|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/04/2012 02:57:23 PM · #1 |
D700(0)?
So I know this has been discussed over and over. But as with the rest I am looking for updated responses... I have read the pixel-peeper reports on ISO/NOISE/Dynamic Range, etc... And many, many reviews... But I want to hear it from folks that own, shoot and love these cameras... I figure there is no better place than DPC :)
I currently own a D300s, and have some good glass. Over the last few years I have gotten to know the controls etc quite well.. I absolutely love and am used to the controls of the D300s, much like the D200 I used to have. The solid feel, size, menu, etc... A friend of mine really wants to buy it from me, and I had a hard time saying no because it's an excuse to upgrade to D700 (FX).... or is it?
I see OUTSTANDING photos from Jagar, and others that are shot with this new D7000. I know it boasts high ISO performance, and lower noise at high ISO than the D300s. The interest for me would be shadow detail, and being able to speed up the shutter and not worry about anything above ISO 500 for noise, etc... I am also wanting to start doing prints as gifts, and who knows what else... I know the 16mp helps with that. My budget limit is what a D700 body and a 50mm f1.8 lens would cost (with the money I get from D300s+35mm f1.8DX I am selling + some cashola). My question is, Should I go for the D700? I am sure it is superior to the D7000 in many ways, but I have heard great things about the D7000 and just want to see if anyone has any "Yes... but" comments so that I am making a completely informed decision :) Like maybe the newer technology, sensor, etc makes it worth staying DX and saving a grand... I would also have to sell my DX fisheye if I go FX :( But then I see photos from LevT and IreneM taken with the D700 and think to myself... D700 all the way!
As I said before I know this has been discussed on many pages before, no need to post links I have probably already read as a response :) Now that the D7000 has been out longer, I'd like to hear what the users think with plenty of trigger time. Is the body too awkwardly small? Build quality good? Can it support a 70-200mm VRII without feeling like the mount is going to snap off? Having never held one I don't know... I am traveling for a while so it would be an online purchase and an anxious wait. PS: I miss the challenges, had a lot of fun and learned a lot in my first DPC year, this is a fantastic site. Can't wait to get back into it after my travels are over!
Help appreciated here, my mind is boggled on which to get.
Thanks,
Nick
Edited for this: Another side question I had for the D7000 owners... does the 16mp make focusing through fences, windows, etc more difficult... in that the dense pixels on the crop sensor catches detail that would otherwise focus through cleanly on say a 10 or 12mp crop sensor? May be a dumb question, but worth asking I guess :) I had read in some reviews that the new sensor + 16mp makes bad lenses look worse, or scratched lenses really show because of the pixel depth? Experiences with this would help as well..
Message edited by author 2012-04-04 15:10:07. |
|
|
|
04/04/2012 03:43:30 PM · #2 |
I'll be of little or no help regarding specific Nikon bodies, but in general regarding technical differences between APS-C and 35mm (FF) formats, I have the following thoughts:
- The 35mm format is over 2x the area of the APS-C sensors (2.25x for Nikon, 2.55x for Canon). The larger area means larger pixels, and this is no small advantage. Typical advantages of 35mm include lower noise and higher acuity (per-pixel sharpness).
- The larger 35mm format means more control over DoF, but conversely may mean more difficulty achieving very deep DoF; your personal style will dictate which choice is appropriate.
- The 35mm format uses the extremes of the image circle of 35mm lenses, which means that corners can be substantially worse-looking than the same lens used with an APS-C sensor. Conversely, the lower pixel density of 35mm (assuming the same pixel count) can mean that the center looks better on 35mm than APS-C.
- The larger mirror required for the 35mm format means more moving mass, so potentially more noise and/or vibration, though in practice this is usually not a big issue.
