Reading mode: Light Dark

Anyone owns/ has owned both the D700 and D7100?

Go to last post
vladg7

vladg7

Member
Messages
29
Reaction score
6
Location
Bucharest, RO
Quite lengthy post, so sorry for that, but thanks for taking the time to read it!

I've been shooting a D7100 for about 4 months now and I am happy with it. But coming from a D300, I am still crying for the size and ergonomics of that body, not to mention the button layout. Not saying by any means that I don't like the D7100, I like it a lot, it's not uncomfortable to hold, especially since I use it with a grip, and I got used to the controls...mostly, I still get the "+" and "-" wrong sometimes. But you know how it is, the D300 just felt better, it felt right.

So I've been thinking about getting a D700, because it basically the same body as the D300, but with a much better performance. I've looked in other threads at comparisons between the D700 and D7100, but there are some things which I simply couldn't figure out.

First I'd like to know the ISO performance thing, because so far I've only found contrasting opinions about this. Some people say the noise levels from the 2 cameras are pretty much the same, with some even giving the D7100 a slight edge, while others say that the D700 is clearly better, maybe not by such a large margin but still better.

Secondly, image quality. Jumping from the 12mpx sensor of the D300 to the D7100's 24mpx sensor was clearly noticeable, but they were both DX sensors. But how does the 12mpx Full Frame sensor of the D700 stack up against the one of the D7100. I don't print so I don't care about that bit, and I never lost a shot with the D300 because I couldn't crop enough without destroying the image quality. I am mainly asking about the details in an image, like textures for example, and dynamic range. How's recovering details from shadows or highlights, compared to the D7100.

These are the things that I would mostly like to find out, preferably from someone who owns or has owned both cameras, but others' input is welcome as well.

I think what's made me reluctant to switching to FF so far, is the extra range you get from DX sensors. I have the SP 70-300mm VC from Tamron, which is 450mm on DX and that is really good to have when I shoot wildlife, every once in a while.

On the other hand, smaller file sizes from the D700 would be really good.
I would also like to buy the 85mm 1.8G from Nikon and that focal length would be much easier to handle on an FF sensor, not having stabilization.

Can't wait to hear your opinions :)
 
--All I can say since I own both cameras is that if you get a D700, your D7100 will used as a backup or sold. My D700 is much better with low light photography. Focus is fast and accurate. Love the controls on the D700. Maybe in real good light the D7100 might have a little bit more detail with the 24 mp sensor, but if you don't print real large you will never notice the difference. Get your hands on a D700 and you won't be disappointed
 
vladg7 said:
Quite lengthy post, so sorry for that, but thanks for taking the time to read it!

I've been shooting a D7100 for about 4 months now and I am happy with it. But coming from a D300, I am still crying for the size and ergonomics of that body, not to mention the button layout. Not saying by any means that I don't like the D7100, I like it a lot, it's not uncomfortable to hold, especially since I use it with a grip, and I got used to the controls...mostly, I still get the "+" and "-" wrong sometimes. But you know how it is, the D300 just felt better, it felt right.

So I've been thinking about getting a D700, because it basically the same body as the D300, but with a much better performance. I've looked in other threads at comparisons between the D700 and D7100, but there are some things which I simply couldn't figure out.

First I'd like to know the ISO performance thing, because so far I've only found contrasting opinions about this. Some people say the noise levels from the 2 cameras are pretty much the same, with some even giving the D7100 a slight edge, while others say that the D700 is clearly better, maybe not by such a large margin but still better.

Secondly, image quality. Jumping from the 12mpx sensor of the D300 to the D7100's 24mpx sensor was clearly noticeable, but they were both DX sensors. But how does the 12mpx Full Frame sensor of the D700 stack up against the one of the D7100. I don't print so I don't care about that bit, and I never lost a shot with the D300 because I couldn't crop enough without destroying the image quality. I am mainly asking about the details in an image, like textures for example, and dynamic range. How's recovering details from shadows or highlights, compared to the D7100.

These are the things that I would mostly like to find out, preferably from someone who owns or has owned both cameras, but others' input is welcome as well.

I think what's made me reluctant to switching to FF so far, is the extra range you get from DX sensors. I have the SP 70-300mm VC from Tamron, which is 450mm on DX and that is really good to have when I shoot wildlife, every once in a while.

