I upgraded to this camera from a canon eos 40d because i really wanted the full frame capability that is only achievable with film cameras or ff sensors. I should mention as an aside that the 40d is a fantastic camera and really impressed me in every department. The d700 is a big step up in price but having now owned it for six months, the price for full frame is worth it for me. The d700 is in a class of three; the choices for the non-millionaires are the sony a900, the canon 5d mk ii or the nikon d700 (although they are all still too expensive).
The good news is that there is not a turkey among them; the image quality is fantastic with all three (i only quote from the ludicrous number of reviews i have sadly read). My choice was ultimately driven by the way in which i use my camera rather than the spec sheets, as the three cameras all point at a different type of photographer. This camera would better suit the intermediate or advanced photographer, as there are lot of menus to learn and much room to configure or hang yourself. On the other hand, the progamme mode does make the decisions for you, although even then you can change the settings. I mainly use the camera for shooting (in order of importance for me):my kids running around (speed), portraits (iq), plays (low light) (speed), rugby, football matches (speed) and lastly landscapes (detail).
Worthy upgrade to my d200. . Some of the other reviewers have given far better in-depth reviews than i can, but wanted to share my thoughts. Received this beauty yesterday after a couple of years on my faithful d200 - which i loved and had taken some great shots with. The d700 was a big investment for a non-pro (i had got my d200 second hand for about.
Pros
- Superb camera, few competitors in low light, solid.
- It's low light performance is breathtaking!
- The Five Star All-Rounder
- If you're not quite sure
- Worthy Upgrade to my D200.
- Cracking camera stop chasing those pixels!
Features of Nikon D700 Digital SLR Camera Body Only (12.1MP) 3 inch LCD - (Discontinued by Manufacturer)
- High performance SLR with 12.1MP FX (full-frame) CMOS sensor
- ISO 200 - 6400: extendable up to 25600 (equivalent) and down to ISO 100 (equivalent)
- Multi-CAM3500FX 51-point AF system and EXPEED image processing engine
- 920,000 dot 3-inch VGA LCD monitor with wide, 170-degree viewing angle
- Durable Magnesium alloy body: moisture and dust resistant
The Five Star All-Rounder. I upgraded to this camera from a canon eos 40d because i really wanted the full frame capability that is only achievable with film cameras or ff sensors. I should mention as an aside that the 40d is a fantastic camera and really impressed me in every department. The d700 is a big step up in price but having now owned it for six months, the price for full frame is worth it for me. The d700 is in a class of three; the choices for the non-millionaires are the sony a900, the canon 5d mk ii or the nikon d700 (although they are all still too expensive). The good news is that there is not a turkey among them; the image quality is fantastic with all three (i only quote from the ludicrous number of reviews i have sadly read). My choice was ultimately driven by the way in which i use my camera rather than the spec sheets, as the three cameras all point at a different type of photographer. This camera would better suit the intermediate or advanced photographer, as there are lot of menus to learn and much room to configure or hang yourself. On the other hand, the progamme mode does make the decisions for you, although even then you can change the settings. I mainly use the camera for shooting (in order of importance for me):my kids running around (speed), portraits (iq), plays (low light) (speed), rugby, football matches (speed) and lastly landscapes (detail). I wanted a camera that was fast, had great image quality, worked really well in low light and was ff. On all those counts the nikon is probably the best package. The sony and canon can resolve more detail for landscapes or architecture and can be blown up larger, they probably have the edge in studio / stock photography work. The nikon produces skin tones beautifully and is the best performer in low light, although the canon comes very close (again from my reading, i don't own one). It is worth mentioning the low light ability of this camera and by that, i mean the ability to shoot at higher iso than anything else around, yet produce excellent images. You can be shooting handheld, in virtual darkness and produce quality images. Living in the uk, this was really important to me (we specialise in cloud) and the camera is truly outstanding in this respect. Even when there is noise, it is grainy and film like; ultimately it is usable rather than unusable. Less pixels than the competition = larger pixels; this translates into an ability to pick up more light. The nikon is much better thought out than my 40d - it is more comfortable to hold, it is easier to change the settings on the fly (you tend to spin dials on the camera rather than having to delve into sub-sub menus), it is more ruggedly constructed and more configurable but on the other hand only has half the resolution of the sony or 5d mkii. However, it blows up to 50cm by 70cm without pixelation (that's as far as i have got) and beyond that it's academic for me, as i don't have a house big enough to cope with larger prints. For some the ability to resolve the finest detail in landscapes may be more pertinent. You do need to fiddle a little more with the in camera settings to get the sharpness, contrast etc that you want for your shot but the camera is so configurable that you can really control your output. The autofocus is excellent on the nikon (superior to the competition) and i have the grip which gives me 8fps when needed (it did mean buying another memory card as they don't last long on machine gun mode). The quality of the images i have produced from plays, landscapes and action is really high - note the quality of the images is high, not necessarily the photographer (some of my landscapes in low light are on flickr, type - sun setting over woodingdean into google). In terms of lenses, the spending does not stop with the camera. Full frame cameras need good glass, as they are devils for showing up the flaws in anything less. I bought the nikor 50mm f/1. 4d - the quality is in a different league and worth the bit extra - i paid about.
