I have both of these cameras. I know selling the D5000 is a no brainer but should I also get rid on my D700. Is the D7000 going to be good enought of a camera to use as a backup camera professionally in case my D3s takes a dive or I just might wasnt to have at 2nd camera standing by with a different lens. What is the smart thing to do here.
I no the D700 does not have full screen and costs about 2K now. I am really confused what would be the best thing to do.
I guess the question is? Is the D7000 going to be a Pro work horse of a walk around camera.
You mean it doesn't have 100% viewfinder? Does it create problems for you? Are you able to frame so precisely that that 2% in each direction actually is significant? Ordinarily I find that I have to crop at least some, either because the subject is not optimal in exactly 3:2 aspect ratio, or because I am printing on standard print sizes (eg 8x10, 16x20). And at least for me, with many moving subjects (sports, auto racing, birds, trains) even if the above two criteria hold, there's no way I can get within even 5% framing accuracy, let alone 1-2%. Even if you can frame that accurately, is it really a problem that it shows you LESS than the actual capture? Surely it can be cropped trivially, even if there's something obnoxious in that area? I'll guarantee that the 5% loss in resolution for doing the crop will never be noticed by any viewer, even the most critical, even if they are pixel peeping, even if the print is huge.
> Is the D7000 going to be good enough of a camera to use as a backup camera professionally
There are pros who use a D90 as their primary camera. Moreover, the D90 exceeds what many pros were using just a few years ago. It's clearly pretty much equal to a D2x in just about everything, for example, other than AF system, and I'd guess that AF performance is not much of a criteria for landscape shooters.
Previously, top pros often had an FM2n as their backup, with an F4 or F5 as their primary. In most ways that's a far bigger disparity than D3s to a D7k.
> Is the D7000 going to be a Pro work horse of a walk around camera.
I think that's a state of mind. Frankly, I there will be a lot of pros who use the D7000 as their primary camera, and those who don't will be choosing that path primarily due to usability features (no AF-ON button, etc) not basic capability.
> I am really confused what would be the best thing to do.
If it were me, I'd sell the D700, and NOT buy a D7k. I'd use the D5000 as a backup, because you're pretty unlikely to need a backup at all. If you do, you've still got a 12mp body that can mount all of your lenses. You'll be kind of stuck if your widest angle lens is really FX-oriented AND your D3s fails AND your assignment is fundamentally requiring something wider than that, but I view that as a pretty unlikely circumstance. Other than that, it's hard to see how a D5000 would be insufficient as a backup.
If you're really going to use a second camera as a second body, ie at the same time as the D3s, perhaps with a different lens, you should be asking questions like "are the controls sufficiently alike not to confuse me if I'm super-stressed and have to get the shot?" and "if they're going to be used at the same time, are they sufficiently interchangeable to support that process?" For me, none of the D700, D5000 or D7k are sufficiently alike to a D3s to not get confused. On the other hand, for me, I easily make do with a D2x as my second body, even though it is pretty drastically less capable than a D3 in quite a few regards (frame rate, AF performance, AF-ON ergonomics for starters, all of which are pretty important to a sports shooter).
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!
Brain the reply was great and I will for sure think about what you said here. I have been thinking a while if I would ever shoot again with my D700. I do like the auto AF movie mode on the D7000. And the low light with the DX for long shots is something to think about.