Looking through the sell forum, the average used price these days for a D700 (no vertical grip) seems to be around $1800 US, and a D3, $2800. So there appears to be a ~ $1,000 difference between the two right now.

-Would you say the above is accurate?

-What were their respective prices this time a year ago?

-What do you see happening to the price differential over the next year? Do you see it getting smaller? Larger? Staying about the same? Why?

The D700 used price seems to be influenced by the price of a new one ($2200)...80% of the price of a new one.

Does anyone see it dropping to $1500 next year, maybe? Like if Nikon introduces a D600 that costs ~$2000 as suggested in the rumors.

I'm thinking about all this because if prices continue to drop, I might look at these very similar FX bodies with the idea of buying one next year. But most likely the D3 will remain out of my price range, while the D700 could conceivably drop close to it. And since the two cameras are so similar in the important aspects, the D700 is a viable alternative if you can't swing the cost of a D3.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

Speaking personally, if your $1800 price is right, I'm amazed that a 4 year old camera can maintain that sort of used price level. I think it is a testament to the camera and how the market values that camera. I would not buy one used at that price, just because the warranty issues, etc. But that is a personal valuation of things.

(I am not following used prices so have no opinion on the accuracy of your price assessment although it sounds right to me)

I think the relatively higher drop in the D3 price reflects the fact that there is not as much "value" in that camera, relative to the D700, and the marketplace values it accordingly.

And obviously, "value" is in the eyes of the beholder and for some the added features and ruggedness of the D3 may be very critical. I'm just trying to assess the overall market's valuation, as reflected in used prices. Not trying to judge any one person's assessment of "value"- that is impossible or unwise, in my opinion.

I suspect a year from now the D700 price will drop commensurate with a D600 intro or something similar, which is inevitable. I could see it down near $1200 or so but that is just a guess, or maybe hope, since I'm not sure I wouldn't buy another if mine fails badly, given what appears to be on the horizon. I really need 8fps and that seems to be the one feature that may not appear in a near term replacement or alternative like a "D600" intended to be an economical FX offering.

_________________________________
Neil
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

I looked at D700 sales on our sell forum from the past 6 weeks or so, and all 6 sales were right around $1800.

Maybe the D700 will hang around a while yet in the lineup. Nikon has been known to do this. Heck, the D90 is still available new today at B&H, even though production ended one year ago. The F3 outlived its replacement, the F4, and overlapped the F5, being made for over 20 years!

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

>> Maybe the D700 will hang around a while yet in the lineup.

I think (hope) it will too. The "D600", in the configuration currently rumored, does not in any way "directly replace" it, like D3s-->D4 or D200-->D300. And if it is indeed intended to be an "entry level FX body" it couldn't and shouldn't.

Just my speculation or hopes .

_________________________________
Neil
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

I am still waiting for the D700 replacement. It is not the D800 nor a 600. The current price is a reflection of the quality of this camera. I paid around $2400 almost4 years ago and could not be more pleased with how the value has held up. I truly love this camera.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

Bob,

I'm starting to wonder if Nikon will actually ever make a true replacement for the D700.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

I look at my D700 like my old F3. In film days i went from Nikkorex F to Nikon Photomic T,FTN and then the F3 which I thought was perfect. I kept the F3 until I bought my d200 then updated to the D700 and so far I have not found the urge to upgrade further. The camera does everything I need. If I do eventually want to upgrade, I share your concern, as the D700 was almost a perfect compromise.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

>I look at my D700 like my old F3. In film days i went from
>Nikkorex F to Nikon Photomic T,FTN and then the F3 which I
>thought was perfect. I kept the F3 until I bought my d200 then
>updated to the D700 and so far I have not found the urge to
>upgrade further. The camera does everything I need. If I do
>eventually want to upgrade, I share your concern, as the D700
>was almost a perfect compromise.

I know what you mean...I did a similar thing, adding a D200 after the D1H and D1x. It's a lower model in the lineup, but time makes up for some of that.

The D700 is the same as the D3 in the most important ways. But a lot less money. I don't see myself justifying the price of a D3 unless it gets a lot closer to that of the D700. This is all just thinking out loud right now...any purchase is like a year away.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

It will certainly drop to $1500 used. I've already seen one at $1600, locally on craigs. The pricing on some great cameras is a little out of whack due to the availability issues. The D3/D3s will come down a good bit. It's a little hard to believe folks will pay almost as much for a D3 as a D800. FPS is the only true advantage I can see. IMO, the kicker is going to be how fast the D600 shoots...

D700 l N90s l AF-S 16-35 f4 l AF-S 24-85 f3.5-f4.5G VR l AF-S 70-200 f2.8G VRII l AF-S 50 f1.8G l AF-S 300 f4 l TC-14EII l 2x SB600 l Autometer IIIF.
https://www.facebook.com/tony.johnson.photography
http://www.eyesonboulder.com
My Nikonians Gallery

And a used D3 is more than a new D700 right now...hoping that changes.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

Hi Al,

While the difference in price between the D3 and the D700 will get smaller over time, I think the D3 will always be priced higher.
The D3 is more capable, and there have been at least an order of magnitude more D700's produced than D3's. Again supply and demand at work.
Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!

Best Regards,
Marty