D7000 or D700/D800???

wildviper · July 10, 2011

This question is probably beaten to death and I have read quite a bit already.

Here is where I am at:

I need to buy a second body. I shoot family portraits, e-sessions, occasionaly some events; though I may do more. Main reason I need a second body is that I have to have a backup. Plus, I have to have a zoom on one and wide on another one (I have Nikon 12-24/4 for the DX). Currently I switch around and that is not a good way to go.

I have a D300s which yields great shots at ISO 1600 for me. So, while I am looking for a decent ISO performance, I have decided that for my work, I am satisfied with the D300s for now.

So, while the D700's performance will be 1 stop better than D7000, I am not sure if this is that much of an advantage for me.

FX vs. DX...not sure about this. Again, if it relates to ISO...I don't really care that much. But if the image quality is different and substantially so, this would lean me more towards the D700/D800.

I am leaning more and more towards the D7000 since with that budget, I can get that and a used Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR I...for about the price of the D700 alone.

But what is stopping me from pressing the "commit" button is the threads here that mention that the IQ is far superior to a DX and the D7000. I just don't know what that means? How superior? Sharpness? Color? Tonality? So, please help out here.

I am thinking that with a 70-200/2.8 and the higher megapixels and a good ISO performance, I should be golden for now. No?

insanefred · July 10, 2011

wildviper wrote: »

But what is stopping me from pressing the "commit" button is the threads here that mention that the IQ is far superior to a DX and the D7000. I just don't know what that means? How superior? Sharpness? Color? Tonality? So, please help out here.

All of those. To me the difference was almost night and day.

If you are not sure of a full frame camera, then just go with what you're more comfortable with, D7K.

ThatCanonGuy · July 10, 2011

I'm a Canon guy (can you tell?

), but I would go with the D7000 and 70-200 vs the D700. I'd rather have a D7K/70-200 than a D700/70-300. Glass holds its value, too: in a few years, the D700 will probably be less than half of what it is now. The 70-200 probably won't depreciate that much. Just my 2 cents. Either option will help you take better photos

insanefred · July 10, 2011

ThatCanonGuy wrote: »

I'm a Canon guy (can you tell? ), but I would go with the D7000 and 70-200 vs the D700. I'd rather have a D7K/70-200 than a D700/70-300. Glass holds its value, too: in a few years, the D700 will probably be less than half of what it is now. The 70-200 probably won't depreciate that much. Just my 2 cents. Either option will help you take better photos

I never understood that. I am not sure how many photographers are into buying and selling hoping they can profit on value.
I thought it doesn't matter really, when I buy a camera or lens I don't have the intention of selling it.

ThatCanonGuy · July 10, 2011

It's more "if" I want to sell it. If someone buys a D700 now, they will probably want to sell it sometime before the D1000 and D6 are out. Who wants 12mp when you can have 80? And 12800 ISO is nothing compared to 102400

Somehow, I don't think the 70-200 will be outdated then. Aren't there already two 70-200's, VR1 and VR2? And there are rumors of a Nikon 70-200 f4.

wildviper · July 11, 2011

I have not seen the quality difference between the DX and FX...I have only been using DX. I suppose I can borrow a FX and see the difference.

I am leaning heavy on the D7K/70-200 combo since they fit the budget for the D700 and I get two tools. I am growing in photography and I think I will appreciate the ability to shoot at 2.8 on the 70-200mm. Last night was a classic example...I was shooting 2.8 / 1/60th at ISO 1600 on my Tamron 28-75mm. I needed to use the zoom to get a better composition, but that would have meant me shooting at 5.6 with my current lens. That's what..2 stops? I couldn't go down to 1/15th nor could I bump up my ISO to 6400....so I settled for a composition that I figured I will crop in(not ideal really).

I just have to quiet the voices in my head that says ....IQ is better on D700/D800.

Here is one image from last night's shoot:

_AND7166-2

This was shot with the above settings I mentioned. Though this is not the picture that requires the crop I was talking about.

Matthew Saville · July 11, 2011

Meh. Once you go full-frame, it's hard to go back. I used to think I was "fine" with the D300, but the day I started shooting regularly at ISO 1600 on a D700, it was like my eyes opened up to a whole new world of low noise, high detail / sharpness, and as a bonus, even better low-light autofocus accuracy.

Anyways, you can read my opinion of the D7000 here on my cameratalk blog: http://cameratalk.xanga.com

Bottom line: The D7000 is an AMAZING camera, but it just wasn't professional enough for me. Mostly because of the button layout and control customization, I simply am too used to the D300 / D700. Personally, I'd say that even though I'd love to own a D7000 for "goofing around" and adventure / semi-professional work, ...my net DX purchase, if I ever make one, will be a D400.

