some camera advice please

martynpd

martynpd

martynpd

Associate
Joined
26 Dec 2009
Posts
867
Location
Norwich
First of all i would like to announce i am now a nikon owner.

6835624378_c1b7d1b1fb_z.jpg


secondly I need a camera to match up with this lens.

I was looking at the D700. but i have a few questions about this lens.

first of all I have no intention of cropping images.
is it still worth buying a d700?
will I be able to get nice quality A4 / A3 prints at least?
is the DX mode on it a complete waste of time?
used is normally about 1300-1400 new you can get it for 1600.

I intend to use it for portraits and sports, and general shooting.

or is it worth saving up the extra and getting the D800. for another 800 pounds?

or get a d700 + d300 / d7000 for the extra reach for my sports?
thanks for your help :)
 
I Dont know i just decided to do things backwards as always. been debating canon nikon for weeks. got a good deal on that lens and decided to jump at it.

I can afford both :) but i could have a d700 and a 24-70 2.8 sigma or a d800 :)
 
ElDude said:
Why did you buy a lens first? :D
Click to expand...

strange, but a very nice lens it is.


Anyway, on topic, I don't get what you mean with
"first of all I have no intention of cropping images.
is it still worth buying a d700?"
The D700 was the best entry level FF camera you could buy until the D800 arrived. It will happily print A3 size photos and much bigger.

The DX mode is fine, still gives you a 5.5MP image which is still plenty for well beyond A4. Of course the D800 really shines here giving you a 15.5M image at DX crop mode, and also a 25MP 1.2X crop mode.
 
What I mean is, under the circumstances of the d800 coming out, would I be wasting money investing in a d700 now? I don't see prices falling by a lot but I'm no expert when it comes to well... anything really, so I came here for advice :)
I mentioned the cropping because the 12mp sensor won't give much room for cropping.
I don't see the 12mp sensor being a issue but I just thought id confirm it.
 
I just thought if im not going to end up kicking myself for not getting the d800 i could invest in another lens, probably a 24-70 sigma to give me 24-200 coverage
 
The sensor in the D700 was one of the best there is until the D4 and D800 came out (not clear if the 5dMKII or Canon 1DX is better but I would hope so), very clean results whhich helps when printing large.

You need to think if you will do much cropping and how much you would crop, and at what print sizes you are thinking 6MP will happily print A4 size and could push to A3 without a big problem if the pixels are perfect and the viewing distance not too close.

Saying that, the D800 gives so much scope for cropping, printing large or down-sampling for great high ISO work.


200mm on a D700 without cropping wont give much reach. You need to think how much reach you need. Would you buy a longer lens in the future?
A TC is also an option to gain reach, especially since you have the newer version of the 70-200.
 
Last edited:
ok, so lets say I go for a d800. apart from the 4fps on the camera is there any reason why it wouldn't be good for portraits and sport?
 
No. Relative to the D700 it has better high ISO performance, better DR, greater pixel density, faster AF, better metering.

The difference in FPS is not so great. With the D800 you could use the 1.2 or 1.5 crop mode to give you the reach needed, this will then give you 5FPS (6 with the grip + battery).

If you are a die hard sport photographer with a budget and high FPS is important, then look for a second hand D3. The bare D700 wont be any faster than the D800 (the D700 is 5FPS, the D800 is 4FPS but 5FPS in 1.2X crop mode, which still leaves 25MP images and in sports you will appreciate the extra reach). Although the D700 will do 8FPS with the grip and battery, that pushed the price up a lot and a D3 makes more sense.
 
^^^many sports photographers prefer predictable, well focused, high quality 4FPS rather than lousy 10FPS machine gunned images.

A pro sports tog will do much better with a 4FPS D90 and 70-300vr than a begginers with a 10 FPS pro camera with 400mm f/2.8
 
OK, so lets say I go for the D800, this filter they put in, according american Nikon website, this filter is quite weak and will effect the sharpness, so that's probably why everyone wants the D800E, my question is this filter, is it better in or out of the d800 for in general shooting? will it effect sports or portraits in anyway?.
I heard the only type of people that will be buying the E version are professionals that can control their lighting situation.

I will probably get a D800 because it saves getting a d300 if extra reach is needed down the line, probably not but you never know. Considering its apparently being released on Monday and yet no early unboxings or anything.

what do you think, will this be a decent move?
 
D.P. said:
^^^many sports photographers prefer predictable, well focused, high quality 4FPS rather than lousy 10FPS machine gunned images.

A pro sports tog will do much better with a 4FPS D90 and 70-300vr than a begginers with a 10 FPS pro camera with 400mm f/2.8
Click to expand...

I usually wait for the right moment, treasuring each shutter count like it was my last.

FPS doesn't really bother me too much like you said it isn't needed if you know what you are looking for, which comes with practice.
 
martynpd said:
OK, so lets say I go for the D800, this filter they put in, according american Nikon website, this filter is quite weak and will effect the sharpness, so that's probably why everyone wants the D800E, my question is this filter, is it better in or out of the d800 for in general shooting? will it effect sports or portraits in anyway?.
I heard the only type of people that will be buying the E version are professionals that can control their lighting situation.

I will probably get a D800 because it saves getting a d300 if extra reach is needed down the line, probably not but you never know. Considering its apparently being released on Monday and yet no early unboxings or anything.

what do you think, will this be a decent move?
Click to expand...


There are unboxing videos and photos out there: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/03/21/first-nikon-d800-delivered-in-japan.aspx/
it is officially being shipped to stores and NPS members.

The standard D800 has an Anti-Aliasing filter (AA), like almost every other digital camera in existence. The D800E does away with this sensor.

Nikon has a reasonable webpage explaining the differences:
http://www.nikonusa.com/Learn-And-E...hnology/gy43mjgu/1/Moire-and-False-Color.html

For almost everything the E version will be that little bit sharper, with an effective resolution in something like the 50-60MP range. You just have to be careful with moire. What I am still waiting on on is user experience to find out how frequently moire occurs with the D800E and how well LR/PS can remove it if it goes unnoticed during shooting.


The D800 is the easier safest option, and 36MP with a very weak AA filter gives massive resolution as it is.


TBH, for sports the non-E is probably the best bet (you wont have time to check for moire and re-take a photo....) You also wont need the extra sharpness. The E version is really a landscape photographers wet dream.
 
Is it worth it? Probably not, if you shop around for a used one then you might find a Nikon 24-70 (far superior to the Sigma and the best standard zoom available full stop) and a D700 for the same money as a D800.

The D700 looses virtually nothing you should care about - video is the big loss if you use it. Otherwise, it's got great AF, good metering, a decent sensor and is nice and quick. The D800 has got better sensor performance and obviously more resolution, but given the choice of extra glass I'd take that instead. Unless you have limitless money. In which case a D4 suits sports better anyway.

I don't like the 70-200 as a portrait lens personally, it's functional but a nice 85 prime makes a world of difference - get the new Nikon 85/1.8 if you can...
 
good advice guys, ive decided on getting a second hand d700, and a 24-70 f2.8
and probably a 1.5 teleconverter later one when I need this extra reach.


thanks again.

if I do end up kicking myself at least with the second hand d700 you have a chance to get a good return back off it.
 
A second hand d700 will certainly holds its value, in you may find anything lost reselling the d700 will be saved with price drops of the d800.

Can t go wrong with d700, and I certainly would not suggest buying a d800 and scrimping lenses, so the d700 was a good ubuy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom