I currently own a Nikon D300 with the following lenses:
1) AF-S Nikkor 12-24 mm 1:4G ED DX
2) AF-S Nikkor 18-70 mm 1:3.5-4.5G ED DX
3) AF Nikkor 70 -300 mm 1:4-5.6 D
4) AF-S MICRO Nikkor 105 mm 1:2.8G ED VR N

Most of my photography is landscape photography and I keep reading that it is best to have a full frame camera.

Ideally, I would like to buy a Nikon D800 but at the present time I cannot afford it. I see that I can purchase a used D700 body around $1200.

My question is: Am I going to get much better pictures with a D700 and the lenses I have? Is it going to be worthed the $1200?

Any input is appreciated.

Thanks,

Montevideano

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

The advantage of the full frame cameras over the D300 is better high ISO noise performance. If you are a landscape photographer you probably don't use high ISO's very much. So in that respect no advantage to the D700.

Now to your lenses. The wide angle lenses you have now are DX lenses. They will give you the same angle of view on both cameras. But here the D700 will need to be in DX crop mode and the view through the viewfinder will be smaller. Also in DX crop mode the resolution will be greater with the D300.

The telephoto zoom will work fine with both bodies but you'll be able to enlarge the photo from the D300 more because of the 1.5X crop factor.

The macro will be fine with both bodies.

Unless you shoot at higher ISO settings and get FX lenses I would say there is no advantage to getting the D700.

Len

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

With your present lenses it does make no sens to acquire an FX camera, since only #3 and #4 are FX lenses, I suggest you sell #1 and #2 and get a mid range FX zoom lens and then buy a used D700.

Regarding "getting better pictures", I don't believe that changing to an FX system will have much of an effect.

Tristan

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thank you for you valuable input. I guess I'm staying with my d300.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Hi Jorge,

Welcome to Nikonians!

As stated above, unless you will be shooting at high ISO settings you won't see much difference between an image captured with your D300 and one captured with a D700 other than the angle of view (assuming you use the same focal length lens).

If you plan on transitioning from DX to FX, I would recommend adding quality FX Glass to your kit before adding a body unless your budget allows you to do both at the same time.
Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!

Best Regards,
Marty

The D700 and D800 are both great cameras, but so is the D300. There are certainly some specific attributes that one may want with those cameras, but there's really no guarantee for much better pictures. Too much depends on you, the user.

Is there something about your results now that you're not happy with now? If so, try to isolate what it is and what feature of a new camera will help you overcome it, and make sure it's not just something you can improve with your own efforts. There ARE reasons to upgrade, but you'll make a much better decision if you know why and when you should. I've seen countless outstanding landscape shots from DX format cameras. Generally speaking, that should not be a factor.

Now, if you want to crop a lot, that IS a factor and supports the extra mps of the D800. What about shooting in low light and using high ISOs? It's the reason why I upgraded from the D200 to the D700.

Of course, if you just want a new camera, well, that's okay too!

Dan L.
http://www.danlarussophotography.com/

buy some great glass first...

I'm in love with my 14-24mm 2.8 , 24-70mm 2.8 Nikkor as well as my 70-200 2.8 Sigma....all FX lenses.

I used them on my D7K prior to going to a D700....

If budget is the issue (like all of us)....go with glass first (FX) then the body...

I just found the ability to shoot wide open for my style is something I enjoy..

dc

Visit my professional gallery.

I'll add to the chorus. I have a D300s and recently purchased a used D700, but for a specific reason. My D300s is great for landscapes, pictures of the forest, airshows, family photos, auto racing, you name it. But wildlife shots of animals in dim light (when they really like to come out), demands good ISO performance. My D300s didn't meet up to the challenge and most of the pictures I took of deer at twilight last year are either dim or grainy or both. So I'm using a D700 this year. But my D300s is still an excellent camera, and will go to the track and the airshow and shoot pictures of family and friends because it's great for that sort of thing.

SP

Learning a little bit more, every day...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Great Camera

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Jorge,

I'm going out on a limb with a bit different kind of suggestion. You do mention landscapes, but you don't mention a tripod. If you don't have one or are used to using one, you might try adding a quality tripod to your kit. A good/versatile one with a quality head and quick change plates can easily set you back 1-1.5K dollars.

I have a nice tripod system and it is in valuable in my photography. However, I also travel a great deal and it's often just not practical to tote a tripod about.

For my landscape photos, especially where I'm not using a tripod, I find the 16-35mm f/4 AFS VR Nikkor very useful. I use it on both DX and FX cameras. If you are possibly heading toward FX, that would be another "vote" for such a lens. The VR capabilities of this lens adds greatly to its utility including extemporaneous landscape images.

This lens does overlap considerably your DX lenses but it adds VR to your mix. I find that very useful for travel, walkabout and general WA photography.

At this time, with your current lenses, I would not get a D700. Your lens lineup just doesn't warrant that choice IMO. BTW: I'll be keeping my D700 as my primary camera for a long time, however my lenses are completely FX. I do have the 17-55mm f/2.8 AFS DX lens that I use on my DX D2Hs and it is a stellar optic. It's also a large lens and one of the reasons that I often use a tripod with my landscape images.

Another side note: if you are using a tripod, you won't find the VR feature that useful.

Best Regards,

Roger
It's still, ISO, aperture and shutter-speed, right?

Everyone here mentions ISO and that's certainly a great benefit of the D700. The other is dynamic range. The dynamic range of the D700 and the D3/D3s is incredible. Folks aren't going to full-frame just for the ISO... You'll do just fine with the D300. It's a fantastic camera.

I had one for years and upgraded to the D300s and loved it too. When I finally started using a D700, the difference was obvious in the raw files. Now I just wish I'd have switched over earlier.

Now, I'm going through the same process due to the release of the D800e... Dooh.

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

Note: every thing I have was purchased on this site.

I have been shooting with a d5100, 35 1.8 and 18 200 dx, learned with this set up and was quite happy, for awhile.
I shoot bands in low light bars alot and can not always use flash.
just bought a d700 with a 24 70 2.8 here and I am thrilled with the ability to get the shot in low light...difference is "night and day"...I am looking for a used 70-200 2.8 next and OK would like a 85 1.8 also. I have my first wedding comming up in May...I am very excited about it...still learning my d700...got the NikonianPrss book Mastering the Nikon d700...have been reading till my eyes get blurry...