I'd rather have two D700's now, or a D700 and a D300 now, and I'd sell one later to upgrade to the D800 whenever it comes out in the next few months...

=Matt=

angevin1 · July 11, 2011

insanefred wrote: »

All of those. To me the difference was almost night and day.

If you are not sure of a full frame camera, then just go with what you're more comfortable with, D7K.

I agree on all accounts, night/day, and going with what you're comfy with too.

For me, I'd always shot with 35mm film. Digital came along and I was DX until the D700 came out. The after getting the D700, it was if the light came on and I was home again. Field of view was a biggie. I always felt like half the photo was missing with D300. I did some tests with same lens and same tripod set -up and the D700 could out resolve the D300. in other words if I cropped the D700 photo, or even did a 100% crop, the D700 just made a better photo.

As far as the ISO thing goes. I did another test using the same lens and found that glass makes a ton of difference in higher iso's from my two cameras at the time, the D300/D700. This was shooting portraits.

ziggy53 · July 11, 2011

The combination of 1 - DX body and 1 - FX body does give you a more flexible kit from a lens perspective. FX lenses have different FOVs on the different bodies and that can make your whole system seem more flexible.

Then again (an opposing view) ...

If you are truly happy with the D300S, why not consider a second D300S? Having 2 identical bodies is extremely fast in use because you only have 1 set of controls to learn. Unless you need the features of the D7000, it may just complicate your photographic life.

Qarik · July 11, 2011

on well exposed shots IQ difference will be negliible...but don't rule out the 1 stop difference in usable ISO. That is huge. Also the 70-200mm will be great for sports on DX but not so great event shooting..it just too long on the short end imo. Finally it's not just the differences you see in a spec..the AF is still more snappy in the D700 and ergonomically better suited for on the go pro shooting. You won't know unless you try kinda thing. The control lockouts, the dial for single point focus, etc. If you intend to stay hobbyist the D7000 is an okay choice...if your intend to shoot to go pro then the D700 is the way to go imo.

insanefred · July 12, 2011

Qarik wrote: »

on well exposed shots IQ difference will be negliible..

Are you talking about D300 vs D700 here?
If so, at ISO 200 the D300 clearly has noise, it looks like ISO 1000 on the D700, but with less detail.
If we were to talk about purely noise levels, the D700 is easily 1 stop better. But for noise not effecting sharpness, the D700 is well over 2 stops.
I have tried ETTR with the D300, and other tricks, it just can't compete with the D700.

Qarik · July 12, 2011

insanefred wrote: »

Are you talking about D300 vs D700 here?
If so, at ISO 200 the D300 clearly has noise, it looks like ISO 1000 on the D700, but with less detail.
If we were to talk about purely noise levels, the D700 is easily 1 stop better. But for noise not effecting sharpness, the D700 is well over 2 stops.
I have tried ETTR with the D300, and other tricks, it just can't compete with the D700.

op is talking about d700 vs d7000

insanefred · July 12, 2011

Qarik wrote: »

op is talking about d700 vs d7000

Ok

wildviper · July 12, 2011

Thanx for helping me out here.

Few more questions:

1. If I get the D700...won't I have to replace all my lenses? Except for the Tamron since that works on FX.

2. For the D700, any issues with corrupt memory cards? I really like the appeal of dual slots for backup purposes. I haven't heard anything negative about the D700, but just asking here????

I am not choosing to go with another D300s because of the price point. It is worth it for me to get new technology in D7000 for the same price as a used D300s. From what I have read, the D7000 beats the D300s in ISO. I do like the controls though of the D300s.

Qarik · July 12, 2011

wildviper wrote: »

Thanx for helping me out here.

Few more questions:

1. If I get the D700...won't I have to replace all my lenses? Except for the Tamron since that works on FX.

2. For the D700, any issues with corrupt memory cards? I really like the appeal of dual slots for backup purposes. I haven't heard anything negative about the D700, but just asking here????

I am not choosing to go with another D300s because of the price point. It is worth it for me to get new technology in D7000 for the same price as a used D300s. From what I have read, the D7000 beats the D300s in ISO. I do like the controls though of the D300s.

1) your 50 1.8 will work as well. but if your lens choice is the issue here then don't get it. it's a true pro body and your lens won't due it justice. you got to decide here..stay commcercial or go pro level..there is no in between here.

2) never experienced an issue and never heard of a mjor issue either.

