Nikon D700

Skynet-T800 said:
Main reason is for prime lens and wide angle lens both of which I'm not liking on the D7000's dx sensor!

Not fussed so much for zooms tbh however I do have the 28-300VR which will cover the 18-200mm range of the DX lens.

I just didn't want to invest more cash and then they the bring out the better model!! and lose money.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd say a couple of things are relevant there... in both your requirements the D700 is better *IF* you have money to spend.

Nikon's wide angle zooms (the 16-35 f/4 and 14-24 f/2.8) are excellent but expensive (£800+ new).

Consider that the Nikon 12-24 f/4 DX give you the same field of view on a DX body as as the 16-35 on FX for about £100 less and the 12-24 is a rather good lens in it's own right. That's before you touch on the cheaper third party wide angles for crop sensors. Point being FX is only great for wide angle if you can afford to get one of those zooms. DX will give you the same field of view for less money. Second hand options are thin on the ground too, the older 17-35 f/2.8 is good but isn't cheap used.

Primes is one area where FX does shine but I'd keep in mind Nikon's primes currently tend to be one of either 'expensive' or 'old' (or in the case of the, rather good, 105 and 135 DC primes, both expensive and old). The old ones are optically good enough and on the D700 will focus quickly and accurately enough, they aren't AF-S lenses, how much this matters is up to you, personally I find it a royal pain not being able to just grab the focus ring for manual focus but I appreciate not many people use that feature as much as I do.

The new 'pro grade' primes are...a mixed bag at best. They are the 24, 35 and 84 f/1.4 respectively. The 24/1.4 is exceptionally good, it'd be worth buying one for DX and using it as a walkabout lens if it wasn't £1600. The 35 and 85 are both good rather than great, which is upsetting given the prices.

The 50's are again good rather than great but reasonably priced so more forgivable. I hear some mutterings about a new 85/1.8 AF-S prime coming soon, that would help things.

As eluded to, if you want f/1.2 primes from Nikon you need to go back to old manual focus AIS glass, there's nothing new around (it's excellent glass but I can't see many DSLR users wanting it).

The 28-300 has always been a lens which bemused me, I can't help but wonder who buys a £1800 body and then sticks a super zoom lens on the front. I appreciate sometimes one lens is nice but still, it's a bizarre choice.
 
I agree with bigredshark. If ywide angle zooms and a set of prime lenses are the only reason to move to FF then I would rethink sticking with crop. For the prime lenses you can use all of the FF primes on a DX body, just get the corresponding stepped down focla length, e.g. the 50mm f/1.4 on DX vs 85mm f/1.4 on FX, 24vs 35mm etc.). Nikon is Just missing something like an affordable 16mm f/2.0 DX prime to match the gorgeous 24mm f/1.4 prime.

The wider angle zooms use to be few and far between for DX cameras, now there is so much choice and most manufactures are on second generation wide angle zooms with iproved optics. Both the nikon 12-24 and 12-22mm are stellar (especially the 12-24), then the sigma 8-16mm is very sharp and very wide, and there is the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 to get the extra stop. Yes the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 on a full frame body is simply the best wide angle lens, prime or zoom, ever made by any manufacturer inklcuding Leica/Cosina/Zeiss, but it is not cheap and does not take filters natively. And I would question ones needs to ahve such a lens. Saying that soon after it was released pro Landscape photographers dumped 20K's worth of Canon gear and pruchased a Nikon D3x and 14-24 the combo is so good.....


PS: Strong hints of a Nikon 50mm f/1.2 AF-S. New patents released last year, which often is a prelude to a lens release but not always.
 
i dont know much about the Nikon set up but that sounds like fair advice. Its true to get the best out of any body, you need to invest in your lenses, tripod flashes etc... honestly before looking at lens cost you can easily rack up another £1K on a good tripod, good flash unit, grip, bag. its all food for thought.
 
Ok cheers Peeps,

I'm gonna hang fire on the FX for now and invest in the 12-24 f/4 DX and also the DX f1.8 prime. See how they get on. I have an offer on with my local camera shop so can get a few pennies knocked off.

I also have the SB-800 flash and the 50mm f1.4 prime which I really like but the focal range indoors is too close in the crop so this is why i'll try the DX 35mm.

My main shooting is portraits followed by candid street shots and because I live in cumbria I want also the wide angle for the hilly stuff.

I just need to give this camera more time and take it from there I think.
 
^^^
Woah horsey, I'd go FF instead of investing in, tying your self down and losing money on DX glass. Your always going to have that FF itch, so might as well scratch it sooner rather than later. I did what your considering now, and could have saved allot of cash by just getting what I really wanted to begin with, now I'v gone FF, there's no way in hell I'd ever go back to using a crop, despite for instance the D7K being an amazing camera.

What do you shoot btw, landscapes, interiors? i.e. nothing that would benefit from a shallower DOF, more precise AF, increased sharpness, ISO etc?

