Sony A700 to D700: Thoughts & Concerns...
First post on Nikonians here:
This is thoroughly exciting for me...as a long time enthusiast in photography (since junior high school/high school, using film/darkroom), i've never once thought that i'd get to the point of getting a camera as good as the D700! Well, folks, it's probably now.
I'm thinking of selling my Sony A700 and 4 lenses, one vertical grip, and getting the D700 instead.
As background in my interest, I enjoy street photography as well as pet photography (I have a whippet).
My concerns include:
- D700 being one year old already. Will Nikon do a D800 or D700Mark II in a few months just to keep up with the 5D Mark II? (btw, i do not care at all about video capabilities). D700 being such a re-design from the D300, maybe bringing out the D800/D700Mark II is not as difficult (changing electronics only?), so the timing may be sooner? Some have said that the life cycle of full frame dslr's are around 3 years (really?), so they think that this is only 1/3 of the way there. i'd have thought that a D800 or D700Mark2 is around the corner, i.e. late summer or Fall of this year. May i ask what your thoughts are?
- will Nikon, being a much smaller company than Canon, be sufficiently negatively impacted by the severe recession that it might be in trouble or "go away"? Obviously, Canon has copy machines, etc. to spread its risks. The recent Ritz Camera shops' debt owed to Nikon is one example of how such a "hit" might impact Nikon even more than Canon.
I fully appreciate the excellent, fast focus (legendary) of the D700. I'm thrilled. Please pardon the negative tone of this first post of mine. This is necessarily so since I'm voicing my concerns - there are so many "pros" or "positives" that it would take pages to list. I'm merely emphasizing my biggest concerns in hopes that I can be efficient in my post so the good folks here will be able to hone in on the essence of my concerns and help me sort out this newbie Nikonian's thinking.
I'm thinking of getting similar lenses for the D700 or its replacement in place of my A700 Sony's lenses. Maybe one with big zoom range, one zoom with wide aperture, one ultra wide angle zoom (love those ultra wide angle lenses - non fish eye), and one macro. I might even be able to skip the zoom with wide aperture since the D700 (or its equivalent) has such fantastic higher ISO performance!
Thank you very much in advance and looking forward to hearing and learning from you all.
#1. "RE: Sony A700 to D700: Thoughts & Concerns..." | In response to Reply # 0MEMcD Nikonian since 24th Dec 2007Tue 24-Mar-09 02:42 AM
Welcome to Nikonians!
Getting the crystal ball out, I think the D700 will be around for a while. I think the next FX body will be a D700X with the D3X 24.5MP sensor priced significantly higher than the D700. I think we will see a D3H and most likely the D4 introduced before the current D700 is upgraded about 6-8 months or so after the D4 is introduced. Maybe 2 or so years down the line.
Nikon is a very well managed company and I believe it will be around far into the future.
Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!
#2. "RE: Sony A700 to D700: Thoughts & Concerns..." | In response to Reply # 0Len Shepherd Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003Tue 24-Mar-09 05:49 AM | edited Tue 24-Mar-09 12:43 PM by Len Shepherd
On financial stability Canon is much more into commercial products than Nikon - which in UK at least so far has been hit much harder than consumers.
Nikon UK has announced 23% revenue growth (not the same as profit) for the 12 months ended February 2009.
I expect turnover in the next 12 months to be about level.
Because of the very significant fall in value of the pound Nikon UK prices are up an average of 30% so level turnover translates into around 25% fewer units sold, which helps reduce costs providing Nikon can cut production back quickly enough.
My guess (it is a guess) is Nikon will come out of the recession better than Canon, though Canon are likely to concentrate on the camera division rather than the harder hit commercial divisions.
Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.
#3. "RE: Sony A700 to D700: Thoughts & Concerns..." | In response to Reply # 0JAlanS11 Registered since 11th Jan 2009Tue 24-Mar-09 11:28 AM
I did the exact same thing in January. I sold my A700, VG, CZ16mm 2.8 fish, CZ 24-70m 2.8, 70-200 2.8, and 18-70 3.5-5.6.
I made the move for many reasons, one being that the new CZ 16-35 2.8 was coming out and I knew that I would end up buying it. Which would cost me $1700. That would give me 16-35 (24-52 crop) on the wide end. So instead of doing this, I sold all of my Sony/CZ gear and picked up the FF D700 with VG, 24-70 and 70-200. I have decided not to get another fish, don't use it enough. I now have 2 lenses that cover the focal range of the three that I had before, except for the 200-300 crop on the long end, I could care less though. I find that I use 70-200 in many more situations that I would not have even considered on a crop sensor.
Of the FF camera's, it was a no-brainer. I have always been secretly jealous of Nikons ever since my first Minolta. I don't have any desire for more than 12mp, that is what film is for. Nikon was a lot less expensive than the competition. The ergonomics, menus, buttons are intuitive, like Sony. Canon makes no sense to me.
Since making the move I have realized many, many more advantages that I did not foresee, the autofocus system being #1. I actually believed that the Sony sensor shift VR was better than the "in-lens" VR, hahaha, wrong. Never looked back, especially since it was almost no money out of pocket.