«

Am considering the Nikon D700. Any early comments?

Thanks,

- Russ

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:02:48 -0700, "RLL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Am considering the Nikon D700. Any early comments?
>
I saw one last night at the camera club meeting. A full-frame entry
in the camera market. The camera store owner who brought the camera
commented that the obvious gap in numbering and the jump up to "700"
convinces him that Nikon will offer additional full-frame models at
more affordable prices.

What impressed me more than the camera was the new flash. I didn't
catch the number, but it has a focussable beam.

He's selling the 700 with a 24/120 at $3,000. Another (I think it
was) $500 for the flash.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"RLL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:JaHjk.4800$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Am considering the Nikon D700. Any early comments?

Looks excellent - not much bigger than a D300 but with 95% of the D3
capabilities, and all of the image quality. That means outstanding high
ISO, up to usable 25600.

You may enjoy this, D300 + 17-55 v D700 + 24-70:

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/re...7/30/8930.html

Hi
Also interested in the D700. Have a D300, D200 and D70, all using DX lenses.
Not sure about this, but have heard D3 reverts to some horrible
configuration when a DX (rather than FX) lense is fitted.

Is this true?

If so, then a lot of upgraders need to consider upgrading a lot of glass
too!

Joe

"RLL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:JaHjk.4800$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Am considering the Nikon D700. Any early comments?
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Russ
>

"Joe Fitzpatrick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi
> Also interested in the D700. Have a D300, D200 and D70, all using DX
> lenses. Not sure about this, but have heard D3 reverts to some horrible
> configuration when a DX (rather than FX) lense is fitted.
>
> Is this true?



It reverts to DX mode (so you keep the telephoto advantage) but at a
miserable 5 megapixels.

So yes its pointless. You not only need a D700 but a couple of expensive
wide and telephoto lenses too. Adds about 2 thousand pounds to the bill.
I am also in this position too.
And I get to lose the use of the extremely useful 18-200 VR as well!

But I have to do it...
Have you seen the difference in both noise and sharpness over a D300?

D300 and wide and telephoto zooms are for sale...
And my 18-200 is exeptionally sharp (compared to 3 others now) its a made in
japan one too...

"Burgerman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ITnkk.701$(E-Mail Removed)2...
> "Joe Fitzpatrick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hi
>> Also interested in the D700. Have a D300, D200 and D70, all using
>> DX lenses. Not sure about this, but have heard D3 reverts to some
>> horrible configuration when a DX (rather than FX) lense is fitted.
>>
>> Is this true?
>
>
>
> It reverts to DX mode (so you keep the telephoto advantage) but at a
> miserable 5 megapixels.
>
> So yes its pointless. You not only need a D700 but a couple of
> expensive wide and telephoto lenses too. Adds about 2 thousand
> pounds to the bill.
> I am also in this position too.
> And I get to lose the use of the extremely useful 18-200 VR as well!
>
> But I have to do it...
> Have you seen the difference in both noise and sharpness over a
> D300?
>
> D300 and wide and telephoto zooms are for sale...
> And my 18-200 is exeptionally sharp (compared to 3 others now) its a
> made in japan one too...
>
What will you do if the D800 comes out? Your D700 will probably be a
big dissapointment.

"Frank Arthur" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:NOpkk.1835$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Burgerman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:ITnkk.701$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>> "Joe Fitzpatrick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hi
>>> Also interested in the D700. Have a D300, D200 and D70, all using DX
>>> lenses. Not sure about this, but have heard D3 reverts to some horrible
>>> configuration when a DX (rather than FX) lense is fitted.
>>>
>>> Is this true?
>>
>>
>>
>> It reverts to DX mode (so you keep the telephoto advantage) but at a
>> miserable 5 megapixels.
>>
>> So yes its pointless. You not only need a D700 but a couple of expensive
>> wide and telephoto lenses too. Adds about 2 thousand pounds to the bill.
>> I am also in this position too.
>> And I get to lose the use of the extremely useful 18-200 VR as well!
>>
>> But I have to do it...
>> Have you seen the difference in both noise and sharpness over a D300?
>>
>> D300 and wide and telephoto zooms are for sale...
>> And my 18-200 is exeptionally sharp (compared to 3 others now) its a made
>> in japan one too...
>>
> What will you do if the D800 comes out? Your D700 will probably be a big
> dissapointment.




