Hi everyone.

I am looking to move to full frame from DX, currently shooting a D300s, which I absolutely love.

In terms of style, my shooting is all over the map. Given a chance, I love to shoot landscapes on a tripod, or a cityscape at night. Or, I will take the camera to Yankee Stadium at shoot from the stands with a long telephoto, such as the 180 f2.8 or 300 f.4, both two gens old.

Then there are my kids, who compete in regional and national karate tournaments. To shoot them, I need great autofocus, and high iso. There maybe some high school basketball in my near future also. Video is a plus, so I don't have to carry the D300s or the Sony Nex5.

For the record, I passed on the D7000 in favor of the D300s, thinking the AF was much better.

I don't mind midlife cameras, I bought the D300s with 45,000 clicks on it, and a bit scuffed up. I see D700s with that range of actuations getting down to the $1400 range on ebay.

In terms of lenses, I have five Nikon primes, none "G' series, 20mm 2.8, 50mm f1.8, 85mm 1.8, 180 f2.8 and 300 f4.0. Plus the older 70-210 f3.8-4. On the D300s I am using the 18-200mm zoom and have the 12-24.

In terms of money, I can buy the camera I want, but every dollar saved buys a lens or pays tuition. While I am willing to wait to 12/15 to see how much the D800 price drop helps, I have basically been leaning against the D800, thinking I need to upgrade my lenses, and frankly, the file sizes seem a bit of an overall kill, and that money can also buy a lens.

So...any thoughts on what you would do?

John

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Very, very tough call.

My first thought was to suggest a D600. It has video, which is a plus, and will give you some funds to buy new lenses.

My second thought was a D700. You have video otherwise covered. The D300s and D700 have the same layout and feel. It is easy and smooth to transition between the two.

But in the end, a D800 might be just right. It has video. With 36 MP it is like having both a D300s and D700 in one, with excellent high ISO ability. You could even shoot in DX mode to get fewer MP if desired. And you could sell your D300s to offset some of the expense.

But if you want to keep your D300s, and can skip video, then back to the D700 ...

I think the first question to answer is the importance of video. Only you know that.

Garrett

This is my Nikonians gallery.

I appreciate that comment, but where I can really help is the experience of folks who shoot the stuff I do, and have used two or are all three.

How did you like AF on them?

What did to think of the image quality? I like to print big, did you see it D600 or D800 vs D700?

John

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I have a D700 that I've had for a few years.absolutely great camera from landscapes to sports to portraits it has worked great. As an all around camera its hard to beat. I bought a D800E when they came out, it too is a great camera, lacks a little for sports but the resolution for landscapes and portraits and wildlife more than make up for the lack of framerate for sports. That being said if I only could have one camera it would be the D800E, because of the video. If the D700 had video I would never have purchased the new camera. If your budget permits buy the D800 otherwise the D700's are a real bargain.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I have a D300 and D700. AF is comparable between the two and more than sufficient for my shooting. I shoot a variety of subjects, mostly nature and middle school kids sports (my daughter). If AF on your D300s works fine, then the D700's AF should be fine.

I haven't used a D600 or D800, so can't compare those two. How many frames per second do you want to shoot? If I remember correctly that is one of the negatives of the D800 (but may not be significant). I would expect AF performance on the D600 and D800 to be at least equal to the D300s. I don't see enough in either camera to justify an upgrade from my current set up (though I'm not ruling out a D800 a few years from now).

Check out the D600 and D800 forums for comparisons of those cameras to the D300 and D700.

I have some experience shooting karate indoors. No problems with a D700 and either an 85 f/1.8D or 35-70 f/2.8 (both screwdriver AF lenses). In terms of low light, the D700 has cleaner ISO at about 1.5 stops over a D300, which was significant for me indoors.

Most of my printed photos are in the 8 x 10 and 8 x 12 range. I rarely print larger. I don't see any difference between the D300 and D700 in my prints, but most of those are nature shots at low ISOs. The differences are much more noticeable at higher ISOs. There you can see the difference.

Overall I think any of the three cameras you are considering will fit your needs well, performance and IQ wise, subject to the video and cost concerns.

Garrett

This is my Nikonians gallery.

I just did what you're thinking about. No way was I getting a D800, and I don't like the D600 for a few reasons - all those mega pixels didn't interest me either because I rarely have prints even made at 24x36. I mainly wanted the lower noise at high ISO (and the full frame) plus all the controls are the same with the D700, so I went for it.