On the other hand, smaller file sizes from the D700 would be really good.
I would also like to buy the 85mm 1.8G from Nikon and that focal length would be much easier to handle on an FF sensor, not having stabilization.

Can't wait to hear your opinions :)
Click to expand...
I have shot with both cameras. Image quality comes mostly from the lens. The D7100 has much larger files. You notice the difference more from just 800 ISO where the D700 is better.

Image quality is superb with either camera. I prefer the look and feel of the files from the D700. That's just my personal opinion of course ! :)
 
I have owned 3 or 4 D700 s and have a D7100 now. Once I got the D810 I was finally comfortable selling my last D700. But if I had to go back to just one body it would be D700 over D7100.

I've held on to my MB-D10 and D3S battery setup just in case :)
 
vladg7 said:
Quite lengthy post, so sorry for that, but thanks for taking the time to read it!

I've been shooting a D7100 for about 4 months now and I am happy with it. But coming from a D300, I am still crying for the size and ergonomics of that body, not to mention the button layout. Not saying by any means that I don't like the D7100, I like it a lot, it's not uncomfortable to hold, especially since I use it with a grip, and I got used to the controls...mostly, I still get the "+" and "-" wrong sometimes. But you know how it is, the D300 just felt better, it felt right.

So I've been thinking about getting a D700, because it basically the same body as the D300, but with a much better performance. I've looked in other threads at comparisons between the D700 and D7100, but there are some things which I simply couldn't figure out.

First I'd like to know the ISO performance thing, because so far I've only found contrasting opinions about this. Some people say the noise levels from the 2 cameras are pretty much the same, with some even giving the D7100 a slight edge, while others say that the D700 is clearly better, maybe not by such a large margin but still better.

Secondly, image quality. Jumping from the 12mpx sensor of the D300 to the D7100's 24mpx sensor was clearly noticeable, but they were both DX sensors. But how does the 12mpx Full Frame sensor of the D700 stack up against the one of the D7100. I don't print so I don't care about that bit, and I never lost a shot with the D300 because I couldn't crop enough without destroying the image quality. I am mainly asking about the details in an image, like textures for example, and dynamic range. How's recovering details from shadows or highlights, compared to the D7100.

These are the things that I would mostly like to find out, preferably from someone who owns or has owned both cameras, but others' input is welcome as well.

I think what's made me reluctant to switching to FF so far, is the extra range you get from DX sensors. I have the SP 70-300mm VC from Tamron, which is 450mm on DX and that is really good to have when I shoot wildlife, every once in a while.

On the other hand, smaller file sizes from the D700 would be really good.
I would also like to buy the 85mm 1.8G from Nikon and that focal length would be much easier to handle on an FF sensor, not having stabilization.

Can't wait to hear your opinions :)
Click to expand...
I don't have a D700 and D7100, but I do have a D3 and D7100, and since the imaging engine is the same on the D3 and D700 I feel qualified to answer your questions.

As mentioned above, the D3/D700 has better high-ISO by a reasonable margin. That said, I think the D7100, if one stays within the native ISO range of the sensor, is still very good and quite usable. It's also further helped by the fact of having a higher pixel count which will tend to help hide noise when the image size is reduced for printing, web, etc. At low ISO, I think they're fairly equal and aside from the resolution difference, the images are comparable.

As for DR, at base ISO and close by the D7100 simply has more, which is noticeable if you are shooting in lighting that requires it. For less contrasty situations though, it's not so important and either is OK. Also, I find that the D3/D700 tends to have more headroom in the highlights while not so much in the shadows, whereas the D7100 flips that and has noticeably more room in the shadows, and not so much in the highlights. Still, either camera is more than adequate for most situations, so it ends up being a bit of a toss up. I never felt hampered by the DR on my D3 in the 6.5 yrs I've been shooting it, so anything better than it is just a bonus, but a make or break it kind of thing. Other may disagree, just depends on one's needs I suppose.

And touching on resolution too, definitely the 24MP of the D7100 is an advantage over the D3/D700 and is quite noticeable in most situations. It's not that the D3/D700 are bad, because they definitely can take some beautiful, sharp, clear photos with a lot of detail, but the D7100 is just that much better and has a clarity to the images that 12MPs just can't quite match. Plus, the crop-ability of 24MP is simply fantastic and adds a lot of flexibility when editing, especially when you realize that you can still crop down to the same levels as you could with the lower MP camera while maintaining similar IQ. Myself, I'm normally not an extreme cropper, but I have less hesitation to do so with the D7100 files when necessary because I know that even with an extreme crop I'm still getting 8-10MP files which is OK for many uses.