I would probably buy one. Why not if its better? My D300 is well over a year
old and about 7k shots. And its paid for itself many times over.

Burgerman wrote:
> Joe Fitzpatrick wrote
>
>> Hi
>> Also interested in the D700. Have a D300, D200 and D70, all using DX
>> lenses. Not sure about this, but have heard D3 reverts to some
>> horrible configuration when a DX (rather than FX) lense is fitted.
>>
>> Is this true?

Yeah but it's optional, at least on the D3. Perhaps not on the D700?

> It reverts to DX mode (so you keep the telephoto advantage) but at a
> miserable 5 megapixels.
>
> So yes its pointless. You not only need a D700 but a couple of expensive
> wide and telephoto lenses too.

It depends what lenses you have, full frame is generally easier to get
wide angle. A 20mm f/2.8 AF looks like 13mm on DX and is a nice
affordable compact lens. For long telephoto shooting, full frame is
going to cost a lot more and a DX body makes more sense.

> Adds about 2 thousand pounds to the bill.
> I am also in this position too.
> And I get to lose the use of the extremely useful 18-200 VR as well!
>
> But I have to do it...
> Have you seen the difference in both noise and sharpness over a D300?
>
> D300 and wide and telephoto zooms are for sale...
> And my 18-200 is exeptionally sharp (compared to 3 others now) its a
> made in japan one too...
>
>


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:10:28 -0400, "Frank Arthur" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>"Burgerman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:ITnkk.701$(E-Mail Removed)2...
>> "Joe Fitzpatrick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hi
>>> Also interested in the D700. Have a D300, D200 and D70, all using
>>> DX lenses. Not sure about this, but have heard D3 reverts to some
>>> horrible configuration when a DX (rather than FX) lense is fitted.
>>>
>>> Is this true?
>>
>>
>>
>> It reverts to DX mode (so you keep the telephoto advantage) but at a
>> miserable 5 megapixels.
>>
>> So yes its pointless. You not only need a D700 but a couple of
>> expensive wide and telephoto lenses too. Adds about 2 thousand
>> pounds to the bill.
>> I am also in this position too.
>> And I get to lose the use of the extremely useful 18-200 VR as well!
>>
>> But I have to do it...
>> Have you seen the difference in both noise and sharpness over a
>> D300?
>>
>> D300 and wide and telephoto zooms are for sale...
>> And my 18-200 is exeptionally sharp (compared to 3 others now) its a
>> made in japan one too...
>>
>What will you do if the D800 comes out? Your D700 will probably be a
>big dissapointment.
>
According to a camera store owner - and Nikon dealer - in this area,
he expects Nikon to come out with something between the D300 and the
D700 that is a bit less pricey. Most of the features, but costs cut
somewhere.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message
news:Rpqkk.8952$(E-Mail Removed)...

>
> Yeah but it's optional, at least on the D3. Perhaps not on the D700?


It's optional on the D700 too.

As for the "telephoto" effect, that is a misnomer. If you put a 300 lens on
a DX box, you get the magnification of a 450, but not the compression. It
seems to me that since the resolution of the new sensors approach the
resolution of the glass, one can use the image magnification algorithm in
the processing program to obtain the same effect.

One of my friends is using his 12-24 and 10.5 on his 700, with the DX option
turned off. and the rectlinear correction in Capture. He claims to have some
interesting WA effects, even after adjusting for the difference in image
size on the sensor. I will probably get to see them in about 2 -3 weeks.
>

> It depends what lenses you have, full frame is generally easier to get
> wide angle. A 20mm f/2.8 AF looks like 13mm on DX and is a nice affordable
> compact lens. For long telephoto shooting, full frame is going to cost a
> lot more and a DX body makes more sense.
>
See my above comment.

--
Peter