3) if you stay DX, absolutely imo

wildviper · July 12, 2011

Thanx for the quick reply.

I forgot to ask...what about a Nikon 70-200 VR I ..not VR II. Will that work on D700??

Qarik · July 12, 2011

wildviper wrote: »

Thanx for the quick reply.

I forgot to ask...what about a Nikon 70-200 VR I ..not VR II. Will that work on D700??

they will work..as will 24-70mm, 14-24mm, all the 50mm, 85mm 1.8 and 1.4, all T/S. Actually the DX glass wilkl work as well but at 6 megapixel.

insanefred · July 12, 2011

wildviper wrote: »

Thanx for helping me out here.

Few more questions:

1. If I get the D700...won't I have to replace all my lenses? Except for the Tamron since that works on FX.

2. For the D700, any issues with corrupt memory cards? I really like the appeal of dual slots for backup purposes. I haven't heard anything negative about the D700, but just asking here????

I am not choosing to go with another D300s because of the price point. It is worth it for me to get new technology in D7000 for the same price as a used D300s. From what I have read, the D7000 beats the D300s in ISO. I do like the controls though of the D300s.

Only your 12-24mm with get heavy vignetting. Better to use DX mode on the D700.
Nope, it's usually the card that goes bad. Even then, I have 5 corrupted photos out of 35,000.

wildviper wrote: »

Thanx for the quick reply.

I forgot to ask...what about a Nikon 70-200 VR I ..not VR II. Will that work on D700??

Of course it will!
Personally, I'd pick the 70-200mm VR2 over the VR1 any day of the week.

I shoot family portraits, e-sessions, occasionaly some events;

Personally, stick with the D300s or D7K. Use that extra money on glass.

Matthew Saville · July 14, 2011

insanefred wrote: »

Only your 12-24mm with get heavy vignetting. Better to use DX mode on the D700.
Nope, it's usually the card that goes bad. Even then, I have 5 corrupted photos out of 35,000.

Of course it will!
Personally, I'd pick the 70-200mm VR2 over the VR1 any day of the week.

Personally, stick with the D300s or D7K. Use that extra money on glass.

I've used the 12-24 f/4 DX on a D700 quite a few times, if you shoot without a hood or UV filter, you can shoot as wide as 17mm (un-cropped) or so without any vignetting and decently sharp corners.

I do agree however, that the D7000 is certainly a more "cutting edge" camera and the functionality is awesome for the most part. I do really miss a few things though, so if I ever buy another DX body for professional use, I'll be waiting to see if Nikon makes a D400 with the same sensor...

BTW, if you shoot on a crop sensor, and more importantly if you plan on shooting that crop sensor for a long term, then the 70-200 VR mk1 is actually sharper on DX.

=Matt=

Zerodog · July 14, 2011

D400 is what I am waiting for. Or whatever the pro-ish DX is. I love my D300s. I just want more ISO. That is it. Better video would be a plus too. I like the difference of focal length between my DX and FX bodies. But if there was a D800 that was killer? I would be temped too. Something like a 700 with the D3s sensor? I don't know if I could keep my hands off of it. Either way, I think I am keeping my 300s as my knock around smaller body. It is hard to beat that package, and it is paid for.....

insanefred · July 14, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

BTW, if you shoot on a crop sensor, and more importantly if you plan on shooting that crop sensor for a long term, then the 70-200 VR mk1 is actually sharper on DX.

=Matt=

It might be personal experience but the 70-200mm VR2 has a much more reliable and faster AF than the VR1 version.

M38A1 · July 14, 2011

I'm certainly no expert, so understand that up front.

Yet.... coming from the D90 (which I still have) and moving to the D700 I was blown away by the image quality. Same glass used on either body, but the actual images were different in a good way on an FX body. I can't explain what was different in technical terms, but they appeared more crisp, popped more, and contained better color distribution more accurate to what I was getting out of my DX body.

It took a while to save the coin, but in my unprofessional opinion, worth every penny of the wait.

.

wildviper · July 16, 2011

...this is like a see-saw here now for me.

D700...no d7000....no d700....no d7000...no I can pull off the budget with d700....

*sigh*

I went and tested the D7000 at a local best buy. My first impressions:

- its small - it can fit in my hands with a battery grip better
- button layout is different - will take time getting used too
- 6 fps is nice - in a camera at this price range
- I ran an ISO test but it is inconclusive against my d300s. It seemed both are very close to each other. I took various shots with both cameras and used the same lens.
- Even though the ISO goes high...who is going to use 25K ISO anyways? Its terrible. mute point
- the viewfinder seemed small to me from the d300s. have to double check this.
- Only one button in the front (the DOF Preview). D300s has two which I customized. Not sure if it really matters...but
- the mode dial seemed platicky. I guess I can live with that as I used to have D70s...nothing went wrong with that one. I don't abuse my cameras.

