Jump to content

D300s or D700


mike_hegerfeld3

Recommended Posts

<p>I currently have a D70 with the following lens, Nikon 20 AF-D, 35-70 AF-D, 105 AF-D, 80-200 AF-D and a 300 AF-D. I am torn between a D300s or a D700. With D300s I enjoy turning my 300 lens into a 450 but I shoot a lot of landscapes and I miss not having wide angle lens. I am not a pro and I shoot mainly landscapes and portraits. The lenses that I have are made for a fx camera. I don't have any lenses for a dx camera although they work fine on my D70. I am also going to be taking a lot of photos of bicycle racing and autofocus on the D70 is really poor. Any ideas? </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'd get a D300S, then spend perhaps $500 on a nice 10-20 or 11-16 ultra wide DX zoom. You'll still have spent less than you would on the D700, you'll get video tools you can use to augment the cycling photos, and you'll actually get - arguably - better sports-oriented AF peformance than you would on the D700, since that same AF module in the D300S covers the frame better. <br /><br />You can always sell the ultra-wide DX zoom for a fair portion of what you pay for it, down the road, if you do feel the need to go FX.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>D300s would be great for the bicycle racing and such but if you put the 300mm and 80-200 on the D700 you'll be fine and get enough reach from your lenses.<br>

Portraits and landscapes are done best with full frame. You should probably get yourself a 24-70mm and sell your 35-70. More on this here: http://thephoblographer.com/2010/02/26/recommended-equipment-for-shooting-weddings-and-portraits/ If you stay on a crop body you're always going to have to compensate for the shooting reciprocal rule even more so due to the magnification process.<br>

The D300s has very nice low light capabilities (http://thephoblographer.com/2010/04/01/field-review-nikon-d300s-final-day-pax-east/) for what it is but there is also the fact that the D700 does this better. Plus, the major enhancements of the D300s over the D300 are the higher ISO and the add-on of a video mode. Do you really need those? I know Portrait photographers here in NYC that use the D80 and D700 and nothing else. Some are thinking about the D3s but that's probably out of your budget.<br>

D300s's autofocus is amazing though, as is the D700's.<br>

Hope this helps Mike.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Mike</p>

<p>For your described purposes the D300 is for you. You did not complain about the size of the viewfinder in your d70, nor did you show that you needed high iso performance above that available in a d300. Spend that extra $1000 on glass.</p>

<p>Btw, i really like the sound of your lens collection, it will go nicely with either camera. Is your 35-70mm the f2.8 version, I have always loved that lens.</p>

<p>In an effort to make full disclosure, I had a d200 and moved to a d700. My thinking was that I never really got over the viewfinder of my old FE so I wanted that back. And reach is not that important to my shooting.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thanks for all of your responses, lots of good advice but still mulling it over. Phil, yes the Nikon 35-70 is the F2.8 and I tend to use it a lot. It is really a sharp lens. And Matt, thats what I had planned to do if I went with the D300s. One other thing comes to mind, my son is into kickboxing and he goes to a tournament at least once a month and to capture the action I wouldn't have to use a flash with either camera. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, I am a D700 user. To me, its the best camera I ever used. Its a pure professional camera like D3 but in a even more flexible package. D300s is a very good camera but from what you are taking, look like a D700 would fit your need better.<br>

1. You already have all lens for FX<br>

2. Its better to shoot landscape with full frame. Most best quality wide angle lenses are full frame.<br>

3. For portraits, you get better DOF with full frame.<br>

4. For sport photography (bicycle racing). D700 have the best AF system same as D3. Even comparable with Canon's 1D's AF speed which both D3 and Canon's 1D are professional sport camera. What is better than that?<br>

5. Better low light performance.<br>

6. Professional body as D3's control, customization and handling.<br>

Well, again, D300s may still fit your need as you mentioned you are not a pro and you don't really care what I list above. And for D300s, you could have the option to take video. But, 1. do you really going to take video with your DSLR? 2. I personally think that video capacity still not that well developed in Nikon's DSLR, IMHO. <br>

Bottom line is, D700 itself is a better camera than D300s and I think its better fit what you are going to use it.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, you could always shoot a D700 in DX mode to get the 'reach' and still have the D700's AF speed. You'd have way better IQ than the D70, and better low-light high-ISO performance than even a D300/300s, but not the resolution, since a D700 is only 6mp in DX mode. If that's good enough for you, then why not?</p>

