Both my wife and I own a D300 body each with the following DX lenses.
12-24 f4 17-55 f2.8 18-70 f3.5-4.5 18-200 VR f3.5-5.6 (1 each) For our non DX lenses please see my profile.
Can you D700 users here please put up some arguments as to why we should buy one. Every time I look at doing so I end up failing to see why.We photogragh a wide range of subjects from micro to sports and specialise at nothing.
I say keep what you have and spend the money on a trip to get some great photos and memories. In the long run, they will last longer than the camera, and you really won't miss any shots or incremental quality.
I always advise people people to change/upgrade when *they* know and feel the limitations of their current equipment. There are advantages and disadvantages to the D700 in lieu of the D300. To replace your D300s and DX lenses with their FX equivalents, for you and your wife, would cost circa £10,000 ($15,000).
with the lens collection you have in dx format, and the fact that both you and your wife have the same cameras, I personally wouldn't jump to the FX format as this will almost entail you to change your whole lens collection. I agree with the 2 posters above. With the $ you will spend on the D700, go to a trip and enjoy!!
Sun 25-Jan-09 12:29 PM | edited Sun 25-Jan-09 12:39 PM by FThompson
Hi Steve, It really depends on what your wife and you shoot. The D700 excels in low light/High ISO situations. Since you shoot micro to sports, imo, this could be a major criteria. There was a recent post in the D700 forum where a photog pushed the ISO over 100,000 and still had a "viewable" picture. A D700 would also allow you to start the migration to FX. You have several primes which could take advantage of the larger sensor. I must warn you about the 4 kings (do not look at, touch or bring viewfinder to eye with ANY of these lenses) AFS G VR 24-70, 70-200, 14-24 and the 200-400 PLUS they work great in DX also
It is good to see a group of competent D700 owners recommending that you stay with your D300. It is a sure sign of sanity. I love both my D700 and 300 but I think we forget just how good a camera the D300 is in our love for the latest and greatest. It is only in low light situations where the D700 will make a significant difference in the actual photos you will get. If you are going to travel and focus on the interior of churches or cathedrals, for example, then the D700 will definitely produce superior results. But landscapes, portraits, street scenes, etc., virtually no difference.
I also have a D200 that my wife now uses. I really wanted to move up to full frame, but still keep my D300. I don't shoot sports or much low light stuff but would like to have the high ISO capability. I am still on the fence as you. If there is no difference in image sharpness and IQ at lower ISO's, I don't know if I want to switch. A camera store salesman told me the images out of the D700 are sharper then the D300 or the Canon 5D Mark II but I don't know if that's true. I see most have told you to keep the D300 and maybe I should also. I can afford the D700 but what am I gaining over my D300. I need more impute to decide.
Sun 25-Jan-09 02:44 PM | edited Sun 25-Jan-09 02:45 PM by Palisades Dave
I recently switched from a D300 to a D700. I had a number of FX lenses though, and shoot some indoor, available light stuff and a lot of low light scenics, so the low light capabilities were a factor. Overall, I sometimes miss the D300. I never experienced any vignetting on my 70-200 VR (I do now), and in ordinary shooting situations -- i.e. daylight etc., I like the D300 just fine. I also miss using some of the lenses I had. I loved the 18-200 as a travel lens -- now I don't use it. I loved my little Tokina 12-24 DX lens. I sold it. I'm probably going to get the 17-35 to replace it, but that's an expensive piece of glass.
Bottom line, I really like both cameras and agree with the other posters that you would be just fine sticking with the D300. If you have a case of NAS, however, there is no cure, so you might as well admit that and go buy what you want.
You could keep your stuff, and buy one D700 and keep one D300. Then you and your wife would have the best of both worlds -- but it will cost you $$.
Well, we all have different motivations and situations. I buy a new camera when there's a specific function or performance issue I want. In other words, I buy when I know what I want and have a purpose for it. And I can further justify it because I use it for work.
So, it follows that I would advise that you don't buy the D700 until you know why you want or need it. Plus, you already each own a D300, an excellent camera, and bunch of DX lenses.
FWIW: Right now you can get a good price for your DX equipment. I just went from the D200 to the D700. The used price for the D200 has gone to about one third of new and I assume will continue to drop. You can bite the bullet now or bite a bigger bullet after Nikon releases another updated model. I know some people that trade up every time a new model comes out just to avoid the $ loss.
IMO it was great going back to full frame and another great Nikon camera. Dave.
I would concur with most here who recommend staying with your D300's. I just upgraded to the D700 but it was upgraded from a D70 with only 2 DX lenses. I pondered between the D300 and the D700 for several months and only decided on the D700 because I did not have a great investment in DX lenses. Also consider the technological advances that will have been made while using the D300's until they are considered technologically inferior. Personally if I was in your situation, I would use the money spent on upgrading and buy a MacBook or PC Notebook and associated software dedicated to photoprocessing.
> >Thanks for the advice. I already have a MacBook Pro and an >IMac. > >Maybe another lens. Oh the choices are killing me. >
If you decide to buy another lens, perhaps you can buy an FX lens so in case someday you decide to migrate to a full frame Nikon you are all set. Bottom line, as I mentioned earlier, save the $ as your D300s are more than fine pieces of cameras.
I agree with the theme running through the comments: stay with what you have unless you have a specific reason to buy different. For me, the jump from D200 to D700 was predicated on two major factors: the need for greater wide angle shots (both architecture and landscape) and the need for better low light capture. It also helped that I had a small investment in DX glass and had already started the migration to FX glass (14-24 f2.8). The extra coverage at true 14mm is awesome (though I have to learn to watch for objects in the perimeter of the frame - my toes). I love the D700, but if I can find the room in my pack, I will carry the D200 for the long distance shots when I want the extra crop factor (though I suspect I may not follow through with this the longer I use the D700).
If only I could stop reading all of these posts I could make my NAS go away and be satisfied with what I have!