If You're Not Quite Sure. While i'm sure that if you're looking at this as a serious purchase you'll have already checked out as many web reviews as you can, this camera deserves a quick mention. Even with this price tag, it remains in the top three digi cameras on the market today, from amateur to pro. The images are simlpy stunning, especially when paired with some class glass. Using a 50mm f1. 4 produces shots that look amazing even when you don't try too hard. But when you do want to go technical, this camera has the lot. If you're not convinced then check out 'ken rockwell' on google, he rates it above the d3!worth every cent and will bolster your addicton to photography every time you pick it up. .
Worthy Upgrade to My D200.. Some of the other reviewers have given far better in-depth reviews than i can, but wanted to share my thoughts. Received this beauty yesterday after a couple of years on my faithful d200 - which i loved and had taken some great shots with. The d700 was a big investment for a non-pro (i had got my d200 second hand for about.
Product Info
- Product Dimensions: 14.7 x 7.7 x 12.3 cm ; 993 g
- Boxed-product Weight: 2.3 Kg
- Batteries 1 Lithium ion batteries required. (included)
- Item model number: VBA220AE
- ASIN: B001BYMC5K
Conclusion of Nikon D700 Digital SLR Camera Body Only
In full-frame, it's presently just the canon eos 5d or 5d mkii (both excellent cameras, 21mpix), or hold out for a '700' version of the nikon d3x (24. This isn't an especially small camera. 8(4) a little noisythis camera makes quite a clunk when it goes off. Pros - pretty much everything, in my opinion:everything else i have to say about this camera is good. I absolutely love shooting with this camera, and the results are almost always better than i feel i have any right to expect, encouraging me to develop and improve my photography.
A few years after that i bought a pentax k10d (i have both nikon and pentax lenses) which cost less but outshone the d70 in every way except flash sync speed (the d70's 1/500sec remains unsurpassed, even in nikon's line-up). When i had the d70, i would take 35mm slrs with me as well - i loved the instant feedback of digital, but the camera's squinty little viewfinder was a pain to use, the dx crop was inconvenient for wideangle. The 35mm cameras were a pleasure to use by comparison and the results with velvia or provia, albeit expensive, easily blew away the quality possible with the d70. With the pentax, i started to set aside 35mm - the 10mpixel results were very good, colour rendition much better than the d70, the viewfinder among the best available in dx sensor cameras at the time, the controls quick and intuitive. First impressionsmy first impression of the d700 was that dslrs had finally made it back to the 'real camera' feel of the best 35mm slrs.
Usesthis isn't a studio camera, at heart. Compatibilityi've a huge penchant for solidly built old manual-focus prime lenses, and with these this camera excels. Like the d200, d300 and other nikon pro/semi-pro cameras, the d700 works very well with old lenses. There are very few nikon fit lenses made in the last 30+ years which won't work with the d700. 4) using the d700, where with the k10d i often found i'd be out if shooting wide open (someone suggested that this was a common issue with modern auto-focus cameras because of the limited effective aperture of the viewing system itself).
The d700 seems better made than the canon, and the controls suit me better. No amount of enthusiastic rambling will tell you whether to buy this camera, but i would certainly strongly encourage you to pick one up and try it out if you're considering cameras in this price/performance bracket. I ended up reading a couple of mags that reviewed both cameras & stuck to my original idea of the best low light performance i could afford - the d700 & 24-70mm f2. Although it's possible to customise virtually very aspect of this camera, i'm not entirely sold on nikon's method. There are two banks of four memories but none will reset to their respective originally customised settings when powering back the camera.