I would say, if you're interested in a D700 then by one. It has the reputation it does because it's an excellent camera and that's never going to change. And you may even want to try a D3 if the size/weight doesn't bother you. It's like a D700 Plus, so to speak.

--

HP: http://www.emasterphoto.com
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/emasterphoto/
Photo Book: http://www.magcloud.com/browse/issue/414130
 
Last edited:
This may not be of much help to you but I did have a D700 (and D2h) and stupidly sold the D700 a couple years back, I thought it the absolute best Nikon I have ever owned and I have have almost all the pro bodies. I now have a D7000 and while it is an excellent camera, I have this vague feeling of dissatisfaction with it, to the point I have now bought a good used D3. My reasoning is for my purposes I do not need more than 12 Mp but I do love the handling of a pro body and for me it was a choice between a used D3 or D700 and the D3 won.

Mike
 
Getting into FX IMHO is most important aspect. D700 is excellent camera and it will not disappoint you. At current pricepoint it is true bargain, you just have to find right one.
 
Thank you guys, I took notes of everything you said, really helpful stuff :)

When I had my D300, one of the things I didn't like was it's rather poor ability of recovering shadows, without getting burnt areas. With the D7100 I still get some burnt areas but only when the shadows are really dark and anyway the texture of those "burns" is much finer. How would the D700 behave in this respect?

I think what I'll do is list my D7100 for sale and see what happens. If I can sell it for my asking price I'll take the plunge and get a D700. Should be able to because it's only 4 months old, with just under 3000 actuations and no marks anywhere.

Keep the posts coming though, I enjoy reading what you guys have to say.
 
I have both the D7100 and the D700. They are both great. My "main" camera is the D7100, its just wonderful and it does everything right. IQ is spectacular (I had a D300 before that and you can clearly see the difference) 24 MP seems to be the new "goldilocks" zone pixel-wise. Noise levels are still better (without a doubt) on the D700, which I use mostly for portraits (with the 85 1.4) and no-flash indoor shots. Although I have to say that for my uses, even ISO 6400 on the D7100 with some processing and resizing looks very good. In reality ISO performance -IMHO- is no longer an issue at all.

One thing I do suffer however is the difference in controls between the two of them, which forces you to think what you want to do and which camera you are using , as opposed to just being automatic (e.g. metering selection or ISO change).

12 MP never bothered me (and I do print relatively big), but unfortunately does not leave much room for cropping. Considering this and given the lens selection I've got today,if I would be forced to choose one, and considering MY uses, I'd probably go with the D7100 and I'm sure I'll miss the D700 every now and then.

They are both great cameras, they complement each other very well, my only issue is having to adjust controls-wise to each one every time I switch.
 
vladg7 said:
. With the D7100 I still get some burnt areas but only when the shadows are really dark and anyway the texture of those "burns" is much finer. How would the D700 behave in this respect?
I
Click to expand...
The D7100 has got better (by a couple of stops) DR than the D700. Its all about the right exposure during shoot and the PP done
 
Ronan_M said:
I have both the D7100 and the D700. They are both great. My "main" camera is the D7100, its just wonderful and it does everything right. IQ is spectacular (I had a D300 before that and you can clearly see the difference) 24 MP seems to be the new "goldilocks" zone pixel-wise. Noise levels are still better (without a doubt) on the D700, which I use mostly for portraits (with the 85 1.4) and no-flash indoor shots. Although I have to say that for my uses, even ISO 6400 on the D7100 with some processing and resizing looks very good. In reality ISO performance -IMHO- is no longer an issue at all.

One thing I do suffer however is the difference in controls between the two of them, which forces you to think what you want to do and which camera you are using , as opposed to just being automatic (e.g. metering selection or ISO change).

12 MP never bothered me (and I do print relatively big), but unfortunately does not leave much room for cropping. Considering this and given the lens selection I've got today,if I would be forced to choose one, and considering MY uses, I'd probably go with the D7100 and I'm sure I'll miss the D700 every now and then.

They are both great cameras, they complement each other very well, my only issue is having to adjust controls-wise to each one every time I switch.
Click to expand...
 
