Should I buy D700?

[Hedge72]

Have a D300, should I upgrade to D700, is it really worth the extra £500?

[Barney]

Have a D300, should I upgrade to D700, is it really worth the extra £500?

That depends on what you shoot, how often you shoot, what lenses you already have and how much spare cash you have.

What would the D700 give you that the D300 doesn't? Do you need these features or merely desire them?

[Learning]

For some purposes the D300 is the 'better' camera.I would suggest that the D700 is only a better choice if you really want its D3 equalling low noise at hi iso performance and if you can put up with the greater bulk of the camera and necessary lenses. If your present lenses are DX then don't forget the cost of replacing them.

[ASTROVANMAN]

First, the D700 is not much different in size to the D300 when considering the size of the body, it is however actually larger than the D3 when fitted with the battery grip.

I was originally going to buy a D300 and 3 lenses, however while waiting for the funds (compensation for being relocated at work) the D700 arrived and after consideration I went for it instead with two lenses. The main reasons were that the lenses were the same as for a film SLR (I also have an F5) and the ability to use really wide lenses, which is not possible with the cropped sensors.

It's a wonderful bit of kit, as no doubt the D300 also is (I'd like one as a backup, but that will have to wait a while)

If you have an reasonable investment in DX optics then I'd stick with the D300.

[AndyTake2]

Top reasons for the D700 are it's low light, low noise characteristics and the FX sensor's ability to use wide-angle lenses.
If these two don't really matter, then don't get one.
I'd wait a few months (probably september) to see if there is a replacement for the 300 before making decisions if you aren't desperate for a camera right now.

[Gold1]

The two cameras are fundamentally different, so if the differences are specific to your needs then yes it's worth it.

For me, upgrading to a D3 from a D200 felt like being let out of a box, mainly for the reason that I always hated the DX format and craved something that resembled a 35mm film camera. Some people love it though and if getting x 1.5 out of your lenses is an advantage (and you don't really need the incredible low light ability) then best stick with the D300.

[Barney]

We'll just ahve to wait and see if the OP returns. Without any knowledge of the type of photography that interests him/her there's no way to be offer any informed advice.

[Gold1]

We'll just ahve to wait and see if the OP returns. Without any knowledge of the type of photography that interests him/her there's no way to be offer any informed advice.

ah who cares, let's just dish out the advice anyway. I say buy the thing and be done with it, although you're bound to regret it in the end, but it's better than what you've got, so you're screwed either which way.

[Barney]

We'll just ahve to wait and see if the OP returns. Without any knowledge of the type of photography that interests him/her there's no way to be offer any informed advice.

ah who cares, let's just dish out the advice anyway. I say buy the thing and be done with it, although you're bound to regret it in the end, but it's better than what you've got, so you're screwed either which way.

Yeah, I would as well, well if I hadn't gone and got a D3 I would

[Lazza]

Have a D300, should I upgrade to D700, is it really worth the extra £500?

No, spend the money wisely on new glass instead making sure it is not a dx format lens and then buy the D700's replacement in a couple of years time instead.

[Barney]

Have a D300, should I upgrade to D700, is it really worth the extra £500?

No, spend the money wisely on new glass instead making sure it is not a dx format lens and then buy the D700's replacement in a couple of years time instead.

How do you know the OP hasn't already got all the full frame Nikkors he could possible wish for?

[PaulatUKcamera]

I have both, since I exchanged my second D300 for a D700 a couple of months ago.

Performance? Ah, you cry, it's much better in low light. Possibly, says he, didn't think the D300 is all that bad really! In very poor light, a definite yes. In just gloomy weather, not much to choose between them.

Better viewfinder. Yes, like going back to my old manual FE2.

Is there a snag with the D700 then? Hell, yes. Noise! Great big flapping sound when you take a picture. Sort of Topcon R 1961 type of noise!

Why did I buy it? One reason. Wideangles. If you just use 28mm upwards all the time, the D300 is your camera.

Why did I buy two? Changing lenses is a real bind on a job. So 24-80mm on the D700 70-200 (actually 105-300mm) on the D300. Covers all eventualities.

My advice? Depends if you are a Wideangle man or a Telephoto man? If you're both, then like me - it gets expensive for you really need a D300 & a D700!

Paul

[Lazza]

Have a D300, should I upgrade to D700, is it really worth the extra £500?

No, spend the money wisely on new glass instead making sure it is not a dx format lens and then buy the D700's replacement in a couple of years time instead.

How do you know the OP hasn't already got all the full frame Nikkors he could possible wish for?

Because nobody has.

Finance alone dictates that unless you are an Oil Sheik or similar, no matter what Nikon lenses you or anybody else owns there is always an area that can be improved, I've been collecting Nikkor glass on and off for almost 30 years and if someone offered me an 80-400mm right now I'd bite their arm off.

Upgrading cameras every 10 minutes is not what will produce better quality pictures which cannot be said regarding better quality optics with wider apertures.

[Barney]

Upgrading cameras every 10 minutes is not what will produce better quality pictures which cannot be said regarding better quality optics with wider apertures.

True, but only up to a point, and it's less straight forward when you're effectively looking at a change of format. The law of diminishing returns kicks in quite quickly, so for example if the OP has the 24-70mm f:2.8 and 70-200.. f:28 already then he/she may already be covered fir his her needs. I certainly would put moving to FX as a priority over and above trying to improve on either of those lenses.

I had the same dilema as a D300 owner with a 200mm f:2. For me the D3's full frame low light performance was the key factor which made it a must have over and above any other glass. The fact that a 24-70mm arrived with is neither here nor there.

[lightspeed]

Top reasons for the D700 are it's low light, low noise characteristics and the FX sensor's ability to use wide-angle lenses.

I understand about the low light, but I am confused about the wide angle "angle" which I have seen quoted a number of times.

I use a 10-20 sigma on my D300 which would be 15mm equivalent on an FX lens. Surely 15mm (eqivalent) would be wide enough for most people?

[Nod]

Depends. I quite often use my 12-24 at the widest on a D700. I also sometimes use an 8mm fisheye.

[Zou]

Surely 15mm (eqivalent) would be wide enough for most people?

My 5x4 pinhole is MUCH wider than that!

[Benchista]

Depends. I quite often use my 12-24 at the widest on a D700. I also sometimes use an 8mm fisheye.

Yup, I use a 12-24 on FF, too, and the more I use it, the more I enjoy it.

[Mark_Norton]

For me, upgrading to a D3 from a D200 felt like being let out of a box, mainly for the reason that I always hated the DX format and craved something that resembled a 35mm film camera.

Couldn't agree more; FX feels entirely right. I was quite surprised when I looked through my D2x, rarely used these days, at how tunnel-like the viewfinder is compared to the fab viewfinder of the D3(x).

Made me think actually that I should move my DX gear on. It's the 200/2 which is seducing me you see...

[Note to Moderator: that previous sentence is not an attempt to solicit interest in my DX gear, merely a comment that after you've moved to FX, there's no looking back.]

In answer to the OP's question, should you buy a D700, yes. Or wait for the (presumed) D3x equivalent.

[trescoekid]

For me the choice is clear. Whilst I love my D80 to bits, I cant wait to scrabble the pennies together to buy the D700 which you can pick up for £1500 of your Earth Pounds if you look hard enough.

I never subscribed to the DX lens cul de sac. It was always going to be a dead end. In 10 years time, the only place you will see them will be in charity shops.

I can't wait to stick my 17-35 onto a FF body. When that happens it will stay there and the D80 will get a new 24-70.

There is one sure fire way to aviod problems with dust on sensors, stop changing lenses over!

Peter