Options
D700 Question
Hi All:
I just got in from work, and excitedly unpacked my new D700. I can't shoot with it yet--must wait for the battery to charge, so I slapped a 50mm E series f 1.8 on & looked through the viewfinder.
I am struck that the viewfinder is dimmer and really not much larger than my Pentax K20d--if it is any larger. I thought I was hallucinating, so I put a 35mm f 2.8 lens on the K20d to equalize field of view. Amazingly, the crop sensor is a good deal brighter than the full frame camera. I am, in a big way, disheartened.
My number one reason for moving to FF was the viewfinder. All I've read is how much better FF viewfinders are. I realize the D700 does not have %100 coverage, but neither does my crop sensor K20d. I did install a split prism & 1.3 magifying eyepiece on the K20d, but that itself could not be why the crop sensor has a brighter viewfinder--can it?
When I look through my film camera viewfinders I am happy--I had this expectation for the D700--am I off my rocker to expect a great viewfinder in a FF DSLR? It is a 3 thousand dollar camera--the viewfinder looks like it is out of a $300 camera. Am I missing something obvious (I sure hope so). The split prism I installed was a $23 version shipped out of China--not a Katze Eye.
I would be grateful for any advice or guidance--thanks.
I just got in from work, and excitedly unpacked my new D700. I can't shoot with it yet--must wait for the battery to charge, so I slapped a 50mm E series f 1.8 on & looked through the viewfinder.
I am struck that the viewfinder is dimmer and really not much larger than my Pentax K20d--if it is any larger. I thought I was hallucinating, so I put a 35mm f 2.8 lens on the K20d to equalize field of view. Amazingly, the crop sensor is a good deal brighter than the full frame camera. I am, in a big way, disheartened.
My number one reason for moving to FF was the viewfinder. All I've read is how much better FF viewfinders are. I realize the D700 does not have %100 coverage, but neither does my crop sensor K20d. I did install a split prism & 1.3 magifying eyepiece on the K20d, but that itself could not be why the crop sensor has a brighter viewfinder--can it?
When I look through my film camera viewfinders I am happy--I had this expectation for the D700--am I off my rocker to expect a great viewfinder in a FF DSLR? It is a 3 thousand dollar camera--the viewfinder looks like it is out of a $300 camera. Am I missing something obvious (I sure hope so). The split prism I installed was a $23 version shipped out of China--not a Katze Eye.
I would be grateful for any advice or guidance--thanks.
0
Comments
I looked through my friends Nikkormat, there is no contest. :cry And only a little bigger than my D300. However, you can purchase the Nikon DK-17M eye piece, which helps this problem quiet a bit. But it does make a little harder to see the corners.
Yes, the 1.3 eyepiece in the K20d makes the corners tough to see too--I do not have a problem with that. But, will the Nikon DK-17m eye piece make the viewfinder any brighter? Doubtful.
I have that sinking feeling I used to get as a kid when I realized my expectations were not supported by reality--looks like I'm packing up the D700 and sending it back to the seller tomorrow. Sooooo sad.
I know the Canon 5d Mark II has a larger, brighter viewfinder than the D700, but learning from this experience, I'm sure it too is feeble.
Thanks Fred.
The 5D2 is a tiny bit brighter and bigger than the D700, I assure you. You'll likely be disappointed in that too.
If it's the bigger bright view finders you are after. Look at the D3 series, on paper, it doesn't say much, but it is a bit better than both the D700 and 5D2.
Also, before you "pack it up" try a different lenses.
The DK-17m actually is more transparent than the Nikon's stock eye piece, making it a just a bit brighter (up to about the 5D2 level) . And noticeably bigger.
*Waits for the OP to put the battery in the D700*
;-)
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
With the DK-17M, the D700 viewfinder is exactly the same size as, and also about as bright as, my old 1980's Nikon FM2 which has a pretty dang gorgeous viewfinder if I do say so myself...
I've shot plenty with the 5D mk2 as well, professionally and for leisure, and I honestly can't say I notice a difference in the brightness or anything else. I find FAR much more benefit from all the control layout and customization that the D700 offers...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Just wait and see what you can do in for example low light conditions...
www.warris.nl/blog
That would be a HUGE mistake!!!! You have an amazing camera and you will soon see how good it really is.
...And I'm VERY surprised that nobody else has even mentioned this yet! Come on, geeks!
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Your professional online camera gear rental store
Follow us on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/borrowlenses
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Firstly, thank you for reaching out to help... I am grateful!
Let me paint a backdrop to the events leading up to last night's post. I have been shooting crop sensor for a few years, and loving every bit of it. In those few years, I have a few thousand posts at a forum known for the civility of its people. In this time my passion for photography has grown to true love. I only shoot for the chance to fulfill an inner need which photography alone fulfills; I have no interest in exploiting that love in the name of money.
Because of this, even though my heart pounded when the D700 came into being, I knew it would be a long time before I could afford to purchase it. I have other hobbies which draw from my spending funds. The last couple of months have been a time of advertising and selling a lot of Pentax gear, to help me get closer to a purchase of a FFer. It took planning, because I wanted something to shoot with as I sold off my lenses & gear, some of which were dear to me. More recently, as I got closer to a decision on C vs N for FF, the available lenses and their performance on FF bodies demanded a lot of reading.