<p>The rest of the time, you could have your wider-angle FX format at full resolution, and reap <em>all</em> the benefits of the D700's IQ. What's not to like (except maybe the price tag)?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Enrique: when you use an FX camera in DX mode, you are recording the image from the smaller, DX-sized middle portion of the sensor. It's just like shooting with a cropped-sensor (DX) body. The only difference is that you'll end up with lower resolution than you would have if you'd be been using a normal DX body. If you're not making large prints, that simply may not matter.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Mike, given your FX-compatible lens collection and the fact that you intend to shoot sports indoors, I would recommend the D700 for it's superior high-ISO performance. I think you're going to get a lot of use out of the ISO 3200 setting.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thanks everyone, I am leaning on choosing the D700 but probably for the wrong reason. Besides for all of the compelling reasons you guys listed, I also just like the thought of having a full frame camera again like my old 35 mm film Nikon. Ok, I know, I know, call me shallow but when digital cameras started to take over film cameras I just hated the thought that the image was smaller than 35mm. I at one time was considering going to medium format because I thought 35 mm was too small. I'm not a pro and looking at some of the work you guys do I am certainly not as talented so I guess it just boils down to........I want it damn it. Thanks again for everyone taking their time to help me. I am truely amazed at how much talent there is on this forum and how quick you will reach out to help someone.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Mike, I pretty much just wanted a D700. I had a D70 then a D200. I intend to keep this body a long time as it is more than I need but every thing I wanted. Older wide glass for FX is very soft in the corners so I may purchase a 16-35mm if it turns out to be a very good lens. Currently I am very happy with the light weight Tamron 28-75mm and its sharpness through out its range. I do miss the narrowed FoV of DX in tele work but I want only one body. Either body will be a considerable upgrade and will work for you. Get what makes YOU happy with in your budget. 20mm in DX is not very wide so you just may be covered for glass.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I wrote this a while ago but it still applies:</p>

<p>

<p >I went from a D300 to a D700, and found it was merely a format change and not an upgrade. In the end I sold my D700 after 5 months and bought another D300 a couple months later.</p>

<p >Not an upgrade:<br />1. D300 has better viewfinder, 100% vs D700 90%. This is a huge deal for me as I tend to crop in camera and not in post. Really slowed me down.<br />2. D300 has better handling, not as heavy and chunky as D700<br />3. D300 has longer battery life than D700<br />4. D300 has better battery door design than D700<br />5. D300 has better AF Sensor arrangement in viewfinder than D700<br />6. D300 is less expensive than D700<br />7. D300, being a DX camera, has a 1.5x zoom advantage over D700</p>

<p >An upgrade:</p>

<p >1. D700 has better image quality starting at ISO 400 than D300. It is noticeable. Some might even say it's better at ISO 200 but I prefer D300 at ISO 200. D700 has stronger anti-alias filtering than D300, resulting in softer images out of camera than D300.<br />2. Full frame means a bigger overall viewfinder. D700 has a gorgeous viewfinder with tremendous eye relief compared to D300. <br />3. D700 has the ability to shoot wider than D300. The Nikon 14-24mm FX zoom has no equivilent lens in DX.<br />4. D700 has faster 14 bit NEF capture (if that is important to you. not so important to me). <br />5. D700 lets you use your prime lenses as they were designed, full frame, with no crop factor. Yay! I loved being able to shoot with my 105mm f2.5 AI'd Nikkor as it was designed.</p>

<p >So for me, the pros outweigh the cons for the D300 vs. D700 deal.</p>

<p >Now, if I were going FX today, with all this in mind, I would either:</p>

<p >1. Buy the D3s, knowing it has a 100% viewfinder, and better image quality than D700.<br />2. Wait for D700 replacement which will hopefully have the same sensor as D3s.</p>

<p >I really didn't find the high ISO performance of the D700 to be that great. Sure, it's better by a stop or two than D300, but the D300 is still superb. And the drawbacks as I listed above made it just not worth it for me as I don't shoot at high ISOs for all my work.</p>

<p >Hope this helps!</p>

</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Finally made up my mind and went ahead an ordered the D700 even though it did not have a 100% viewfinder. As in all of life one must make compromises. Thanks to everyone for your input, can't tell you how many times I read and reread your comments. Of course come next week I'm sure Nikon will release the new Nikon D700s lens with a 100% viewfinder and a 24mp sensor among other advances. That would be just my luck, but just can't sit and wait forever for something that might or might not happen.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Mike - I'm in virtually the same situation as you, although my upgrade will be from D200 to either 300s or 700 (I already did D70 to D200 a couple of years back)<br>

So far all pros and cons weighed up balance out so nothing to swing me one way or another.<br>

We don't often hear 'what happened in the end' so if you now have your D700, I'd be really grateful to hear whether you feel you made the right choice and all the things you love and hate about it now you have it in your hands!</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...