I have posted this in the D7100/D7000 forum, but did not get any feedback there, yet. Hoping that maybe this is a better place for it.
With new generation of DSLRs now available (D800,D600,D7100) the price of the older generation full frame D700 is now close to the price of a new D7100. Both are wonderful cameras and have their own advantages. I would like to hear from people that have experience with these cameras what they think about these advantages. This maybe of help to people deciding what to get now.
Also, myself, I just got a very good deal on a used D700 and I already have D7100. I am playing with both to see if I want to keep D700 as a second camera for low-light and other situations. This discussion may help me decide when I should use one camera over the other or if D700 should be sold.
In the little experience I had so far with playing with D700 I could say that it feels great in the hand. With low-light photos I have mixed feelings. There are times when I think that D700 is simply amazing. There other times when I feel that D7100 is just as good.
For detailed photography in good light (macro, superzoom, etc.) clearly D7100 has an advantage hands down. I am thinking about portraits and pictures of people gatherings where the light may not necessarily be good possibly be the area where D700 may have an advantage.
#1. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 0
Sterling Heights, US
>I have posted this in the D7100/D7000 forum, but did not get >any feedback there, yet. Hoping that maybe this is a better >place for it. > >With new generation of DSLRs now available (D800,D600,D7100) >the price of the older generation full frame D700 is now close >to the price of a new D7100. Both are wonderful cameras and >have their own advantages. I would like to hear from people >that have experience with these cameras what they think about >these advantages. This maybe of help to people deciding what >to get now. > >Also, myself, I just got a very good deal on a used D700 and I >already have D7100. I am playing with both to see if I want to >keep D700 as a second camera for low-light and other >situations. This discussion may help me decide when I should >use one camera over the other or if D700 should be sold. > >In the little experience I had so far with playing with D700 I >could say that it feels great in the hand. With low-light >photos I have mixed feelings. There are times when I think >that D700 is simply amazing. There other times when I feel >that D7100 is just as good. > >For detailed photography in good light (macro, superzoom, >etc.) clearly D7100 has an advantage hands down. I am thinking >about portraits and pictures of people gatherings where the >light may not necessarily be good possibly be the area where >D700 may have an advantage. > >Please let me know your thoughts. > >Vitaliy
It's no wonder that you got no response. You are comparing apples to oranges. D700 is a full frame and D7100 is a 1.5 crop camera. Myself, I prefer the D700 over the D7100,there is no comparison. When D700 was the new guy on the block,it cost about $2,700 not a measly $1,200 and for a good reason. 8 FPS versus 6 FPS also a far superior excellent pipe line (in camera iso cleaning) and light sucking ability with the full frame larger sensor. The only benefit I can see of the D7100 is the extra reach (which "all" 1.5 crops give) and the movie recording which does not make sense - if you want movies,buy a camcorder and if you want a camera buy a dslr that's what they are supposed to be about and that's what I use a camera for. You would be more in the ball game if you were comparing a D800 or D600 to a D700 because they are all full frame cameras. But still in my opinion none of them beat the D700 regardless of the price because of (8) FPS,excellent built in pipe line/low light performance,faster buffer and all the important controls are easily accessible with out having to use a menu,unlike the others.The D700 is still used by many pros for many venus,weddings,portraits,sports.landscape,wildlife,macro,products etc. (did I leave any out??). The D800 has files that are so big that it slows down the buffer on the camera and causes bottle necks on computers when editing and requires expensive rebuilding/upgrading the computer to be able to process the large files quick. Besides how many people have walls big enough or can afford to have pictures the size of a billboard?? The D700 will give you an "excellent quality picture of 20"x30" that I know of for myself and maybe even bigger. How big do you need ??
