nikon d700 vs nikon d7000....or wait
I currently have the following
18-55
55-200
35 1.8
50 1.8
d60
What should I do...
A - Sell the d60 and buy the d7000
B - Sell everything and buy the d700 with a new lens
C - Wait for the upgrade for the d700
18-55
55-200
35 1.8
50 1.8
d60
What should I do...
A - Sell the d60 and buy the d7000
B - Sell everything and buy the d700 with a new lens
C - Wait for the upgrade for the d700
0
Comments
Mostly, no one here can really give a useful recommendation without knowing what it is you shoot, what you want to shoot, what situations (low light? speed?), for fun, professionally, weddings, sports, wildlife, and what limitations you find with the D60. Knowing that, the folks here can give you a LOT more incredible advice
http://www.youtube.com/user/NYCFilmmakersGroup
http://www.meetup.com/NYC-Filmmakers-and-Actors-Meetup-Group/
Like the others said. We can't make a "true" suggestion for YOU without knowing what you shoot, and what you want to shoot.
"Don't worry when you are not recognized, but strive to be worthy of recognition."
-- Abraham Lincoln
With your lens kit right now I would consider spending less money on a body and more money on glass. If you want full frame get lenses that are full frame compatible. In the end it is the glass that makes a shot. The only exeption is very high ISO shots.
There are a few quickie shots on Thom Hogan's site, but only at 3200 (equivalent to max non-boosted ISO on D90/D300s: D7k has up to 6400 base plus HI-2 of 25600.). He says it's the best low light performance of any crop sensor camera he's ever tested. He doesn't yet have his full review up, in which I hope he'll post shots from the max ISO range. He also says specifically that it's no D700, and certainly no D3s, but very good for DX.
Given that it's the same physical size as the D90, I will wait for the D400 (and probably will hold onto my D300 until the D500 comes out, realistically). I don't use my D90 very much anymore, but it just doesn't feel as right as the D300 does, now that I'm used to the larger body.
My site 365 Project
Confused. I understand people's preferences, but the D7K seems to be better in almost every aspect over the D300. What is the one feature that makes the D300 your favorite?
"Don't worry when you are not recognized, but strive to be worthy of recognition."
-- Abraham Lincoln
It's not one feature, it's actually a lot. Mostly in build quality, physical size, and customizability (is that a word?).
I have a D90, which I like a lot and LOVED before I got my D300. Now that I'm used to the D300, including the larger size and (IMO) better ergonomics, when I pick up the D90, it feels small and awkward in my hands. The D7k, sizewise, appears to be identical to the D90. The D300 just "feels right" in my hands while the D90 does not. So I'm assuming (and we know what happens when one assumes) that I can get an idea of what the D7k feels like in the hands by simply picking up my D90. Not bad at all, but I much prefer the D300.
In this post: (http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1461847&postcount=16) I went into detail about the current D300/D300s specs vs. the D7k. As you can see, there are several specs where the older camera still is "better" than the new one. Obviously the D7k has many improvements, mostly in the sensor which is definitely a HUGE step forward. I believe that the D400 will include the same or tweaked sensor as the D7k as well as the myriad things that currently differentiate the D300 from the D90. I like having a dedicated "AF-ON" button, for instance. Yes, the AE-L/AF-L button can be programmed to be AF-ON, but I already use both thumb buttons that I have on the back of the D300, so I'd be down one control right there. The AF system in D7k is improved over the D90, but still seemingly not as advanced as in the D300. I would like the new metering system, but the one in the D300 doesn't suck. Would I like having more "see in the dark" abilities at higher ISO? Sure, but for what I do, I'm not limited by the D300.
Don't get me wrong, the D7k looks like a VERY GOOD camera. It is a definite advance in technology over the D90, and in many ways over the D300/D300s as well. Just, to me and for what I shoot, the sensor improvements would likely make little to no difference. I tend not to go over ISO 800, and stay at 200 whenever possible. I do not care in the slightest about video. 16 vs. 12 MP is really not a huge difference in reality. 4928x3264 vs. 4288x2848 is an increase by 320 on each side and 208 on the top/bottom. IMO, that's not an enormous difference. Sure, you can crop more, but I have never felt limited by 12.
Plus, of course, there is money. I have already put as much as I feasibly can into my hobby for the time being. And since there's not a thing wrong with either of my cameras, if I were going to spend ~$1k on something new right now, it would be glass.