Ronan_M said:
I have both the D7100 and the D700. They are both great. My "main" camera is the D7100, its just wonderful and it does everything right. IQ is spectacular (I had a D300 before that and you can clearly see the difference) 24 MP seems to be the new "goldilocks" zone pixel-wise. Noise levels are still better (without a doubt) on the D700, which I use mostly for portraits (with the 85 1.4) and no-flash indoor shots. Although I have to say that for my uses, even ISO 6400 on the D7100 with some processing and resizing looks very good. In reality ISO performance -IMHO- is no longer an issue at all.

12 MP never bothered me (and I do print relatively big), but unfortunately does not leave much room for cropping. Considering this and given the lens selection I've got today,if I would be forced to choose one, and considering MY uses, I'd probably go with the D7100 and I'm sure I'll miss the D700 every now and then.

They are both great cameras, they complement each other very well, my only issue is having to adjust controls-wise to each one every time I switch.
Click to expand...
 
vladg7 said:
First I'd like to know the ISO performance thing, because so far I've only found contrasting opinions about this. Some people say the noise levels from the 2 cameras are pretty much the same, with some even giving the D7100 a slight edge
Click to expand...
This (D700 == D7100) is also apparent from this graph from Bill Claff's PDR page:

http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#D7100,D700

If you check the individual points in the graph you will see that the PDR is roughly the same at the hiISO settings. So the noise must be comparable. Now if you shoot both at equivalent settings as described in this DPreview article:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care/4

then the D7100 is way ahead because it will shoot for example at iso 1250 where the D700 at iso 3200.

(It would be nice if someone owning both can perform a controlled comparison at equivalent settings)

My experience is only from a D3. I have never touch a D7100 but I find it's performance from these measurements amazing.

--
Panagiotis
 
Last edited:
I've owned both. Interesting comparison, as the two have quite different strengths.

The D700 is a very forgiving, easy to use camera with excellent AF, decent but never exceptional image quality (12mp in a 24/36 world is a bit limiting if you require certain levels of textural detail in fabric/fashion or shoot larger print landscape, but obviously not if you mostly work online or small prints), and very nice even to this day high ISO image quality.

The D7100 is a camera best at low ISO used carefully with excellent glass. When used in those parameters, it had image quality a D700 could never achieve, with a 'bite' and ability to resolve the things that got mushed on the D700. Excellent AF system, small body, but even with all that, just a touch bit "gritty" in the shadows, and a little harder to work with than the D700 in post.

At the end of the day, I no longer have both (D800E and D610 have replaced them for me), but I think for general purpose use where reach is not an issue and one didn't print really large, the D700 might be the better fit. For those who tend to sit at the low ISOs more, print large, or need the 'reach', the D7100 would be the better fit. Honestly for my own use, unless I knew I was going to be shooting high ISO a LOT, I'd take the D7100 for it's low ISO image quality. Mounted with a really great lens like the Sigma 18-35 Art, Zeiss 21, one of the Nikon exotics and it's getting pretty close to what the best FX bodies can do, although the shadows and shadow tonality on the FX bodies to my eyes lives in a different and better world. I don't miss my d700 one bit - time has moved on and things have improved since then, but there are times I wish I kept the D7100 around for what it did well. That camera and a Sigma 18-35 Art was a very high performing slightly more compact package than an FX + mid range zoom would be.

Thinking about it a bit more though, I'd just get a D750 once Nikon clears out the bad batches with this sometimes-occurring flare problem. Even better AF (it's world class) with excellent image quality that exceeds both the D700 and D7100 by a fair bit honestly, and it's reasonably small. Unless you need the reach of a DX body, the D750 would get my vote quite easily.

Interesting question that made me think it through a bit though.

-m
 
anotherMike, thank you, excellent reply!
When I'll start earning real money and do photography more seriously (hopefully pretty soon haha), I'll probably get both a FX body and a second, DX body...maybe the D400 will be out by then, that would be cool
...until then however, I have to get used to the fact that in order to afford something new, I have to sell something I have. I would've liked to afford getting a D700 without having to sell the D7100.
 
Last edited:
I just sold my D7100. Hopefully I'll manage to get a good D700 quite quickly over the next few days.
Thanks again to everyone who shared their opinions here and please feel free to keep posting if you have more things to say :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top