Nikon D700 and old bodies.

[David11271]

D700 service.

Hi guys , do any of you send your D700’s in for service?

With a camera as old as the D700 , do you guys ever get any issues with yours, for example mirrors sticking, shutters sticking , buttons etc

What worries me for an example is my current D700 only has 6000 clicks on it and in immaculate condition and everything works fine, however if the shutter dies on the next shot I am more of less stuffed right?

I mean in the UK I doubt any camera repair shop has any parts like new shutters, mirror boxes etc so it could only be used for a door stop.

Does this concern any of you D700 owners? Should the camera be sent in for service , does the lubricant dry out for the mirror or moving parts I wonder?

People buy these preowned old Nikon’s (myself included) as they have special things that most modern cameras can’t replicate (build quality especially) but what if they go wrong, so many people think that if they have a low shutter count they will last for many more years as they are rate for 150000, but what about age?

Would like to here opinions and experiences please

 

[DeathArrow]

D700 service.

Hi guys , do any of you send your D700’s in for service?

With a camera as old as the D700 , do you guys ever get any issues with yours, for example mirrors sticking, shutters sticking , buttons etc

What worries me for an example is my current D700 only has 6000 clicks on it and in immaculate condition and everything works fine, however if the shutter dies on the next shot I am more of less stuffed right?

I mean in the UK I doubt any camera repair shop has any parts like new shutters, mirror boxes etc so it could only be used for a door stop.

You can buy a shutter assembly from e-bay or aliexpress. However, I doubt that it´s woth replacing unless you have some emotional connection to it.

People buy these preowned old Nikon’s (myself included) as they have special things that most modern cameras can’t replicate (build quality especially) but what if they go wrong, so many people think that if they have a low shutter count they will last for many more years as they are rate for 150000, but what about age?

I would buy one only because is cheap, to have a backup camera.

 

[David11271]

Thanks for your response, do you think age can be a factor on the shutter or is it purely how many shutters it’s done? In other words can age cause a shutter failure, will it wear with age?

 

[DeathArrow]

I don't know exactly how a shutter works mechanically. Maybe the shutter blades can have some kind of lubrification and that might become dry.

But seing how cheap D700 is I'd take the risk to buy one. I did find one with a replaced shutter, 50k actuations on new one for € 200. But used D800 or D600, are a few hundreds more so the choice is hard.

 

[johnchap2]

The D700 was good for its time, but is far out of date in many respects -- particularly in veru low resolution. I would keep it as backup and buy a used D800/D800E/D810. Look at ebay closed auctions for prices on low actuations low use D800 bodies.

 

[queequee]

........

People buy these preowned old Nikon’s (myself included) as they have special things that most modern cameras can’t replicate (build quality especially) but what if they go wrong, so many people think that if they have a low shutter count they will last for many more years as they are rate for 150000, but what about age?

Would like to here opinions and experiences please

What fearures of the D700 pray tell are not replicated by the more modern Nikon DSLRs? It’s not build quality since the D800 - D850 cameras have basically the same weather sealed alloy body and control placement ? Is it the lower resolution then that you treasure or the lower dynamic range and ISO sensitivity .

 

[THKPIC]

I think for 500 or under (especially 400 and under) it's worth the risk. I've had one since Jan. with 49 shutter and I've put about 4k on it. No problems so far. I figure if I get two years out of it, it's a solid deal. If I get more than that, it's a steal. Based on user reviews and forums, the D700 seems to be fairly trouble free.

 

[lightandaprayer]

........

People buy these preowned old Nikon’s (myself included) as they have special things that most modern cameras can’t replicate (build quality especially) but what if they go wrong, so many people think that if they have a low shutter count they will last for many more years as they are rate for 150000, but what about age?

Would like to here opinions and experiences please

What fearures of the D700 pray tell are not replicated by the more modern Nikon DSLRs? It’s not build quality since the D800 - D850 cameras have basically the same weather sealed alloy body and control placement ? Is it the lower resolution then that you treasure or the lower dynamic range and ISO sensitivity .

There are various perfectly reasonable reasons why someone might prefer a D700 over a more recent DSLR, price being the most obvious one. . . FYI, there are differences in the materials and construction between the D700 and D8xx cameras.

To the OP: As a fellow D700 user, I advise you to stop worrying and simply enjoy using your camera. The D700 is a proven performer and unlike some more recent DSLRs (the D750 comes to mind. . .) it has not been plagued with hardware problems. Your D700 should last many more years with reasonable care.

 

[queequee]

........

People buy these preowned old Nikon’s (myself included) as they have special things that most modern cameras can’t replicate (build quality especially) but what if they go wrong, so many people think that if they have a low shutter count they will last for many more years as they are rate for 150000, but what about age?

Would like to here opinions and experiences please

What fearures of the D700 pray tell are not replicated by the more modern Nikon DSLRs? It’s not build quality since the D800 - D850 cameras have basically the same weather sealed alloy body and control placement ? Is it the lower resolution then that you treasure or the lower dynamic range and ISO sensitivity .

There are various perfectly reasonable reasons why someone might prefer a D700 over a more recent DSLR, price being the most obvious one. . . FYI, there are differences in the materials and construction between the D700 and D8xx cameras.

To the OP: As a fellow D700 user, I advise you to stop worrying and simply enjoy using your camera. The D700 is a proven performer and unlike some more recent DSLRs (the D750 comes to mind. . .) it has not been plagued with hardware problems. Your D700 should last many more years with reasonable care.

Fair enough . If budget constrained , No argument here with getting a D700 for less than 400 bucks as it was a great camera during its production run and will still produce good pics today .

On the build quality side. Maybe the D700 feels a little more solid compared to the D8xx cams due to the different feel in the dials and the doors? I am still trying to reconcile though how that helps take better pictures today? Or is there a use case that the OP hasn't told us about that makes that small difference in build paramount.

 

[Nikon33]

........

People buy these preowned old Nikon’s (myself included) as they have special things that most modern cameras can’t replicate (build quality especially) but what if they go wrong, so many people think that if they have a low shutter count they will last for many more years as they are rate for 150000, but what about age?

Would like to here opinions and experiences please

What fearures of the D700 pray tell are not replicated by the more modern Nikon DSLRs? It’s not build quality since the D800 - D850 cameras have basically the same weather sealed alloy body and control placement ? Is it the lower resolution then that you treasure or the lower dynamic range and ISO sensitivity .

There are various perfectly reasonable reasons why someone might prefer a D700 over a more recent DSLR, price being the most obvious one. . . FYI, there are differences in the materials and construction between the D700 and D8xx cameras.

To the OP: As a fellow D700 user, I advise you to stop worrying and simply enjoy using your camera. The D700 is a proven performer and unlike some more recent DSLRs (the D750 comes to mind. . .) it has not been plagued with hardware problems. Your D700 should last many more years with reasonable care.

Fair enough . If budget constrained , No argument here with getting a D700 for less than 400 bucks as it was a great camera during its production run and will still produce good pics today .

On the build quality side. Maybe the D700 feels a little more solid compared to the D8xx cams due to the different feel in the dials and the doors? I am still trying to reconcile though how that helps take better pictures today? Or is there a use case that the OP hasn't told us about that makes that small difference in build paramount.

You can see my gear list and see I have the D850. But I also keep a few other cameras around. There is nothing wrong with using a D700. It is a great camera, mine has 224K shutter count and counting. I just shot a whole event with it indoors in low light, it did absolutely wonderful. Also, I do love the colors of the D700! That camera has great character.

 

[cosmicnode]

I met a fellow motorsports shooter at Silverstone who was using 2 D300 bodies, same vintage as your D700, He was on his 7th or 8th body, he shot a lot and when they broke simply bought a used replacement, Some bodies are so good for the intended purpose they don't need upgrading,

 

[Nikon 79]

The D700 colors... have never enjoyed any other camera as much as the D700
https://www.flickr.com/photos/58919412@N00/

 

[Parry Johnson]

David and others,

I recently bought a used D700 for$400 CDN with well under 50,000 shots, which I thought was a steal. My D800 has considerably more mileage, and it's lasted six years with no problems, so I expect at least as much from the D700.

As for the advantages over newer cameras, I've simply found that 36+ MP is not required for most event shooting. Yes, my D800 is still used for most situations, but it's nice to know that I'm not "using up" all those extra actuations on that camera. At 12MP (and really good pixels at that), the D700 does well.

If you've had to upgrade your computer and other hardware because of the tequirements of a newer camera (as I did when I got my D800), you'll then appreciate the other advantages of the D700 with smaller files, faster read/write times, faster batch processing/EXIF editing/ renaming/slide shows, etc. That's what's mainly holding me back from buying a D850.

I don't have deep pockets, but I appreciate durability and quality. I'm confident both these cameras (plus the D850) are in that category.

