As a review, it is rather lacking in detail and kinda late compared to Imaging Resource's thorough evaluation. I find the very consistent measurements and the ability to compare different cameras to be more valuable from I-R.
>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D700/D700A.HTM Whilst any review may be better than nothing is this one part garbage? There is an "attempt" to compare 5D and D700 image quality with nothing more demanding than a wine bottle, obviously taken in very different lighting for the 2 cameras, and with a comment that perhaps the 5D sharpening is set a little high. I have not visited this site before - if this is the best they can do I see no point whatsoever in follow up visits
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.
I should clarify - there is nothing wrong with Thom Hogan's abbreviated review, I usually read them and I like a lot of what he has to say on a high level about Nikon and agree with some of his views on their cameras. Still, for a real indepth dive into a camera, I just find the methodical approach of Imaging Resource useful. In fact, they are the ones that have convinced me I want the camera.
I always read Thom's (not so abbreviated) reviews because they seem serious, objective and give a good idea of what to think about a camera or a lens. I think he's testing them more in the field than with charts and Imatests. I feel he's testing like a very high level user and not like a pure lab tester. Other excellent reviews like DPReview or Imaging Resources also give a lot of useful information with more technical measures. IMHO both types of reviews complete themselves very well. I got Thom's Complete Guides for my D70 and my D200 and they were the most detailed, useful and well explained books I ever read about these 2 bodies. Now I'm waiting for his D700's Guide which will be released on Oct. 22nd