Well I just bought my D300 less than two weeks ago... I really do love the D300 but I could have had a little more time to enjoy having that body before the next one came out.
At first glance I thought it was basically a D300 with a FX sensor, but there are many subtle details that have been added to the D700 that make it a unique body. If I had a spare $3-$5k I think I would have to actually take a serious look at the D700 over the D3 before deciding between the two, course I don't, so I will enjoy my D300 for now.
Okay, well I'm probably not getting one since I have a D300 but I can look right? Just wondering why the D700 does not have a CF door lever? It's just going to open like my old D80? Is that "weather sealed"? Just wondering...not that I'm getting one...I swear...lol.
Minor discrepancies in this and other reviews regarding specifications and details. Stafford lists the D700 as only accepting CF Type I, while DPreview specs list both Type I and II. In checking the D700 brochure available from Nikon USA's website, it states "Compact Flash(Type I, compliant with UDMA)". Rob Galbraith's D700 description states: "A single CompactFlash Type I/II card slot is on the right side of the D700 body". Interesting if this is a change that's been made, or just a typo in the Nikon brochure. Lots of fun details to examine!
OldPhotos "If everyone possesses some measure of this intangible quality called creativity, photography is unprecedented as an outlet for its expression." - Ansel Adams
Why would you cross the D300 off your list? For 90% of the photos taken by 90% of users, you won't notice a difference in image quality between the D300 and D700. Where the D700 will have a clear advantage in low light use. It will be an advance for a wedding photographer,for example.
the D300 is still a great camera. It didn't get worse in the last week or two.
I have a D300 and I'm very impressed with good lighting - but the D3 has far better IQ, and a much faster AF. I've used both cameras quite extensively. I'll keep my D300 for backup, but the D700 with the new chip and it's AF system really is, for me, a pretty significant improvement in my pictures. I'm first on my pro dealer's list, which gives me a couple of weeks to make up my mind. I was'nt swayed until I covered boxing last week - and used both D300 and D3. No comparison when it comes to getting THE picture.
>I have a D300 and I'm very impressed with good lighting - but >the D3 has far better IQ, and a much faster AF. I've used both >cameras quite extensively. >I'll keep my D300 for backup, but the D700 with the new chip >and it's AF system really is, for me, a pretty significant >improvement in my pictures. >I'm first on my pro dealer's list, which gives me a couple of >weeks to make up my mind. I was'nt swayed until I covered >boxing last week - and used both D300 and D3. No comparison >when it comes to getting THE picture. > >Regards, > >Derrick > So you're saying that you would go with the D3 if you had the chance to? Angel
Actually, it's not "twice" as expensive when comparing original body prices. The D300 went for $1800, the D700 will go for $3000. A better way to look at it is that the D700 is $2000 less than a D3--which I doubt many think the D3 is overpriced--and doesn't give up all that much to that fantastic camera. Loss of higher frame rates doesn't bother me, or the 5:4 crop. Gaining a full frame, excellent high ASA performance, and huge VF are all big pluses to me. The D700 is an incredible deal, and Nikon will a bazillion of them. I have a D200 and was about to commit to an 18-200 (yes, many say it's soft), but I'll hold out for a D700. I only wish I heard better things about the 24-120 FX lens.
Do you know the cost of manufacturing an FX sensor compare to a DX sensor?
Anyway, the price is not just an objective value. It is also a subjective one. I really wanted the D3 because of the FX format and its high ISO performance. Plus the fact that now my lenses would be working at their true focal length. The joy of using my 85/1.4 like a 85 mm lens again! I didn't try and calculate if it was really worth that much more money than my D2X. That's the camera I wanted. Period. I also wanted the two new Nikon zooms, 14-24 and 24-70. To afford all that, I had to trade in all the camera equipment I had, including the D2X and a Hasselblad V system. Then, of course, the D3 was very big and heavy - especially with the 24-70 on - to go out with. So I traded in my D200 for the D300, which has many superior features, but I'm missing the high ISO performance when I go out. Now, they'r offering me the best of both world! Full frame AND small and light. Exactly what I want (Need? No. Want, yes.) So, if I can trade in my D300 for the D700 and some extra cash, I will do it. For me it's worth it. I will not make better pictures (well, I may at high ISO) but I'll be happier doing it. Is it worth double the price of the D300? Objectively, I don't know. Subjectively, yes. YMMMV
I have looked at the comparison between the D3 and D700 since they came out and I think I am going with the D700, and I really have a choice between either.
I went into my local Nikon dealer yesterday and they had a D3 for me to play around with and I asked them about going between the two and they just didn't know, not until they got one in their hands (they are getting 4 total on Aug 1).
What I found is and my running total of pluses and minuses (course this is purely subjective):
1. D700 has a self cleaning sensor unit, D3 does not (to me, needed)
2. D3 has dual CF slots, D700 does not (that is a cool feature)
3. D700 has monitor screen cover, D3 no (no biggie)
4. D3 has 100% viewfinder coverage, D700 has 95% (probably the biggest negative about the D700 to me, but I understand why)
5. D3 has 9-fps vs D300 8-fps (assuming grip, no biggie here, one single frame per second)
6. Shutter durability D3 300k vs D700 150k (never made it that high before trading a body in)
7. Voice memo on D3, none on D700 (to me, who cares)
8. Battery grip D3 built in, D700 buy (I love the built in grip)
9. Weight, D700 995g, D3 1,240g (for those of us in the U.S. who are mentally challenged at anything other than pounds, D700 just over 2 pounds, D3 just under 3 pounds, good difference)
10. Price D3-$5k, D700-$3k (big difference to me, if I go with the D700 I can get at least the 14-24 or 70-200 and still have change, so we are basically talking about extra glass, and really good glass at that)
11. Release Date / Asset value, D3-Aug 2007, D700-Aug 2008 (to me, constantly upgrade is a pain and expensive, I put this in there just because the D700 theoretically buys me a year of new development. When is the D4 out, January, June 09, September 09, who knows, but as soon as I buy it, it is sure to be on the way)
There were very minor differences not mentioned here because, to me, they didn't make a difference in my purchase decision.
So, if you add up all the pluses and minuses you get . It could go either way as the above is subjective. If I drop #11, the D3 has it by +1, so this is just my take on it.
I think I will probably take one of the 4 my local dealer gets and use both my D300/D700 combo. Now, if the new 70-200mm would just come out with the "N" coating that would be great (and make it more impossible to get).
>3. D700 has monitor screen cover, D3 no (no biggie) >D700]
On number 3, I would give +0.5 or +1 to the D3, because it doesn't need to cover. It has extremely tough tempered glass for the screen and the D700 probably has the same screen as the D300. I personally hate the covers.
Taking a half point from the D700 and giving it to the D3 makes the difference a cool zero based on your point system. Eliminate number 11, and the D3 wins by +2.
Shoot nature with respect and don't trample it or startle its inhabitants. :)
I have the D3 and am tempted to "downgrade" to the D700 for the smaller size body. However, one of my favorite things about the D3 is the fact that the battery seems to go on forever and I never have to worry about running out of power. Sure I could use the optional grip on the D700 to get equivalent battery power, but that defeats the purpose of getting the D700 for me...
Also, having two CF cards slots is nice, since sometimes I leave my CF card in my card reader by accident and with the D3 I always have the backup card in my camera.
I haven't experienced a big dust problem with my D3 and I do tend to change lenses often (I have Dust Aid and used it once or twice in several months and that has been enough, although I know other people have more of a dust issue).
Right now I am leaning toward keeping my D3 although having a smaller body sure would be nice (but then again I have the Sigma DP1 for when I really want to go small)....