Reading online, couple of things concern me now with the d7k - oil stains on sensor and due to high megapixels, you can clear tell if a shot is not in focus.

Arghhhh...but what a price point! :P

I am going to try and get a d700 to test as well. Anyone got one I can borrow??? :P

dbarnby · July 17, 2011

Recycled Advice

wildviper wrote: »

This question is probably beaten to death and I have read quite a bit already.

Here is where I am at:

I need to buy a second body. I shoot family portraits, e-sessions, occasionaly some events; though I may do more. Main reason I need a second body is that I have to have a backup. Plus, I have to have a zoom on one and wide on another one (I have Nikon 12-24/4 for the DX). Currently I switch around and that is not a good way to go.

I have a D300s which yields great shots at ISO 1600 for me. So, while I am looking for a decent ISO performance, I have decided that for my work, I am satisfied with the D300s for now.

So, while the D700's performance will be 1 stop better than D7000, I am not sure if this is that much of an advantage for me.

FX vs. DX...not sure about this. Again, if it relates to ISO...I don't really care that much. But if the image quality is different and substantially so, this would lean me more towards the D700/D800.

I am leaning more and more towards the D7000 since with that budget, I can get that and a used Nikon 70-200/2.8 VR I...for about the price of the D700 alone.

But what is stopping me from pressing the "commit" button is the threads here that mention that the IQ is far superior to a DX and the D7000. I just don't know what that means? How superior? Sharpness? Color? Tonality? So, please help out here.

I am thinking that with a 70-200/2.8 and the higher megapixels and a good ISO performance, I should be golden for now. No?

Hey there Wildviper,

You have a common dilemma that is going round at the moment for anyone looking to get a new body. I get most of my advice and reviews from www.kenrockwell.com (which im sure 99.9% of people on this site already know of) but having shot both cameras he can give a better picture (pun intended) of what the differences are.

He basically says that the newer technology in the D7000 blows away every camera to date, and the U1 and U2 memory banks are a godsend if you need to switch settings quickly (for example taking a shot of a child at a wedding running across the lawn needs different settings than the shot of the whole area that you are focusing on just before hand) so in that respect the D7000 will get you the shot whereas you might miss it using the D700. (Also apparently the Auto-White balance on the D7000 is incredible)

The Advantages of the D700 is that it is built for the pro-amateur meaning that everything is weather-sealed and built beautifully so no worries if you drop it (unless your toe is underneath haha) and the major advantage is the FX sensor. The FX sensor is really useful if you are shooting all day long, at an event or just in a really beautiful place haha just because it is much easier on the eyes (just look through ANY 35mm film camera compared to a standard DX digital camera and you will see what I mean).

Check out that website for a more in-depth review and his recommended cameras (he knows a lot more than I do) but it also depends on what your lenses are - if the majority that you use are DX lenses then go for the D7000 - they wont work on the D700 (not well anyway) but at the same time if you want extreme wide-angles then FX and the D700 is the best route to take.

Hope all of that info helps at all

Let us know what you decide on,
All the best,
Dbarnby

Harryb · July 17, 2011

You mght want to check out the D7000 review by Thom Hogan it adresses some of your questions.

I've considered the D7000 myself but its buffer size was decisive in my decision to take a pass on it.

insanefred · July 17, 2011

dbarnby wrote: »

Hey there Wildviper,

You have a common dilemma that is going round at the moment for anyone looking to get a new body. I get most of my advice and reviews from www.kenrockwell.com (which im sure 99.9% of people on this site already know of) but having shot both cameras he can give a better picture (pun intended) of what the differences are.

He basically says that the newer technology in the D7000 blows away every camera to date, and the U1 and U2 memory banks are a godsend if you need to switch settings quickly (for example taking a shot of a child at a wedding running across the lawn needs different settings than the shot of the whole area that you are focusing on just before hand) so in that respect the D7000 will get you the shot whereas you might miss it using the D700. (Also apparently the Auto-White balance on the D7000 is incredible)

The Advantages of the D700 is that it is built for the pro-amateur meaning that everything is weather-sealed and built beautifully so no worries if you drop it (unless your toe is underneath haha) and the major advantage is the FX sensor. The FX sensor is really useful if you are shooting all day long, at an event or just in a really beautiful place haha just because it is much easier on the eyes (just look through ANY 35mm film camera compared to a standard DX digital camera and you will see what I mean).