Realistically for me, I hope to continue using my D300 for the next few years or until I am truly limited somehow by its ability. At my stage of photographic talent, I expect the camera will physically fall apart before I outgrow it. There are people still using older bodies and making great images, even though the new stuff is way "better." My camera(s) are not suddenly crap because there is a newer model on the market. What I want to do is read reviews, get excited about technology's path forward, be excited for people who get and love the D7k, but continue to shoot and enjoy what I have.
What gets me excited about the D7k is the new sensor and other fancy bits, and what that implies about the D300 replacement, simply b/c I prefer that body in general use. I expect that my D300 will last just fine for the next few years, and I'm just guessing that around the time the D500 (or whatever they call it in the new nomenclature system) is released, that's probably when I'll be ready (financially if not talent-wise) for a new body.
Don't take any of this in any way as an indictment of those who are upgrading or itching to do so. As I said, the D7k looks awesome, it's just not so much amazingly better than what I have for me to get excited about new gear. I'm very satisfied (and then some) with what I have.
My site 365 Project
No Problem, I was just asking your opinion regarding the differences between the 2. I just wanted the impression of someone who clearly likes the D300 and for the time being prefers that over the D7K.
Isn't the sensor of the D7K a crop version of the D3s with a little more megapixels?
"Don't worry when you are not recognized, but strive to be worthy of recognition."
-- Abraham Lincoln
No. The advantage of FX (24x36mm = 864 mm^2) is that since it is physically so much larger than DX (16x24mm = 384 mm^2), the sensor elements can also be physically larger. The larger sensels are what contribute to FX having much superior noise performance.
If you just hacked it up to the right dimensions in order to create a "crop" version of the D3s sensor, it would only have 384/864 = 44.4% of the area (and thus sensels) that are on the FX sensor. That is why DX mode on FX bodies has such low resolution. A crop version of the D3s sensor would have 12 * 0.44 = 5.33MP. In order to add more sensels, you have to make them much smaller, and since D7k has 16MP, they'd have to be 1/3 the size of the D3s sensels in order to fit that many on a DX sensor.
So while I have no idea on the actual device physics of the D3s or the D7k sensors, they are certainly not "the same just DX size." There may be many of the same technologies going into their fabrication, but the elements themselves are much larger on the FX chip as they would be on the DX chip, and therefore the sensors might be related, but they are certainly not the same.
My site 365 Project
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
Neal Jacob
[URL="http://nealjacob.com/twitter"]Twitter[/URL]|[B][URL="http://photos.nealjacob.com"]SmugMug[/URL][/B
Gene
I seriously recommend keeping your D60 and getting some glass. Like a 24-70 if you can afford it, or some nice primes, or sell your 55-200 for a 70-200. I mean, the D60 with a 24-70 is going to take better photos (except in low light) than a D700 or D7000 with a 50 1.8.
Yes, I use both in my 1DII and much prefer the CFs. The SDs are flimsy; they feel llike you can just snap them in half. The CFs are way more durable; there have been stories about them going through the dryer (do not try this at home!).
I am renting renting the 70-200 this weekend...and this thing is to heavy for any practical use.
I initially liked the idea of the d7k because of the movie mode, but I question the practical use. Although it is something to consider since I have two young children that I will want to record.
I posted up a mini review of the D7000 on my blog that you might find useful. As for my .02, if you're going to dump everything, the D700 is a fantastic upgrade as far as low light capture and speed. Do bear in mind however that moving to a full frame body is going to change things for you dramatically. Your lens selection moving forward will be geared towards pro glass rather than consumer grade glass which equates to a greater long term investment.
Full disclosure, I don't have a D700. I do have 2) D3 and 2) D7000 bodies though. They both fit into different uses for me. I like video and the D7000 trumps any other video capable DSLR that Nikon currently produces.
The soonest I'd expect a replacement for the D700 is early next year. It will likely be a couple hundred $ more expensive than the D700 is now.
1) If you're waiting for full frame, don't care about video, and am willing to plunk down some dough, pickup a new/used D700 now.
2) If you've got the itch for some new gear, don't shoot much in low light, and want video, get the D7000 and you'll be one happy camper.
3) If you're waiting for full frame, do want video, and am willing to plunk down even more dough, wait for the D700 replacement.
- my photography: www.dangin.com
- my blog: www.dangin.com/blog
- follow me on twitter: @danginphoto
I think that the 24-70 feels fine on a D700 and D7000. The Nikon 70-200 feels completely unbalanced on the D7000 when shooting handheld.
- my photography: www.dangin.com
- my blog: www.dangin.com/blog
- follow me on twitter: @danginphoto