Let me tell you, for low noise at high ISO it does not disappoint. Unscientifically speaking, at 6400 ISO, it looks between 2000 and 3000 ISO on my D300s. I love it.

I picked up my D700 from another Nikonian with approx 33k clicks on the shutter, extra battery and two memory cards for $1500 shipped which I thought was fair. Camera functions excellently, and it's in like new condition (I hate getting used equipment with scuffs on it! LoL)

I shoot portraits, landscapes, on-stage musicians (thus the need for ISO performance) and on occasion, action shots such as swimming events.

I mainly got it to use with my 70-200 VR II and my D300s remained married to the 17-55.

Ideally I'd love the D3s but I can't swing that kinda money at the moment.

I also have a D7000 and it's a great little DX performer.

If the D700 interests you, monitor the For Sale board, D700's popup fairly frequently.

__________________________________
IanThurstonPhotography.com | Blog & Gallery

I had the D700 & then sold it to buy the D800 & then sold it to buy the D700 back. The prints I produced w/ images taken on the D800 are incredible- detail so fine even the flower pollen is viseable but in the end just felt that I liked the way my images looked w/ the D700.
My vote would be for the D600 for it's few advances over the D700 if I were to buy again but I am just still very attached to the D700 & it has some + over the D600 so in the end it was a 50-50 draw & so I went back to what I know worked best for me.
Best wishes in your decision.

Art is the only way to run away without leaving home.



www.TinkersRealm.com

I had the same dilema when I was looking to upgrade....but, the 600 was in the last rumor stages...


In the past 3 years, I've moved from a D60 to D7K and now a D700.


My progression was based upon greater interest in the hobby and wanting to become "semi-pro".


D800...at the time, I did some heavy investigation and was concerned about the file sizes and the ability to manipulate them....I have some good power on the PC, but, the majority of my work was portraits and video was not a requirement...I use my "flip video" and GoPro for my outdoor video stuff...so, D800 was out.

Do I wait for the D600....when I heard all the discussions about it being a D7K on steriods, I decided to go with the D700....


Why, while I like the feel of my D7K, the D700 is just larger in my hands (both have the battery pack)...I'm a big guy with large fingers....as well, I shoot a 70-200 and the weight of the lenses makes a difference...having a larger, D700 in your hands, "just feels better".

In terms of AF and pictures, I find my pics just "pop" better with the D700...now, could just be me wanting to justify a $2000 + purchase, but, others have said the same.

I am keeping my D7K as my second shoot camera as I see no reason to part with it...it takes great pics...

But, as mentioned above, while some pixel peepers might say the D700 is "OLD" technology....it's technology that just works....my studio work has greatly improved and the ability to change settings on the top of the camera, verses the side via the menu, is faster and more efficient...

I've just had a chance to shoot a D600 and it's extremely smooth, great autofocus, good low light, etc....but, given what I do..the D700 is fine for me.

DC

Visit my professional gallery.

Interesting, I went thru the same thought process and in the end picked up a D700 to accompany my D300.Like they say there are lots available used and I got mine for $1500 and a 9K shutter count.The combo works great and it is easy to transition between the two.The clincher for me was when my son in law purchased the D600 and I took one look thru the viewfinder and hated it.I know that sounds shallow because the rest of the camera and pictures are great.Just not my cup of tea.You also might consider renting the cameras and try them out,I have done this many times with lenses.Good Luck on your decision,just remember cameras are like pictures everyone sees it differently.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

You also might consider renting the cameras and try them out,I



BTW, GREAT ADVICE TO THE OP....

FOR ABOUT $200 OR SO, YOU CAN CONTACT APETURERENT.COM IN ATLANTA OR OTHER LOCAITONS AND GET A FEW BODIES FOR A LONG WEEKEND....

DC

Visit my professional gallery.

John,

I think you have been given some good things to consider. I just have a couple questions:

1) Where can I find out about the D800 price reduction on 12/15?

2) Would the slow frame rate of the D800/E not be a detraction from someone shooting karate & basketball? I know a Karate shooter with the D300 that has some pretty neat shots. Just thinking that basketball might need a faster frame rate than the D800.