#2. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 0 Mon 15-Jul-13 12:04 PM by km6xz
St Petersburg, RU
The D700 will have an advantage as you found out, in low light of about 1 stop. Regarding image quality, the D700 being a lot lower resolution is more forgiving for slow shutter speeds and hand holding. Otherwise, image quality will be better on the D7100. Neither camera is as quiet at the D7000 at 100 ISO, only the D800, D3x and D4are as quiet with as flexible files as the D7000 which can handle shadow pulling of 4-5 stops without much artifact. The file depth not quite as good at low ISO on the D700 or D7100, but both cameras have some advantages over the older D7000. The biggest difference is the speed and accuracy of the AF of both the D700 and the D7100 with a slight advantage to the D7100 which is delighting bird and wildlife shooters a great deal. The D7100 is a solid somewhat smaller camera than the D700 as you know, and has been one of the most successful, problem free releases since the D90. The D90 was probably the most sorted camera in a long time, never needing a firmware update from day one. If you pixel peep, no question, the D7100 files are spectacular but if printing moderate size, its probably a wash with the D700, until you print large or crop. Reliability and dependability is probably a wash also, neither should be fragile. Service will be more expensive on the D700 as prices increase for replacement parts as stocks dwindle. Frame rate is higher on the D700 but unless you really need a sequence, the difference in getting a shot and not getting one is not going to be much different. If it is too fast action for 7fps it is also going to be too fast for 8. More experienced pros shooting their specialty sport rely more on game and player knowledge and anticipation than raw frame rate, were the second and later shots being in focus is somewhat related to luck. There have been improvements in the MultiCAM3500FX in the D800 and D4 which seem to lock and track better than prior versions. Part of the reason for that improvement is the 91k metering sensor that neither the D7100 or D700 has. The only sore spot for some high frame shooters has been the buffer depth. The buffer is larger in the D7100 but the data for each frame is much larger so it fills up fast in RAW 14 bit mode. You can drop down to 12 bit or JPG and have a 100 shot buffer. The D300 was a pig on 14 bit and could only manage 2.5fps if all the extras were turned off. So birders and sports shooters worked only in lower flexibility 12 bit format. Overall, the D700 is a fine camera for general purpose work, not real high res, or real fast but quite competent in a wide variety of applications that do not need cropping or large prints. Getting used to the D7100 files however will make you notice the benefits of such high resolution. The D7100 has finer detail than a D800 which is head and shoulders above the D700. I have a D7000 backing up a D800 and have been considering replacing the D7000 for something better for low light so the D7100 sure looks tempting. I have used it enough to have a lot of respect for it, the best DX camera on the planet. But not being in a hurry, I will wait for the D400 that is getting stronger rumors again. If it is not a major enhancement I will get the D7100. The D400 will probably be $1000 more than a low click used D700, and above the D600. The only other camera in the running now is a used D3s. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#6. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 2
Thank you Stan for an informative response, as always
So far it seams the best use for D700 (having D7100) would be - for low light - "casual" walk around use (with small imprint on a harddrive) and - long bursts in RAW. For me low light is the most important aspect. The other two do not justify having D700 vs say another D7100. I think I will hold on to it until my cousin's wedding and decide based on its performance then.
#3. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 0 Mon 15-Jul-13 04:55 PM by GiantTristan
According to your profile, four of your seven lenses are DX lenses which are pretty useless on the D700 which is a FX camera. I believe you have to decide whether to stay with the DX system or switch to FX lenses and cameras. My last DX body was the D200, and I got a D700 five years ago. The D700 is an excellent camera, and I still use it with my f/2.8 zoom lenses. Only with first rate prime lenses do I see a significant IQ difference between D700 and D800 files.
#8. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 3
Indeed, not all of my lenses can be used on FX. But I am not planning on switching completely to FX. D7100 is perfect for birding and macro, which I like. I am evaluating an option of supplementing D7100 with D700 (keeping D700).
One interesting benefit of having FX and DX is that each of my FX lenses now has two effective zoom ranges (50mm is now 50 and 75, 35-70 is also 1.5x35-70). How good of a reason is this for having D700?
#9. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 8
Your idea of using your D7001 and the prospective D700 in tandem definitely makes sense. On my trip to the Galapagos I used my D200 with the 70-200/2.8 and the D700 with the 24-70/2.8. In many cases, FX lenses perform better with DX cameras, since only the center of the lens is used which usually is the sharpest. Using this strategy, it still would be wise to gradually replace your DX lenses with FX glass.
#4. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 0
As stated above, the D700 has better high ISO performance, a faster FPS rate, and a larger buffer than the D7100. The D7100 has more Dynamic Range and Color Depth than the D700. Just because a camera body has been discontinued doesn't mean that it is obsolete. They remain as capable today as when they were first introduced. Depending on the subject and ambient conditions, I use my D700 together with my D200, D300, D2X, D3, D3s, and D800E. Using multiple bodies is much faster than changing lenses.
#5. "RE: does D700 have advantages over D7100" In response to Reply # 4
St Petersburg, RU
In one important aspect, discontinued equipment is obsolete. In the case of repairs being needed nothing is more useless than a unit in need of an ASIC or single source critical component or assembly which can not be produced again. With equipment so dependent on electronics that becomes obsolete for new designs so quickly, end units can be rendered unrepairable when higher assemblies are no longer in stock even it there are stockpiles of industrial electronic components can be found. Units are not repaired on a component level, only on a higher assembly level. Even mechanical parts are subject to that fate. A tiny spring might fail in a shutter assembly which in the old days would have been replaceable as a separate spring part number. Now, only the the entire shutter assembly can be stocked and replaced. If a common $0.01 bypass cap fails on the main processor pc board it can only be repaired by replacing the $450 assembly. When the model ends production no more assemblies are made so the clock it ticking down for any in service units to the day it becomes unrepairable, even if it is only a commonly available part that has failed. Stan St Petersburg Russia