So if you inadvertently or deliberately change a setting which you then forget, this setting will still be active when switching the camera back on. I would like to see half the memory positions being reset on powering the camera back on without having to recall from the card. Although i've been more critical than most, there's no getting away from the fact this is just one hell of a camera when combined with the best glass possible. The viewfinder is bright & the fifty one focus points means tracking moving objects renders this camera perfect for sports & photojournalism, particularly in low light. I'll quite happily use iso1600 & upwards though iso25600 looses a lot of definition but still gives useful results though i stick to iso12800 which gives undreamt-of resultsno review of a nikon is complete without some mention of the nikon creative lighting system.
The d700 can be set to command mode that will control the firing of an external flashgun such as the sb900 set to slave. The d700 can set four groups of flash guns to different levels of power when set to ittl mode. This camera is capable of sync'ing the shutter well above the normal speed by firing off a sequence of flashes as the shutter blades transit across the frame, albeit at lower maximum flash power. This camera has a built-in level but i rarely use it despite never having been able to hold any camera particularly straight - my ideal solution would be an audible change of tone.One aspect worth mentioning is the ability to set both the shutter & aperture to manual & let the exposure system determine the iso - nice one nikonalthough not mentioned more than in passing, nikon's scene recognition system means the camera can focus on faces.
I've had 12x18' prints made from this camera from both the 24-70mm & 16-35mm f4 vr lenses i own. I upgraded to this camera from a canon eos 40d because i really wanted the full frame capability that is only achievable with film cameras or ff sensors. I should mention as an aside that the 40d is a fantastic camera and really impressed me in every department. The d700 is in a class of three; the choices for the non-millionaires are the sony a900, the canon 5d mk ii or the nikon d700 (although they are all still too expensive). My choice was ultimately driven by the way in which i use my camera rather than the spec sheets, as the three cameras all point at a different type of photographer.
This camera would better suit the intermediate or advanced photographer, as there are lot of menus to learn and much room to configure or hang yourself. I mainly use the camera for shooting (in order of importance for me):my kids running around (speed), portraits (iq), plays (low light) (speed), rugby, football matches (speed) and lastly landscapes (detail). I wanted a camera that was fast, had great image quality, worked really well in low light and was ff. The nikon produces skin tones beautifully and is the best performer in low light, although the canon comes very close (again from my reading, i don't own one). It is worth mentioning the low light ability of this camera and by that, i mean the ability to shoot at higher iso than anything else around, yet produce excellent images.
Living in the uk, this was really important to me (we specialise in cloud) and the camera is truly outstanding in this respect. The nikon is much better thought out than my 40d - it is more comfortable to hold, it is easier to change the settings on the fly (you tend to spin dials on the camera rather than having to delve into sub-sub menus), it is more ruggedly constructed and more configurable but on the other hand only has half the resolution of the sony or 5d mkii. You do need to fiddle a little more with the in camera settings to get the sharpness, contrast etc that you want for your shot but the camera is so configurable that you can really control your output. The quality of the images i have produced from plays, landscapes and action is really high - note the quality of the images is high, not necessarily the photographer (some of my landscapes in low light are on flickr, type - sun setting over woodingdean into google). In terms of lenses, the spending does not stop with the camera.
Full frame cameras need good glass, as they are devils for showing up the flaws in anything less. While i'm sure that if you're looking at this as a serious purchase you'll have already checked out as many web reviews as you can, this camera deserves a quick mention. Even with this price tag, it remains in the top three digi cameras on the market today, from amateur to pro. But when you do want to go technical, this camera has the lot. The d700 was a big investment for a non-pro (i had got my d200 second hand for about. If like me you were thinking about whether to go for a d300 or a d700.
Brilliant Product. I bought this product with sigma lens. It seems there was something wrong with the lens, it made the multiple points af didn't work very well. I returned the product and the lens, and then i bought another one from a local store. It worked flawlessly (i wrote this review now in august 2012). The 5 stars is also for amazon satisfactory service all the time always. .
For All Those Thinking Should I ?. There is a lot of good stuff already said in reviews above. I wanted to answer the question that i had answer: "is it worth all that money?" - and the answer is. . Depends. If you are considering buying a sub.
No comments:
Post a Comment