DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> I pulled the trigger! Mmmm, D700!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 44, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/01/2008 04:10:28 PM · #1
Woo hoo! Amazon now has the D700 for just $2399!

My 5DII pre-order is cancelled. Having donated my XT to my sister back in August, I can't wait to be out shooting again! Hooray!

My primary reasons for dumping the 5DII pre-order were:

- video probably not useful for amateur, requires extra software for editing and hardware (tripod) for stabilization
- D700 noise quite comparable to 5DII
- Slight increase in 5DII resolving detail not worth the massive file size
- D700 seems like a better all-around still camera with AF and fps
- And of course, the D700 is available today

I feel that the 5DII release was much hyped and well botched. Fare well, Canon. Now to sell off my 24-105...
12/01/2008 04:46:53 PM · #2
Three friends of mine have recently gotten them, as has ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21_F.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21_F.gif', '/') + 1) . ' IreneM and I hear nothing but raves.
12/01/2008 04:56:17 PM · #3
Yes, I expect to be marring the D700's average DPC score (at it's present high in large part thanks to Irene) very soon. =) More importantly, I just can't wait to shoot again.

I held one in my local camera shop today and took a number of shots. It feels very solid and responsive, and though I am used to the Canon interface, I figured out the basic controls (changing modes, ISO, file format) very quickly.

Now the infamous wait for the brown truck...
12/01/2008 04:58:14 PM · #4
Paints all the brown trucks red. Muhahahahahaha!
12/01/2008 04:58:19 PM · #5
Woohoo, another Nikon convert ;)

I drooled over a D700 (fortunately, they're weather sealed), but it would make fun of my favorite lens, the 18-200 VR. So I stuck with the Dxx line (D90).

Great price! Enjoy!
12/01/2008 05:17:45 PM · #6
I was torn between the D700 and the new laptop. It was a tough choice and I still may do it, but right now I think my D300 fits most of my needs, better ISO would be nice but at least I have extended reach and as Neil said, the 18-200 :3

A great great camera though, I be jealous!!
12/01/2008 05:20:19 PM · #7
Congrats! I'd like to add one to my arsenal and dump the D200, but now is not the time for me.
12/01/2008 05:28:09 PM · #8
Yes, I've heard excellent reviews of the 18-200 VR. I've also heard negative reviews of the 24-120 VR... I went with a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 based on threads I've read around here. When my Canon 24-105 sells, I may pick up a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8.

I do have one question: Amazon shows two versions of the Tamron 28-75 - one with an internal focusing motor and one without. I realize the one with is for lower-end Nikon bodies, but it was also cheaper. I presume it will still work on the D700 in FX mode. Is this correct? I also hope that I won't lose focus speed. I can always return it if this was the wrong choice. I'm new to the different Nikon options. =)
12/01/2008 05:55:14 PM · #9
Originally posted by smurfguy:


I do have one question: Amazon shows two versions of the Tamron 28-75 - one with an internal focusing motor and one without. I realize the one with is for lower-end Nikon bodies, but it was also cheaper. I presume it will still work on the D700 in FX mode. Is this correct? I also hope that I won't lose focus speed. I can always return it if this was the wrong choice. I'm new to the different Nikon options. =)


yes, the new version is especially built for the nikon d40, d40x and d60, that don't have an internal focusing motor.
with your d700 you'll be fine off with the older, and cheaper, version, that, as far as i know, is the exact same model but without the focusing motor.
12/01/2008 06:27:34 PM · #10
Originally posted by nshapiro:

Woohoo, another Nikon convert ;)
I drooled over a D700 (fortunately, they're weather sealed), but it would make fun of my favorite lens, the 18-200 VR. So I stuck with the Dxx line (D90).


I am kinda thinking about an upgrade as well, and this 18-200VR issue has been a major sticking point for me as well. On the other hand, I am thinking that I still could make a good use of that lens for some less demanding street/tourist stuff, just have 6MP files instead of 12MP. But those would be GOOD 6MP :). I think we are being spoiled by these multi-megapixel sensors, 6MP is actually quite a lot, one can easily make a good size print out of it. And for some really critical stuff, take this lens off and use full-frame fare. What do you think?
12/01/2008 06:36:46 PM · #11
Originally posted by smurfguy:


I feel that the 5DII release was much hyped and well botched. Fare well, Canon. Now to sell off my 24-105...


LOL!
It does sound like the D700 will fit your needs well, and it is a great machine, no doubt of that. But "botched release?" Mind telling us what about the release was/is botched? Canon announced the camera in late September, and shipped it in quantity two months later. I guarantee it will be available in reasonable quantities, as a matter of fact there were unspoken-for units at some retailers on Friday. Nikon rarely does as well on releases, often with poor initial availability and long delays between announcement and shipment (though they seem to be getting better.)
12/01/2008 06:46:35 PM · #12
Congrats. You'll love it.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/30000-34999/32767/120/740097.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/30000-34999/32767/120/740097.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

There's one that shows some mojo with an 85mm at 1.4.
The last 50 shots posted in my portfolio are D700ers. I'm less of a sharpness maniac these days (unless it's really called for) but you'll see some pretty cool shots in terms of image qualityn where there's a very clear difference from my previous cameras.

Have Fun!
12/01/2008 06:51:58 PM · #13
I've been tossing and turning about exactly that choice too - 5D either version or D700, and have also decided to go with the D700 as my first body, and keep the D300 as my spare. It does mean having to get extra lenses - my 17-55 will stay on the D300 body for most portrait sessions in good light as its an excellent lens, and I'll get the 24-70 for the D700 for weddings and when light is an issue, plus my trusty 50mm 1.8 of course. The sway towards Canon was pretty strong, I really love what the 5D does in terms of natural colours and beautiful images, but when it comes down to it, in your hands the D300/D700 seems much more ergonomic. I found the Canon actually hurt my hands because of their button/dial placement and I couldn't do it all single handed, which occasionally I have to do in weird situations when shooting kids. The D700 is cheaper than the mark II, which helps, and I can still use most of my lenses on it - I was planning on getting the 24-70 anyway for the extra reach on the D300.
Well done on your choice - its seems to take a ridiculous amount of your time and brain space doesn't it!
By the way, I've also been talking to some local pros here, and all but one have made the switch to the D700 (from their 5D's), although some are on the D3, but it seems to be the same camera in most respects.

PS if I had enough money I would still DEFINITELY go with the 1D over any of the Nikons, but at this point I simply don't deserve it! At least with the D700 you are getting the top of the line Nikon in a smaller and more manageable body, for a lot less. That will do for now!

Message edited by author 2008-12-01 18:53:48.
12/01/2008 07:04:22 PM · #14
Originally posted by jettyimages:

PS if I had enough money I would still DEFINITELY go with the 1D over any of the Nikons


I'm curious as to why you say this.
12/01/2008 07:15:26 PM · #15
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by smurfguy:


I feel that the 5DII release was much hyped and well botched. Fare well, Canon. Now to sell off my 24-105...


LOL!
It does sound like the D700 will fit your needs well, and it is a great machine, no doubt of that. But "botched release?" Mind telling us what about the release was/is botched?

I pre-ordered within 24 hours of pre-order availability from a very large retailer (Amazon). Canon didn't bother to tell anybody that they wouldn't be supplying online retailers until after the little brick'n'mortars. Part of the joy of a pre-order is having it ASAP - that's why you wait for months and pay MSRP. I too had heard of excess stock at some stores, and it was more than a little annoying to me.

So that's how I feel Canon botched this release - at least for me and the hundreds of others who ordered from Amazon, buydig, etc.

Who knows, maybe Amazon will actually start shipping 5DII's tomorrow - I don't care anymore. I believe it worked out in my favor. The extra speed will help with my quick-moving daughter, the smaller files will be easier and faster to work with, and I'm not on the heartburn side of introductory body depreciation.
12/01/2008 07:54:40 PM · #16
Originally posted by smurfguy:

...I believe it worked out in my favor. The extra speed will help with my quick-moving daughter, the smaller files will be easier and faster to work with, and I'm not on the heartburn side of introductory body depreciation.


Yup, yup, and yup. For you, this was certainly the right choice. Nikon does have class-leading speed, including frame rate, blackout time and shutter delay. Canon does need to step up a notch there with their offerings outside the 1 series. The file size is a big consideration. You can always notch down to a smaller size, Sraw1 or Sraw2 for instance, but then what's the point of having 21Mpx? Those opting for the 5DII (or the D3x or A900 for that matter) had better be prepared with computing power and disk space. Finally, yes, the financial "bite" of being an early adopter means that you really must gain something in IQ and/or features/performance in order to sustain that extra hit. I don't regret doing it with the 5D, but I consciously chose not to do so with the 5DII.
FWIW, Canon is going to ship first to it's top "pro" retailers, and those are going to be sellers like B&H, Calumet, etc.; it's no surprise that shipments to a generalist retailer like Amazon lagged a little.
12/01/2008 08:13:54 PM · #17
Originally posted by breadfan35:

Originally posted by jettyimages:

PS if I had enough money I would still DEFINITELY go with the 1D over any of the Nikons


I'm curious as to why you say this.


Because personally I prefer the Canon image quality over the Nikon in artistic terms. Its something I've discussed here before, its very hard to describe and I have used the word 'luminescence', unsuccessfully. In my opinion the top level canons seem to be able to provide a smoother and higher dynamic ratio, less punchy and contrasty than Nikon. Some Nikonians don't seem to like the 'softness' of a Canon image - its not that the clarity or sharpness is there, it certainly is - but I think its the softness of the light thats between the subject and the lens that the canon manages to pick up. I love that, and wish the Nikons did. Nikon is razor sharp and great at picking up immense detail, colour and form, but - perhaps its the glass rather than the camera, I'm not sure yet - the Canon 1D seems to make artwork out of an image far more easily than Nikon. IMHO.
Oh boy, I'm going to get shot by both sides now. I'm not fence sitting though, and I'm not grabbing onto one particular brand with vehemence. I just like certain things about Canon, and certain things about Nikon. At this point in time, I do a lot of natural portraits with kids and families running around on beaches etc, and a lot of weddings, so I need to be able to grab the camera with my toes if necessary and shoot a good image in micro seconds. The Nikon is better for me there, probably because I've always shot NIkon, film or digital. If I were only shooting in the studio or concentrating on landscapes and art shots, I would definitely want the Canon as it records the feeling as well as the image in a way that I understand better. Maybe some people can find that quality in their Nikons, if so I'd love to know how. Obviously you need to know how to use a camera, regardless of what brand it is, and you need to be highly skilled in order to make artwork instead of snapshot, thats all a given, and I'm always going to be learning.
12/01/2008 11:52:47 PM · #18
Hot damn, if D700s are only $2400, I may just return all my Christmas presents and sell my D300 and grab a D700!
12/02/2008 12:30:12 AM · #19
Originally posted by kirbic:

You can always notch down to a smaller size, Sraw1 or Sraw2 for instance

Ah, that's what I thought, too. But it turns out that sRAW file size is much larger than the proportion of pixels thrown away (i.e. 50% of pixels, 75% file size).

Originally posted by kirbic:

FWIW, Canon is going to ship first to it's top "pro" retailers... it's no surprise that shipments to a generalist retailer like Amazon lagged a little.

I wish I'd known that beforehand to save myself some grief.

Anyway, I always appreciate your posts, Fritz. =)

Originally posted by jettyimages:

its seems to take a ridiculous amount of your time and brain space doesn't it!

It really does! I have found myself considering a used 1DIII, used 5D, 5DII, D700, 50D, and 40D. It's a lot of money to spend for an amateur, and you'll live with the choice for a long time. Still, they all are excellent cameras. In a way, I'm just excited to take pictures again. =)
12/02/2008 01:53:20 AM · #20
Originally posted by jettyimages:

Originally posted by breadfan35:

Originally posted by jettyimages:

PS if I had enough money I would still DEFINITELY go with the 1D over any of the Nikons


I'm curious as to why you say this.


Because personally I prefer the Canon image quality over the Nikon in artistic terms. Its something I've discussed here before, its very hard to describe and I have used the word 'luminescence', unsuccessfully. In my opinion the top level canons seem to be able to provide a smoother and higher dynamic ratio, less punchy and contrasty than Nikon. Some Nikonians don't seem to like the 'softness' of a Canon image - its not that the clarity or sharpness is there, it certainly is - but I think its the softness of the light thats between the subject and the lens that the canon manages to pick up. I love that, and wish the Nikons did. Nikon is razor sharp and great at picking up immense detail, colour and form, but - perhaps its the glass rather than the camera, I'm not sure yet - the Canon 1D seems to make artwork out of an image far more easily than Nikon. IMHO.
Oh boy, I'm going to get shot by both sides now. I'm not fence sitting though, and I'm not grabbing onto one particular brand with vehemence. I just like certain things about Canon, and certain things about Nikon. At this point in time, I do a lot of natural portraits with kids and families running around on beaches etc, and a lot of weddings, so I need to be able to grab the camera with my toes if necessary and shoot a good image in micro seconds. The Nikon is better for me there, probably because I've always shot NIkon, film or digital. If I were only shooting in the studio or concentrating on landscapes and art shots, I would definitely want the Canon as it records the feeling as well as the image in a way that I understand better. Maybe some people can find that quality in their Nikons, if so I'd love to know how. Obviously you need to know how to use a camera, regardless of what brand it is, and you need to be highly skilled in order to make artwork instead of snapshot, thats all a given, and I'm always going to be learning.


I am not experienced enough with DSLRs yet, but I can comment on at least one thing: vibrant colors.

A friend of mine has a Nikon D70 (I know.. not hot anymore), and I have a Canon 450D. I invited him over once to try each other's cameras out. We took portraits of his pretty baby daughter (<3 yrs of age) from the same location in the same lighting condition at the same lens settings down to aperture.

Our findings?

He started praising how my Canon kept the colors faithful with good colors even in the background.. while I started raving about how vibrant and contrasty the picture was from his Nikon. He was using the Nikon 18-200 mm lens (I think without the VR). I used the 28-105 f3.5-5.6. Another thing I liked about the Nikon image was how the background wrapped around the subject. I tried to replicate the same color tones by tweaking the picture styles on the Canon body (saturation, brightness, contrast, sharpness), but could never get the same effect.

So as you said, I like some things about the Canon (liveView, faithful colors, etc.), while the vibrant colors and good contrast in the D70. I actually started looking to swap the XSi with a D90.. only two things stopped me: higher price with the D90, and an extrapolation from lower resolution images at higher zooms in live view.

One more thing: I do agree a lens may have something to do with the final image quality.. but I am leaning to think it is also the individual sensor elements that affect how different color frequencies get transpired to relative pixel channel values (RGB etc.).

I will try to post the comparison images.

12/02/2008 10:47:39 PM · #21
Originally posted by Prash:

Originally posted by jettyimages:

Originally posted by breadfan35:

Originally posted by jettyimages:

PS if I had enough money I would still DEFINITELY go with the 1D over any of the Nikons


I'm curious as to why you say this.


Because personally I prefer the Canon image quality over the Nikon in artistic terms. Its something I've discussed here before, its very hard to describe and I have used the word 'luminescence', unsuccessfully. In my opinion the top level canons seem to be able to provide a smoother and higher dynamic ratio, less punchy and contrasty than Nikon. Some Nikonians don't seem to like the 'softness' of a Canon image - its not that the clarity or sharpness is there, it certainly is - but I think its the softness of the light thats between the subject and the lens that the canon manages to pick up. I love that, and wish the Nikons did. Nikon is razor sharp and great at picking up immense detail, colour and form, but - perhaps its the glass rather than the camera, I'm not sure yet - the Canon 1D seems to make artwork out of an image far more easily than Nikon. IMHO.
Oh boy, I'm going to get shot by both sides now. I'm not fence sitting though, and I'm not grabbing onto one particular brand with vehemence. I just like certain things about Canon, and certain things about Nikon. At this point in time, I do a lot of natural portraits with kids and families running around on beaches etc, and a lot of weddings, so I need to be able to grab the camera with my toes if necessary and shoot a good image in micro seconds. The Nikon is better for me there, probably because I've always shot NIkon, film or digital. If I were only shooting in the studio or concentrating on landscapes and art shots, I would definitely want the Canon as it records the feeling as well as the image in a way that I understand better. Maybe some people can find that quality in their Nikons, if so I'd love to know how. Obviously you need to know how to use a camera, regardless of what brand it is, and you need to be highly skilled in order to make artwork instead of snapshot, thats all a given, and I'm always going to be learning.


