with the new models being released I'm hoping to find a deal on a D700 and now I'm seeing that I can pick up a D3 for another $200-$300. are there any major differences between the D700 and D3?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

The Nikon D700 is a newer version of the D3 with a lower price.

I wont buy the D3 even at $2000, rather buy the D3s

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit Windsor wedding photographer.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Yes, but a D3S is going to run you $4000+ used...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Hi Doug,

I shoot a D700. It is my understanding that the image quality is virtually identical, in user reports and lab tests. The AF is said to be "better" on the D3 but those things are hard to quantify (?). Supposedly it's AF engine is a bit more speedy even though it uses the same basic CAM3500FX AF sensors.

Assuming you are comparing apples to apples - new to new or used to used, and you like the D3 integrated grip, verses the flexibility of a smaller, lighter camera plus grip when needed, there are a number of advantages to the D3 that I think can easily be well worth $200-300:

1. An MB-D10 grip alone is $250 or so and if you always shoot with a grip, the D3 integrated grip will give slightly better performance on a tripod (eliminating a connection joint) and it may feel better. The D3 is slightly smaller than a D700. A D700 with grip can be problematic in camera bags designed to just barely wedge it in, and my experience is that there are a lot of them. Especially the Think Tank stuff I have.

2. An MB-D10 works best with EN-EL4a batteries. That adds another $250 to the cost. You can use AA's with the MB-D10 grip and still get 8FPS but AA's are more work and don;t proivide remaining life as effectively. Conversely with the D3 you lose the internal EN-EL3 "backup battery".

3. D3 will give you 9fps verses 8fps with the grip and some say it is more responsive than the D700.

4. Having owned a D2h for a long time, the extra real estate on the "grip" is nice, espeally the extra LCD screen and more instant access controls.

Conversely, the D3 forces you to buy an SU-800 or use an expensive Speedlight in the hot shoe, just to fire off camera flashes in commander mode. The D3, though, is arguably more rugged without the pop-up mechanism.

If you are a grip kind of guy, and you did not allow for that in the price difference, I would think that would seal the deal. Similarly if you want the very best in difficult AF action shots, the D3 might be worth it for that alone.

My D700 is my poor man's D3, but back then the diff was $2500, not $300 and I already had a pair of EN-EL4's. At $300 I would have been all over it, even though I do like the D700's "convertible" option to a small footprint camera. Even if the D3 was $300 more than a D700 with grip and EN-EL4a and charger, I would still go for it.

_________________________________
Neil
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

thank you for that insight. I'm now leaning towards the D3. there is one for sale locally for $2100 with a shutter count of 49,088

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

...video, does that matter?
I have a d700. I did not want video (oh and the 700 is dream) but now, in journalism class, the next semester requires video and stills within one assignment. It was to do with wordpress, blogs, layout software, multi media, and storytelling.
Maybe as you look at the person's other gear you can assess if they take good care of their "tools." I think the d3 does video, different than the classic d700. But you have a d3? I don't think I've helped too much.
I hope it all works well.


"Close Your Eyes and See With Your Heart." a quote by Canadian writer Kerri MacDonald.

Glad to help . Good luck with your search .

_________________________________
Neil
Nikonians Team
My Gallery