Nikon's D700 a balanced camera for image quality, value, pro handling and MP.

Started Mar 28, 2014 | User reviews thread
ScottRH Senior Member • Posts: 1,748
Re: Nikon's D700 a balanced camera for image quality, value, pro handling and MP.

Adrian Van wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

Adrian Van wrote:

Nikon D700 still is a great camera. Nikon should update this camera to a D750 with 24MP and professional pro body and top AF. A modest increase in resolution to 24MP for Raw, not 36MP.

That said, the D700 still provides incredible image quality, descent dynamic range, great color, crisp images at 12 MP, (when using pro lenses like Nikon 24-70mm or 24-120, primes etc.) and excellent build quality and control features. One of Nikon's best and most popular cameras.

For taking large volumes of images (like a thousand in a day at an all day event), the D700 camera is still a great choice for pros, for faster workflow, and not being bogged down by the 36MP file sizes (especially Raw) of D800. They need to put the 24MP sensor of a D610 into a D750 pro body to be an ideal pro camera of today, for event shooters and journalists and wedding photographers, who 24MP would be more than enough (with bump of added detail capture or resolution). The Canon 5D Mark 3 has the right MP. A D750 makes sense for Nikon to put out one day. Most of us, do not want to spend the money on a D4 (sorry Nikon) as great as a D4 is. Make a D800 and a D750 (with rugged pro build quality and features, and fast CF cards, not SD) at around the same price, and see many pros buy one or the other. Nikon, you may be surprised. Wishful thinking on my part.

Until then, still loving my D700, and it holds it own with most current FF cameras for colour image quality for great prints. Nikon, thank you for making that great camera! Although the D800 is also a great camera, just wishing its Raw files would capture at 24MP for reasonable file sizes. The D610 lacks only the pro body build and button features and top AF system (great sensor though).

This isnt a review. This post mentioned other cameras and features a hell lot mroe than D700 itself and what it actually has. It is a nostalgia piece where the author is telling himself how D700 isnt quite yet irrelevant, and a rant piece complaining the lack of a modern 3000 USD 8FPS FF body, and a wish piece about what the author want such a body to have.

DPR should really do a bit more minotoring this type of reviews.

Regardless of what you think the original post was (it was partly a review of D700 as you see in first post and my ratings), it was then put into a discussion talk forum for FX Nikon, which is actually an appropriate place for it be. Over 100 replies, of which most support another camera model such as a pro body feature D710/750 to fit certain needs of event photographers. The D700 was used as an example to demonstrate that it fit these needs well in the recent past, can still be used for the same type of photography today (many pros still use their D700 and used D700 with low shutter counts hold their value), however, Nikon is no longer manufacturing the D700, and there is in some of our minds (not everyone agrees though), no true D700 replacement at the $3000 camera body mark that has fast fps, reasonable files sizes for heavy workflow (raw) and all the pro AF and body features.

Some argue, that the D800 is the new D700, while some do not agree with a few of its missing features they prefer, hence the discussion topic which this forum is appropriate for, and worth discussing. Perhaps the rumored new to be announced later this year D800s might come closer to a replacement to the advantages of a fast fps D700/750 upgrade (at the ideal MP) with latest tech and video features, without having to spend $6000 for a D4. Most of us pros are fine with spending $3000 on a pro body, (but $6K?). We are also debating what MP (36MP, 24MP or 16MP) is ideal in a pro body with its corresponding Raw size files, when an event shooter takes literally 1000 photos in a day and has to process these. The needs are different for different shooters, I also admit. I respect those that love their D800, and I admit the D800 is great at the amazing detailed image quality it can achieve (and large file sizes to match). Like all cameras it has strengths and also disadvantages (huge Raw files requiring computer system upgrades if we do not have the latest hardware already).

Thom Hogan also has an interesting article he wrote recently on his site called What happened? discussing a similar topic. Check it out.

Healthy debate is a good thing to have in these discussion forums.

Well put Adrian.

I shoot weddings with D700/D300 with MBD10. I would buy a D4s but do not want XQD cards as there is minimal traction in the industry. No way I would shoot a wedding with a D800 as it is slower and impacts workflow (I consider it a landscape camera). D610 does not have the body and controls I want.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow