Replacement for D700?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by western_isles, Dec 5, 2010.

  1. Does anyone know of or heard of Nikon intending to replace the D700? My reasoning is quit simple. Cannot afford D700 now but might be able to once a replacement is released and dealers have stock to get rid of which I hope would lower the price to affordable levels.
  2. Why wait until the D700 is replaced by what will probably be a better, even more tempting model? If you can't afford the D700, buy a D7000. It's better than the D700 in most areas, much smaller, lighter and cheaper. It's not full frame, but what are the consequences? A slightly smaller viewfinder and slightly "worse" performance in low light. Some even claim that the D7000 can compete with the D700 at high ISO.
    As for me; I would buy the D7000 even if I could afford the D700.
  3. If you can't afford the camera, can you afford the more important thing--the lenses?
    Kent in sD
  4. You can buy clean D700s on ebay now for around $1700. Whatever D700s stores have left after the D800 is released won't sell anywhere near that low.
  5. Nobody knows when the D700 will be replaced by a newer model. Nikon keeps it pretty quiet about new releases most of the time. .
  6. "The D200 sure dumped in price for a few months when they discontinued that model."
    In that particular case, I think Nikon did a very poor job of managing inventory and production prior to the release of the D300. The was a lot of new D200 stock in the retail pipeline (in the USA at least) when the D300 hit store shelves, and Nikon USA needed to drop the price significantly to enable their dealers to clear the stock (we did not get the same price break in Canada).
    They seem to have done a much better job with recent new releases. I think the D200 price freefall was a bit of an aberration (along with IIRC perhaps the D2H?), and I would not count on the same happening with the D700 when a successor is released. Sure the price will probably drop a bit, but there is also a chance that supply will be very low and many dealers may already be sold out / backordered when the D800 (or whatever the successor is called) is released.
    The D700 will be replaced. As to when, anyone here that knows can't say (NDA). Anyone that claims to know is simply guessing (or in breech of a NDA).
  7. Does anyone know of or heard of Nikon intending to replace the D700?​
    Yes, someone does know! But those people have signed legally binding non-disclosure agreements, so they won't be sharing that information with any of us.
    Sorry, but this is a necessity in the competitive business world. Nikon can't afford to let its competitors know what features its new models will have before those models are even released.
  8. Like every model, the D700 will be superceeded by another model sooner or later.
    Considering the D700 has enjoyed a very long production run, chances are it's due to be replaced sooner - perhaps in the first half of 2011 but let's not speculate here .......
    When the replacement model hits the shelves the D700 is likely to become very affordable compared to the AU $4k that I paid for mine in July 2008 when it was released.
  9. If you can't afford the lenses to go on a D700, you shouldn't be in the market for one anyway.
  10. heard of Nikon intending to replace the D700?​
    Sure. Everything is eventually replaced.
    When? No one can give you a precise date other than Nikon but you can guess based on Nikon release cycles.
    I doubt the D-700 will drop significantly anyway unless the next FX is revolutionary; something I highly doubt; unless you think movie mode is revolutionary.
    I agree with another poster, buy great lenses since they hold value far longer than a body.
    This plethora of cameras littering the market is comedic to me. Why get caught up in (their) game?
    I still heavily use my D-300 and D3; I see no DSLR produced today that visibly records a better image.
    Although not used nearly as much, I still have my F3HP...used it for years w/o any need to replace it.
  11. Thanks for all the replies, very interesting.
    I already have a D200 which I bought a couple of years ago new so it was a good price. I still use my Mamiya 7 kit and my F5.
    As far as lenses are concerned I already have mainly primes, 20mm Sigma, 24mm PC Nikon, 85 mm PC Nikon, 180mm Nikon, 35 & 50mm Nikons. The lens is not the issue the price of the body is the issue here in the UK and no doubt in other parts of the world.
    Next month in the UK there is a price rise on most goods, including photo kit, of 2.5%. The manufacturers and dealers will suffer as people will simply not buy. I will not be shedding any tears for them.
  12. "It's better than the D700 in most areas" Yes, but not in the most important areas.
    While it would be expected that the price of the D700 will drop a bit when the D800 (or whatever comes out), it may not be a huge drop. The D700 is a great camera and an exceptional value now at $1700 (IMO). But ultimately the best camera is the one you can afford and have in your hands. My suggestion is to keep what you have until you can afford what you want.
  13. In my opinion the D700's successor will have better sensor than D3S (better resolution and better ISO). Nikon wants to sell so many D3S as possible first. That's the reason why we have to wait so long for the new model. But the new model will cost much more then D700. So I doubt that the stores will reduce the price of D700 at that time.
  14. Looks like you're more likely to get free copies of loads of wiki-leaked State Secrets, than any pre-release Nikon info.....!
    Funny old World!
  15. Regarding the advice to invest in lenses: Good advice, but first one has to decide on full vs APS-C for the long term.
    So, for example, the D7000 and D700 are not equivalent in this sense.

  16. Frank, the D200 has very clean output at ISO 100. I had one for a couple months and got some good images from it at that setting. However at ISO 800 and above it was terrible, so I went back to the D300. (My path was D300 -> D700 -> D200 ($599 new) -> D300). I'm satisfied with the D300 and am going to stick with it until it fails. The D700 replacement will probably retail for $2799 when new, and a flood of used D700s will hit the market at $1500-1700 or so. Wait until then and score a cheap one. I may do the same.
  17. Good advice, but first one has to decide on full vs APS-C for the long term.​
    Well, FX (FF) lenses work on DX cameras. The only practical difference (besides cost) is UWA angle of view with DX, and maybe fisheyes.
  18. The D700 is a great camera and an exceptional value now at $1700 (IMO)​
    Where can I get a D700 for $1700... because I want one!
  19. John, at $1700 I think everyone would buy one. Right now they retail for $2250 or so. Used usually around $1950.
  20. Per Jon Porter, "You can buy clean D700s on ebay now for around $1700".
  21. I bought a 2nd new D700 a three weeks ago.
    I've really wanted the Nikkor 24-70mm 2.8 & when purchased together I saved $300 at point of sale.
    With instant money off I guess I paid $2,049 for my D700 since I planned to buy the 24-70mm 2.8 anyways.
    Twenty three months ago now, my first brand new D700 cost me $2,319.
    Launch price was $2,999.99 on these D700, ya'know ?
    I suspect D800 will start out up there at $3,000 again, so instead I bought a 2nd D700, 3 more Nikon made batteries & 2 Nikon made MC-36 remotes.
    D700 is really great as are their Crystal Nano Coat lenses ! I now own two Nano Coats, both are stellar !
    Nikon Instant rebate season is happening now in USA.
    Something to consider, after the Holidays, the deals vanish till next winter.
  22. John, at $1700 I think everyone would buy one. Right now they retail for $2250 or so. Used usually around $1950.​
    I think it's a good camera but I would not buy one for $1700.00. To much money for a family guy to be spending on a camera.
  23. ". . .buy a D7000. It's better than the D700 in most areas. . . '​
    Really? How so?
  24. Ross, ssshh! Don't say it out loud! You're supposed to say you bought some tools or made a down payment on a piece of land or something!!
  25. "It's better than the D700 in most areas......."​
    Care to elaborate? That is a mighty broad statement with no supporting information.
  26. "It's better than the D700 in most areas......."​
    A DX user's puff, but if it makes them feel better about their toy camera.....
    Let's do a quick comparison shall we?
    Does the D7000 give better control over depth-of-field than the D700? No!
    Does it allow smaller stops to be used before diffraction becomes a problem? Again no!
    Does it have a brighter and larger viewfinder? Afraid not!
    Does it take pro quality fast ultrawide lenses like the 14-24 f/2.8 AF-S Zoom Nikkor? Sorry, but no!
    Can it take full advantage of the thousands of cheap yet high-quality MF Nikkors out there? Sadly, not really!