Seriously, I'm not suggesting buying a D700, it may well be a good idea to wait for the D800, but I don't think investing a shed-load of cash in a second rate system makes much long-term sense imho.
 
Last edited:
no point in investing in FF for the sake of 'he might need it in the future'. If the DX range suits his needs there is no point really. I dont know about the costings but with Canon the EF-s range can save you some money. Thats not including the cost for crop body compared to FF.

They way i moved to Full frame was slowly, shifting all my glass to EF only lenses, left with just my 10-22mm which i traded for a 17-40 with no loss of money. All my lenses are second hand, probably saved me over 1K across the range.
 
the shadow said:
losing money on DX glass how? If i sold my DX glass i would get back what i bought it for i don't buy new :D
Click to expand...

That hasn't been my experience, not if you factor in ebay/paypal fees, and if you sell it in a forum you don't generally get as much as you want.
Also I only buy lenses from UK suppliers, so if you buy imports you might stand a better chance I guess.
 
33L said:
no point in investing in FF for the sake of 'he might need it in the future'. If the DX range suits his needs there is no point really. I dont know about the costings but with Canon the EF-s range can save you some money. Thats not including the cost for crop body compared to FF.

They way i moved to Full frame was slowly, shifting all my glass to EF only lenses, left with just my 10-22mm which i traded for a 17-40 with no loss of money. All my lenses are second hand, probably saved me over 1K across the range.
Click to expand...

If he isn't going to upgrade to FF ever in his life, sure stay with DX, I doubt that though because when he has all the DX glass he want's and get's the upgrade itch again, what's left to upgrade?
That's right his body, and that isn't going to be strait forward now.
 
Buy a used Nikon 55-200mm VR 120 sell in a year for the same price
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D 80/85 sell for the same
NIKON 16-85 buy 300 sell 300
Stick to the usual suspects look after them all you lose is postage costs :)
 
Just invest in FX glass instead of DX only stuff, if you do upgrade you have a set of lenses you can use straight away, plus a backup DX body if you decide to keep it. I wouldn't buy a FF Nikon body now considering a replacement is around the corner, but I would invest in glass that can be used for both formats.
 
D.P. said:
The D700 replacement is due any day now BTW.
Click to expand...

just don't expect it in the shops anytime soon
as Nikon's factory was under water till a few days ago and Nikon say they wont be back to normal till march 2012
already shop prices are going up on Nikon cams and lens
a friend just brought a D7000 and in 1 month it went up by £150
 
ShakenNstirred said:
just don't expect it in the shops anytime soon
as Nikon's factory was under water till a few days ago and Nikon say they wont be back to normal till march 2012
already shop prices are going up on Nikon cams and lens
a friend just brought a D7000 and in 1 month it went up by £150
Click to expand...

The D700/D800 is not produced in Thailand but in Japan (where it has already experienced a delay due to the tsunami).
 
ShakenNstirred said:
just don't expect it in the shops anytime soon
as Nikon's factory was under water till a few days ago and Nikon say they wont be back to normal till march 2012
already shop prices are going up on Nikon cams and lens
a friend just brought a D7000 and in 1 month it went up by £150
Click to expand...

Yeah I saw the prices go up on them too!
 
D.P. said:
The D700/D800 is not produced in Thailand but in Japan (where it has already experienced a delay due to the tsunami).
Click to expand...

Well something's happened because they looked set to announce something, and then suddenly cancelled the announcement.

Yes the D700 is produced in Japan, but maybe due to the recent difficulties they decided on another plant which would have more capacity/less issues... and then kablamo, hit with another natural disaster!
 
i had a play with the nikon d700 last night

i was very impressed with it.

with a 50mm 1.4 it in terrible light it was fast and acurate
 
Last edited:
snow patrol said:
d700 + 50 1.4 is a pretty awesome combination indeed!
Click to expand...

Ok been a while but i'm about to order both of these, not bothering waiting for the D800 or whatever is out there as 12mp is more than enough for me. 16 from the D7000 was too much imo.

Hard to find one in stock though as Nikon still struggling.

Wilkinson camera sell one but £100 more expensive than others, but extended warranty is good?

Thoughts on where else to get one?

Cheers
 
You've waited this long, you might as well wait a little longer to either get a D800 or a used D700 imo.
Also there is hardly much difference in image size if you compare 12mp vs 16. So 12 might actually still be too much for you. For instance a 24mp image is only 40% larger than a 12mp image.
Also, if you got a D800, there maybe a s or mraw shooting mode, we don't know yet, but what I do know is buying a D700 now represents really bad value for money, you should have got one in November if you couldn't hold out.

Edit:

Just looked up the price on WC, £1850 is a joke!
 
Last edited:
An Exception said:
Yes the D700 is produced in Japan, but maybe due to the recent difficulties they decided on another plant which would have more capacity/less issues... and then kablamo, hit with another natural disaster!
Click to expand...

It also might be an issue with components as well.

The harddrive shortage hasn't been caused by problems at the HD manufacturers own plants, it's a component supplier used by all the manufacturers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom