camera But can see its merits.
To me it was an easy winner.

As for the other categories I am less sure.

As the only representative of the micro 4/3 the Pansonic won by default... but I would like to see other variants of the system.

The Epson printer, Clickfree and Ixus 980, are more or less unknown to me so I could not comment.

Elements, nikkor 60mm and the pentax 16-50 are topline products and I would not argue about them.

The canon 1000D seems an odd ball to me and though a quality entry level Dslr. it seems to be a camera you would want to upgrade too soon to be a winner.

[Nod]

When the D700 was first announced, I was interested and as more and more glowing reviews (from owners as well as the press) came out, I was even more interested. The reputed low noise at higher ISOs and full frame put it high on my "I want one of them" list, so when the recent price rises were announced, I looked at the bank balance, the interest rates on savings and the prices of the camera and kits.

To cut a long story short, Jessops were offering the D700 as a kit with the 24-120 VR lens at a decent price, so I ordered it on their collect at store service and duly collected the box that afternoon. !! The noise was all it was cracked down to be AND I got instant wide angle gratification from my 12-24 (and fisheye) - the 24-120 seemed OK as well, with the VR being quite handy at the longer end. (That was soon replaced due to the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 being in Jessies sale at an "as low as 2nd hand" price - and who needs VR when ISO 1600 is a genuinely useable speed?).

The more I use the D700, the more I like it (and I liked it a lot as soon as I held it in the shop). Yes, it's a sizeable investment for me to make but I had always kept using film so apart from the kit 18-70 that came with my first DSLR (D70), all my lenses are 35mm (and so FF) compatible so (apart from the "standard" zoom) no glass needed to be replaced.

IMO, a worthy winner of both awards it's received here.

[Benchista]

IMO, a worthy winner of both awards it's received here.

That's both of three, is it?

[alanS]

It's a camera that seems to have the "I want one" factor. If only Canon made one that called to me.

[Barney]

I nominated the D700 and voted for it too. I bought a D300 in July last year, prior to the D700 launch. In a way I'm glad I missed the launch date because I wouldn't have been able to afford the D700 anyway, but it's now something for me to aim for.

[alanS]

You lucky soul. I had a Nikon SLR and I can't really explain why I went for a Canon DSLR other than that at that time (10D and 300D era) people were whispering in my ear that that was the way to go. Looking at the line ups now I'd probably go for a D300 or (much) more likely a D700 but I'd have a look at Sony too.

[Nod]

IMO, a worthy winner of both awards it's received here.

That's both of three, is it?

Yup!

[nspur]

FWIW I've just checked up on the inflation effect since I started in photography in the mid-1970s. The street price ot the D700 today is pretty much equivalent to the street price then of one of Ebenezer Roberts' ( ) favourite ever cameras - the Olympus OM1 (with a 50mm f/1.8).

Yes, but you can pick up a nice OM1 + 50/1.8 for about £50 now.

[huwevans]

Well? Wait three and a half decades until the D700 is as old as that OM1 and I dare say you'll get the Nikon for £50 too. The point was that the D700 is now about exactly the same price as the OM1 - a camera much beloved and purchased, or aspired to by enthusiasts - was in its own day. Inflation accounts entirely for the difference in the numbers.

[beejaybee]

Well? Wait three and a half decades until the D700 is as old as that OM1 and I dare say you'll get the Nikon for £50 too.

You'd probably need to pay someone £50 to take one off your hands ... as you say, inflation will have had an effect, but a D700 is far less likely than an OM1 to be in a usable condition after 35 years. The battery packs certainly won't last that long, and I'd be surprised if they remain available for more than five years after the model is replaced.

The OM1 took what was just about the commonest battery in the world when it was made, even though it was very very simple (unlike lithium ion rechargebale packs), it's still hard & expensive to source batteries to fit an OM1 - so much so that it's better just to ignore the meter, which is the only thing the OM1 needs electrical power for. No disrespect intended to the D700, but a digital camera without a power source is just junk.

[Staropramen]

If you'd like to lend me one for a few weeks I'll give you a considered and categorical answer. If not, I'll remain in blissful ignorance.

I'm still saving for the 1998 Product of the Year, or was it 1888? I cannae remember ....

[AndyTake2]

The D700 is a brilliant bit of kit.
It's pretty much what I've wanted from a digital camera since they first came out - a full frame, high quality machine which is great in low light. There's not much I'd change on it, and the fact that this technology is likely to trickle down to the level occupied by the D90 in the next couple of years is really exciting.