The other thing you need to consider in making the decision on whether to "go FF" is an economic one. The cost of good glass for 35mm is substantially higher, for two reasons:
1.) In order to achieve the same "reach" at the long end, you will need a lens with 1.5 times the focal length (1.6x for Canon)
2.) In order to get really good WA glass that covers the 35mm frame, be prepared to spend money. Both the Nikon and Canon WA zooms and primes are darn expensive, with big front elements.
Look at the switch from APS-C to 35mm the same way you'd look at a switch from 35mm to Medium Format. It's not quite the same magnitude, but the same thought process does apply to a degree, except that some lenses can serve well for both.
Personally, I jumped for joy when I was able to make the transition to 35mm back in 2005, and I would not go back. At the same time, I do recognize that APS-C cameras have become so good that for a lot of uses, there is no real reason to consider 35mm. In the end it is a very personal choice. I hope my ramblings help with your decision!
Edit for typo
Message edited by author 2012-04-04 15:45:15.
|
|
|
|
04/04/2012 03:48:55 PM · #3 |
| Kirbic, I appreciate the response a lot. A lot of knowledge there from a FX owner, I will definitely keep that all in mind. One follow on question though, I may have misunderstood but let me know if I got this right... does this mean that my 70-200mm f2.8 VRII will lose reach on the D700 (VS Crop) because of the larger sensor? I guess on the flip side that makes it a touch more usable on the short end? |
|
|
|
04/04/2012 04:02:36 PM · #4 |
| I made the upgrade from the D300s to the D7000... EVERYTHING is better in my opinion.. If you make this switch, you will not be disappointed at all..... |
|
|
|
04/04/2012 04:05:42 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by ShutterRev:
...does this mean that my 70-200mm f2.8 VRII will lose reach on the D700 (VS Crop) because of the larger sensor? I guess on the flip side that makes it a touch more usable on the short end? |
Effectively, yes. Do the following thought exercises:
1.) Imagine looking through your (DX) viewfinder at 200mm. Now imagine that you can see more than double the image area. That image area is what you will see on FX.
2.) You have essentially the same pixel count on the D300s as on the D700. So imagine a hypothetical subject, perhaps a bird, at 200mm on your D300s. It takes up 1/12th of the frame area so you (conveniently) have 1 million pixels on the subject. With the D700, the pixel density is just under half that of the D300s, so you will have just under a half-million pixels on the subject.
|
|
|
|
04/04/2012 04:14:54 PM · #6 |
Kirbic, awesome example I understand completely. Thanks again for the responses FX sounds like a whole new arena.
apercep: NOTED! - I peeked at your shots, have not seen any posts from the D7000 yet, or did the camera just not get selected on submission?
Message edited by author 2012-04-04 16:18:38. |
|
|
|
04/04/2012 04:19:27 PM · #7 |
apercep: NOTED! - I peeked at your shots, have not seen any posts from the D7000 yet, or did the camera just not get selected on submission? [/quote]
all my shots are from my Canon XSI... (Technically the D7000 is my significant others camera...)
Message edited by author 2012-04-04 16:21:00. |
|
|
|
04/06/2012 01:51:23 PM · #8 |
| Well after a long bit of staring at forums, studying reviews, looking at examples, getting responses from two folks here, and counting the dollars... I pressed buy on the D7000, with the Nikon Battery grip and extra cell. The D300s has been sold to a fellow enthusiast so I am glad I can help facilitate someone else's addiction at the same time as my own. Without camera for a few weeks, but I eagerly await the D7000.. Side from whining early on of a bad batch sold, it seems to be a very capable DX in a lighter and faster package with some new tech to boot. I figure I'll keep my lenses and keep riding the DX train until the D800 or D4 are in my price range in a number of years :) Thanks for the responses. |
|
|
|
04/06/2012 02:09:52 PM · #9 |
Congrats on the new gear! Sounds like you made a good, un-biased decision based on your photographic needs. That's not always easy to do, LOL.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 07/28/2025 07:03:48 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/28/2025 07:03:48 AM EDT.
|