Anyway, a ton of thought and work went into the d700 which UPS delivered yesterday for me. The anticipation was great. I expected to put that Nikon up to my shooting eye and see paradise, the view for which I had been waiting years now. When I saw otherwise, my heart sunk.
Your effort to provide help is precisely what I hoped to get when I posted here. However, I was exhausted last night and, after spending 3 thousand dollars on a camera, the thought of having to spend more to get the viewfinder up to par was less than satisfying. I truly thought I was going to have a viewfinder like my film cameras provide.......now I understand, it just aint so.
Mod edit
Trust me, I know what the camera can do--It needs no sales pitch. It is a great camera.
Unfortunately, the D700 viewfinder is not a large leap over the K20d.
I know how good it is--honestly I do. However, great shooting is about basics, which is why 50 year old pics can be just as amazing as our most modern pics. Compostion & subject are vital to a great pic, and the best tool towards this end is the VIEWFI?NDER. not 21.1 Mega Pixels, not ISO 25,600, not HD video, not 10 frames per second.
Gear heads get all wrapped up in numbers, forgetting the obvious, simple things--like, it is still the shooter who makes the shot. A great example of this misguided thinking is in the silly thread now showing @ this forum where a nonsense babble revolves around which camera is better: D7000 or 60d. Completely out of the junior high school days of our youths.
My thinking is in line with yours: we are agreed, it is an amazing camera, and it deserves a viewfinder equally amazing. Anyone who reads my post can clearly see I am not attacking anything except the viewfinder. I am being honest--I expected more. Reality has set in, I understand my expectations were too high.
My d700's viewfinder gets no brighter with the battery in and camera on. But I left this possibility open in the OP by clearly stating I was waiting for the battery to charge. The viewfinder in my K20d gets no brighter or dimmer with the camera turned on or off either.
You realized what I said there wasn't pointed to you. IF, keyword "IF", you are indeed judging the camera's view finder with out the battery. Then I wouldn't be able to resist to chuckle a little. The view finder gets really dark and useless with out a battery.
You never indicated that you charged the battery...
... And actually installed the battery at all, so that leads us to believe that you are making the assumptions that the viewfinder sucks.
Then either Nikon decided to make some changes that we don't know about, or something is defective.
I didn't have time to and return to the seller, but I did get a RA today. It has been a miserable day for me--returning this camera would be returning a dream.
Matt's idea is possible, though I wonder if it will provide the complete solution for me.
Yes, this thought came to mind, except I only have 1 Nikon lens in my possession, the one described above. I recently bought Nikon lenses from Keh, and Ebay, but they are in transit. I have a lot riding on this deal--money and hard work. I did not come to this forum to insult anyone or any camera. I came here to start a new camera life, in Nikon. Unfortunately, I ran into a problem--it seemed wise to post the problem, to be honest--to seek help from those experienced in Nikon.
Outside of a few genuine displays of compassion, most of what I got was mocking, sneering and a call to war. This is 2011--these are cameras, not religious ideas. No wonder we still keep killing each other all over the planet.
Whatever I decide to do, it is doubtful I'll be sharing anymore of it here.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Again, as in my other recent reply, I'm looking through my D700 viewfinder and my FM2 viewfinder, and with the DK-17M on the D700 they are so nearly identical in size and brightness, I can't see a difference.
At the very least, I can promise you that the 5D mk2 is not noticeably better, and the controls / customization are definitely inferior, at least to me PERSONALLY.
I can highly recommend getting yourself a DK-17M, a full eyecup, and a few good f/1.4 primes or at least f/2.8 zooms. You'll have all the brightness and low-light accuracy you could desire!
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
If you have so much riding on this camera, why did you not try it out? Grab one from a friend, rent it or go to your local shop. I did the latter: held it, loved it, bought it on the spot.
I also took out the battery off my camera and the viewfinder looks like shit (dark and grainy). Difference of night and day with the battery in (even with the camera switched off).
www.warris.nl/blog
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
There's another possibility: check the aperture ring on the lens. Is it at f/1.8? If not, that may be why. I know with Canon EF, since there is no aperture ring on EF lenses, that the camera has the aperture wide open until you press the shutter button, then it stops down to whatever you have set. Is it this way with Nikon? Since the F mount lenses have an aperture ring (don't they?), it's possible that you've got it at a small f-stop that doesn't let much light in.
FWIW, on my 1DII the viewfinder doesn't change brightness with or without a battery. I just checked.
If the battery doesn't help and it's not the aperture ring, then (someone else may have said this) the original D3 is "only" $1000 more than the D700 right now, maybe less used. It's a really nice camera; however I don't know how much different the viewfinder is on the D3.
I don't think the 100% vs 95/98 really matters with regards to brightness; it just means that more of the edges of the photograph show up in the viewfinder.
However ...
<< I don't think the 100% vs 95/98 really matters with regards to brightness >>
If the 95% relates to linear % rather than area, then this ends up being a 10% area difference - and presumably -a larger mirror / more light transmitted?
pp
Flickr