I am not experienced enough with DSLRs yet, but I can comment on at least one thing: vibrant colors.

Prash I think you've got it in a nutshell. Perhaps it depends on the subjects that you're capturing as to which camera is best. Its very true, the NIkon cameras offer vibrancy of colour and contrast above the Canon, but the Canon offers true to life colours and a more gentle approach to dynamic range for when you want a softer, clearer image. It really is personal taste, both brands are excellent, and there may be times when I really prefer the Nikon punchiness over the Canon and vice versa. Maybe we should all have two!

A friend of mine has a Nikon D70 (I know.. not hot anymore), and I have a Canon 450D. I invited him over once to try each other's cameras out. We took portraits of his pretty baby daughter (<3 yrs of age) from the same location in the same lighting condition at the same lens settings down to aperture.

Our findings?

He started praising how my Canon kept the colors faithful with good colors even in the background.. while I started raving about how vibrant and contrasty the picture was from his Nikon. He was using the Nikon 18-200 mm lens (I think without the VR). I used the 28-105 f3.5-5.6. Another thing I liked about the Nikon image was how the background wrapped around the subject. I tried to replicate the same color tones by tweaking the picture styles on the Canon body (saturation, brightness, contrast, sharpness), but could never get the same effect.

So as you said, I like some things about the Canon (liveView, faithful colors, etc.), while the vibrant colors and good contrast in the D70. I actually started looking to swap the XSi with a D90.. only two things stopped me: higher price with the D90, and an extrapolation from lower resolution images at higher zooms in live view.

One more thing: I do agree a lens may have something to do with the final image quality.. but I am leaning to think it is also the individual sensor elements that affect how different color frequencies get transpired to relative pixel channel values (RGB etc.).

I will try to post the comparison images.
12/03/2008 11:44:49 PM · #22
The brown truck arrived today. My and my wife's very first words were - it's a beast. Probably twice as heavy and much more bulky than my old Rebel XT.

I'd been reading up, and I'm very excited about Auto-ISO and some of the auto-focus options on the D700. The low-light performance did not disappoint, nor did the focus; even with my quick-moving little girl and the not-terribly-expensive Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.

Here's an ISO3200, f/2.8, 1/60 shot from tonight, indoor and under terrible lighting:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/65000-69999/65858/120/744598.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/65000-69999/65858/120/744598.jpg', '/') + 1) . '...' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/65000-69999/65858/120/744599.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/65000-69999/65858/120/744599.jpg', '/') + 1) . '...' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/65000-69999/65858/120/744600.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/65000-69999/65858/120/744600.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Out of camera . . . . . . . . . 100% crop . . . . . . . . . . . edited

I can't wait to bust out my flashes and use some decent light.
12/03/2008 11:55:37 PM · #23
Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!

Grats again!

Enjoy!

And when you go out to take images t'rrw, dont forget a bunch of us are waiting with eyes and tongues out to see the results:-)
12/03/2008 11:58:50 PM · #24
Thats pretty good for ISO 3200 - can't wait to see more images as you take them. Are you using auto white balance?
Don't worry about the size - in a couple of weeks anything smaller will feel like a toy to you!
12/04/2008 12:23:13 AM · #25
I believe that's tungsten, though I was switching back and forth between tungsten and auto. I updated my edit to be slightly less yellow-ish. =) The light was awful. Maybe I should shoot a gray card and try custom in a setting like that...

Anyway, I'll take some shots in better light, with the flashes and outdoors and what have you. =)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 02/20/2020 03:38:32 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 02/20/2020 03:38:32 AM EST.