 

[cosmicnode]

David and others,

I recently bought a used D700 for$400 CDN with well under 50,000 shots, which I thought was a steal. My D800 has considerably more mileage, and it's lasted six years with no problems, so I expect at least as much from the D700.

As for the advantages over newer cameras, I've simply found that 36+ MP is not required for most event shooting. Yes, my D800 is still used for most situations, but it's nice to know that I'm not "using up" all those extra actuations on that camera. At 12MP (and really good pixels at that), the D700 does well.

If you've had to upgrade your computer and other hardware because of the tequirements of a newer camera (as I did when I got my D800), you'll then appreciate the other advantages of the D700 with smaller files, faster read/write times, faster batch processing/EXIF editing/ renaming/slide shows, etc. That's what's mainly holding me back from buying a D850.

I don't have deep pockets, but I appreciate durability and quality. I'm confident both these cameras (plus the D850) are in that category.

I have had my D800 for almost 7 years and if you have a computer these days that won't run files this size or D850 size you may be still in windows Xp or 7. Just a cheap modern computer will run 45mp files. Build your own cheaply. You could upgrade the gear in your case for around £300 plus.

 

[Daniel Bliss]

You'd have to go back to the 1990s to find a shutter on a serious Nikon camera that wasn't designed to go at least 100,000 clicks -- back in the day cameras like the FM2 and F/N90 were designed for 50,000. If I recall correctly the D700 and 800 are aimed at 200k and the pro ones 400 or more. There are reports of shutters on the D3/4/5 series going for millions of photos.

I think as long as you don't either a) stick it in a drawer forever and then expect it to go full tilt or b) machine-gun it at 8fps for hundreds of consecutive clicks at a time, you can expect to get a lot more mileage out of it.

 

[Parry Johnson]

David and others,

I recently bought a used D700 for$400 CDN with well under 50,000 shots, which I thought was a steal. My D800 has considerably more mileage, and it's lasted six years with no problems, so I expect at least as much from the D700.

As for the advantages over newer cameras, I've simply found that 36+ MP is not required for most event shooting. Yes, my D800 is still used for most situations, but it's nice to know that I'm not "using up" all those extra actuations on that camera. At 12MP (and really good pixels at that), the D700 does well.

If you've had to upgrade your computer and other hardware because of the tequirements of a newer camera (as I did when I got my D800), you'll then appreciate the other advantages of the D700 with smaller files, faster read/write times, faster batch processing/EXIF editing/ renaming/slide shows, etc. That's what's mainly holding me back from buying a D850.

I don't have deep pockets, but I appreciate durability and quality. I'm confident both these cameras (plus the D850) are in that category.

I have had my D800 for almost 7 years and if you have a computer these days that won't run files this size or D850 size you may be still in windows Xp or 7. Just a cheap modern computer will run 45mp files. Build your own cheaply. You could upgrade the gear in your case for around £300 plus.

My point is that I had to get better computers (first, an i5 laptop, then an i7 desktop) six years ago when I bought my D800. Those computers are still doing fine (with some upgrades in the meantime), but I would chew through hard drives faster with D850 files.

Of course, there are also the Linux options, which often give new life (and sometimes new frustrations) to older computers.

 

[lucidum]

Few thoughts:

Things don't last forever so at some point it will die.

In some places, servicing might cost a lot that it doesn't make sense anymore.

Still, as an engineer I would advise regular servicing if you shoot in adverse conditions (dust, humid etc)

I have few nikons from 70s and a toy camera from 50s and I haven't serviced them since acquiring 2-3 years ago. They work perfectly fine.

I got a 60k+ d700 4 years ago and not an issue after 40k+ shooting in dirt, snow rain etc.

Luc

 

[Janoch]

David11271 wrote... Should the camera be sent in for service , does the lubricant dry out for the mirror or moving parts I wonder?

Yes, yes and yes.

By all means, do let it see a proper service overhaul. Even here in expensive Denmark, the service cost next to nothing.

They'll check *everything* and give it a nice, thorough cleaning and some fresh lubricants, seals and what not.

The number of clicks doesn't really means anything when it comes to regular service... I send mine in every second years or so.

And btw. I doubt you'll ever see the shutter die. At your current frantic clicking rate, you'll see it pass "expected lifespan" in about 40 years... :-D

 

[DDavis1]

The Nikon D700, D3, and D3s have unique color rendition. Their sensors were special in that regard. One of the most beautiful pairings was the 80-200 f/2.8 (D) lens mounted on the D700. ABSOLUTELY CREAMY!!!!!!

The one downside to the D700 was/is its high ISO performance...or lack thereof.