Check out that website for a more in-depth review and his recommended cameras (he knows a lot more than I do) but it also depends on what your lenses are - if the majority that you use are DX lenses then go for the D7000 - they wont work on the D700 (not well anyway) but at the same time if you want extreme wide-angles then FX and the D700 is the best route to take.

Hope all of that info helps at all

Let us know what you decide on,
All the best,
Dbarnby

I just cringed when you mention KR. He is considered a joke on too many forums and people. I think he ruins his reputation by reviewing cameras and lenses with out ever touching them. I could go on about why I disagree with KR, but that would be too much writing.

Matthew Saville · July 17, 2011

insanefred wrote: »

I just cringed when you mention KR. He is considered a joke on too many forums and people. I think he ruins his reputation by reviewing cameras and lenses with out ever touching them. I could go on about why I disagree with KR, but that would be too much writing.

Ken may post a lot of completely un-founded information, but I find that 90% of the things he says hold true in the REAL world. He is certainly not going to make any friends among those who only accept measured, quantifiable facts as truth, but to me he is a breath of fresh air in a world that has largely lost it's touch with the REASON behind all the geeking out...

In many ways, the D7000 is the best Nikon DSLR ever made, and better in some ways than any other DSLR from other manufacturers.

However, of course, I certainly would NOT prefer it for professional use, I would much prefer a D400 in general for it's similarities in control and customizability. (And I DO NOT like the new custom modes options, I MUCH prefer the way the semi-pro and pro flagship cameras handle custom mode settings...)

HOWEVER, as a hobbyist or adventure / travel / outdoor photographer, I think the three best cameras on the market right now are the Nikon D7000, the Canon 7D, and the Pentax K-5. Depending on what you shoot, you can't go wrong with any of those cameras.

=Matt=

dbarnby · July 17, 2011

insanefred wrote: »

I just cringed when you mention KR. He is considered a joke on too many forums and people. I think he ruins his reputation by reviewing cameras and lenses with out ever touching them. I could go on about why I disagree with KR, but that would be too much writing.

unfortunately he has gotten a bad rep on forums and such but everything he has written has helped me so far, and he actually goes out of his way to say when he has or has not touched a camera or lens and then puts his opinion of what he thinks it would be like, or just puts the promo stuff from that company. But what ever, this is the internet and there are always people to fight and disagree haha

whatever helps the OP get to a decision on where to spend his money is what matters - not where it comes from

wildviper · July 17, 2011

I have read KR and take his info and combine it with other info I get from other sources. He isn't that bad.

Matt, I am surprised that you do not like the Custom U1 and U2....for me that is a god send. Imagine setting your camera for indoor shoot and outdoor shoot. Switch to C1 or C2 for either or and you are ready to shoot...including ISO, Shutter, and all. The semi-pro and pro version offer user banks that you have to load from a memory card...and is very cumbersome. You may want to give that a second look...I would think you would change your feelings towards them. Obviously I don't have the D7k but this was one feature I saw on the 7D and was just like..."wow!".

Now i am leaning towards D7K....am going to buy it and see how it works out from BestBuy. They have 14 day no restocking now.

Mav · July 18, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

HOWEVER, as a hobbyist or adventure / travel / outdoor photographer, I think the three best cameras on the market right now are the Nikon D7000, the Canon 7D, and the Pentax K-5. Depending on what you shoot, you can't go wrong with any of those cameras.

=Matt=

For the outdoor/adventure element, wouldn't the weather sealing and chassis of the D700 be useful? I've been taking my camera everywhere with me, and often not in a purpose built, padded bag. My D90 has held up pretty well, but I do worry about it in some of the environments I've taken it (from the arctic circle to the sahara desert...) and was of the impression a D700 would hold up better...

Ed911 · July 18, 2011

The problem with buying a new D700 now is that the price is outrageous.

I paid $2150 for my new US model in March, right after the quake in Japan. If you can find one via a reputable dealer, you're going to pay at least $2700 (Best Buy) all the way up to $3300 at Amazon...if they are in stock.

I'm happy I bought mine. One plus...and it's my personal preference, is that with a 1.5 crop sensor, you sometimes can't get far enough away...even shooting at 24mm, and I'm talking across the street, when you're shooting architecture downtown...like in Miami's South Beach and for sure when your indoors. So, I like the wide angle benefit of the FX sensor.

I also like all the controls on the outside....once you get used to them...you won't want to go back.

Just my two cents.

D7000 or D700/D800???

Comments