>For those who want a safety buffer, a 95% viewfinder is a >blessing. > >For those who want precise framing, a 95% viewfinder is a >curse. > >For me, it depends on what I am shooting. > >Some of my cameras have a 100% viewfinder; some have less than >100%; and some have more than 100%. > >For architectural work, macro work, copy stand work, and >shooting slides, I prefer the 100% viewfinder for critical >framing. > >When I have neither the time nor the opportunity for >postproduction cropping to remove something undesirable from >the edges of the image, I prefer a 100% viewfinder. > >For street candids, I prefer viewfinders with more than 100% >so that I can see the action that is happening outside of the >frame. > >For most other work, it makes little difference. > >Yes, I would have preferred a 100% viewfinder in the D700; >however, its absence is not a critical issue. >
This post above is a great reply.
Although I prefer a 100% viewfinder, I've always had less than 100% prior to getting the D300, and with the exception of a few instances I didn't have any problems.
I got to play around with a D700 for a few minutes last week when a Nikon rep brought a few of them to a local camera store near me to demo, and I shot some images and looked at the LCD screen to see how much more was in the image from what I saw in the viewfinder. It looked like only a little extra got in the image.