Charlie

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Charlie,

The rumour about 12/15 is discussed here in these three places:

Nikon Rumors: http://nikonrumors.com/page/2/

Thom Hogan: http://www.bythom.com/

Dpreview: This appears to cite the above: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50375634


I used to shoot high school basketball with a single frame manual focus camera. It's about timing, not frames per second. 4 FPS is fine if you time the first shot correctly. The FPS will not be a decision factor for me. 4, 5.5, or 7, I can make them all work.

I still can't decide.

John

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

And the answer is: I could not pass up the two day sale. I bought the D600 today.

Thanks guys...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Congrats...you had lots of good info to help make 'YOUR" decision..

And it's about you and your personal preferences...

Report back on how you like it.....not just on the D600 forum (LOL).

dc

Visit my professional gallery.

Which lens aree you planning to use with your new baby?

I can't give you advice on a D600 or a D800 except to tell you I am not buying either as I don't consider them to be a true replacement for my D700. I did not go the D300 route. I started with a D200 which I really liked until I started shooting i situations where it just could not keep up. So when the D700 came out I bought one 4 years ago now and have used it for wildlife, portraits, scenic, action, macro, etc. If you plan to shoot sports from a stadium, I think you should keep your D300 or be prepared to either buy a longer lens or use TC's. My longest lens is an AFS 300m f/4 but I use TC's with it. My gallery is full of 4 years of images of all kinds. Others certainly have taken more spectacular images with theirs, but I am mostly a hand held shooter in low light, but sometimes use a tripod. So if you don't need video-I don't and you are not drawn to the D600 or D800, the D700 is hard to beat. ou can share accessories with your D300. It is rugged, does not weigh as much as a D4 and has so many customization features, it will make your head spin.

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!

John -

With cherry used D700s going for $1500 and less, I think the choice is obvious. The D700 was a real revolutionary camera as opposed to an eviolutionary step. It still takes magnificent photos from broad, bright daylight to better low light capability than the D800.

You have to answer your own questions:
-- How important is video, or are you keeping your 300s?
-- How important is resolution -- the D800 is tops there?
-- How important is frame rate and high ISO capability? The D700 is the best answer there.

Again -- a good D700 is $1100 - $1300 less than a D600 and even better against a D800/D800e price.

I am keeping my two D700 bodies -- maybe adding a third as a back up. I often shoot sports with two bodies.

Just my 2 cents worth! I suspect you will be happy with any one of the three -- just richer with the D700.

Alan
Waterloo, IL, USA
www.proimagingmidamerica.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I think Alan nailed it with his questions. I have one digital body, a D700, I looked at low light capability and frame rate.

Among other things I to shoot sports, primarily Rugby and the first accessory I bought for my D700 was a MB-D10 to help with the frame rate.
I kept one of my F5 bodies and keep that along with film handy as backup.

I'm looking at another D700 or D800...at times I think the added resolution would be cool but then there's the price difference and for me video isn't all that important. The D700 had a 10 pin connector so I can use those accessories that I used with my F5's - the D600 doesn't so for me it's down to a good used D700 or D800.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

As I noted above, when the D600 and kit went on sale for $2,000 I bought it.

I love this camera. I shot high school basketball at iso 3200 and 6400 and was just stunned by the results. Maybe some of the other cameras have faster AF, this is plenty fast, and the IQ is just out of this world.

I would publish the photos here, but I do not like to publish photos of minors. However, the school did use several of my photos on their website: http://www.rosellecatholic.org/Athletics/Athletic-News/RC-CRUISES-BY-PLAINFIELD-IN-REMATCH-OF-UCT-FINAL.aspx

I locked at the jpegs today at work on my very large monitors and I am just elated with the results.

And if the if the lens is worth $400 (and it is a better lens than a lot give it credit for) then I paid $1600 for a new D600 for a 24 meg sensor with video. It seems to be a better deal than a used D700 at $1400.

John

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

... and I kept my two D700s and still have ALL of my money! LOL. Like I said, I don't honestly think you can go wrong by choosing any one of the three. I am intrigued by the video capability, but the last video I shot was on 16mm film with a 70-KRM during the Vietnam evacuation almost 40 years ago. They seem to have different capabilities -- but all are superb. Good shooting -- whichever one you choose.

Alan
Waterloo, IL, USA
www.proimagingmidamerica.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thank Goodness you did not Jump on the D800 Bandwagon-Turned out a mess of a ride for me-LOL! Bought back a D700 & love it!


Art is the only way to run away without leaving home.



www.TinkersRealm.com