    Is its high ISO noise as low as the D700s? Hardly!
    I make that about 6 nil to the D700 so far.
  27. Rodeo Joe,
    Although it might be a stretch to put the D7000 above the D700, it isn't 6 - nil, my friend.
    Does the D700 have lightweight, affordable high-quality wide angle "semi-pro" glass? Nope.
    Does the D700 give an extra 50% reach when using Telephoto lenses? Nope. (DX advantage)
    Does the D700 have two card slots? Nope.
    Does the D700 have 1080p video? Nope.
    Does the D700 have 16MP? Nope. (Yeah, I don't need more than 12 either... but...)
    Does the D700 have 6fps? Nope.
    Can you buy two D7000 bodies new for the price of one D700? Almost.
    Clearly, there are some who will find the D7000 a MUCH better camera for them and vice versa. I'm not saying all those things are important to everybody (some of them are not important to me at all), but it's not a one-sided discussion.
  28. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I have had a D700 for over two years and have been testing a D7000 for over a month. I own both models and some other cameras. There are clearly pros and cons on both. In particular, I have studied their high-ISO capabilities quite a bit, under different lighting conditions: outdoors building light, indoor, etc. The D7000 has come very close to the D700 in terms of high-ISO results, even though the D7000 has much denser and smaller pixels: 16MP on the smaller DX area. At best, the D700 has about 1/2 stop and in some situations 2/3 stop advantage.
    Back in October, we had a thread that a photographer decided to move from a very old D700 to a D7000, and it turns out that he is very happy about the move. His opinion might not be very typical, but it is certainly not ture that the D700 or FX format is always "better":
  29. Just to add to Peter Hamm's list:
    The D7000 does indeed meter with AI/AIS lenses
    High quality WA lenses for DX may not come as stellar as the Nikkor 14-24 for FX, but the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is more than good enough for very many photographers, is a third of the price, half the weight and it can use normal filters.
    A 300mm f/4 on DX equals a 450mm on FX. Again, any 400 or 500mm lens is much bigger, heavier and more expensive than said 300mm. With zooms (like Nikkor 70-300mm AF-S VRII vs. Nikkor 80-400mm VR or Sigma 150-500mm HSM OS) the difference is equally large. Since the D7000 has more pixels, this advantage actually increases further, since you can crop the photo to get even "closer" and still retain the same number of pixels as the D700.
    I see the "control of DOF" argument appear again and again, but for most practical purposes, I find myself wanting more DOF, not less. If I really want shallow DOF, a 50 or 85mm f/1.4 gives me all I need and more. And with money I save using DX format cameras, I can actually afford to buy those lenses. Not that I've bothered so far. I'm perfectly happy with the f/1.8 versions on DX.
    For people who like to take their camera and lenses with them, instead of leaving them at home, the size argument carries a lot of weight. I'm just back from a few days of bus travel in Cambodia. Even if I had one, I wouldn't even dream of taking a lens like the 14-24 with me. What I did take (a Panasonic GH1 with Olympus OM primes, 28, 50 and 100mm which is 56, 100 and 200mm eqv.) actually weighs less than any of the recent Nikon FX lens, and now I'm talking complete kit vs. one lens. The D7000 is a bit bigger and heavier than the GH1, but still compact enough to fit in a small bag with two or three lenses, and from what I've seen so far, the image quality is absolutely great. In my book, that makes it the best camera from Nikon so far. Others may have different needs.
  30. I've also been struggling with this issue too. I can buy a good used D700 for only a few hundred $ more than a new D7000. But thats only half the story. My overall direction is FX. I just have to decide when. I need two pro 2.8 lenses...17-35 and 80-200 in FX format. In DX I can also get equivalent quality. The investment in these is about $2500, so my decision is important. If I went D7000 I would have to sell these DX lenses too later on. The D700 appeals as it gets me to FX where I will stay. The D7000 appeals as its got a new generation AF and meter. Its also a bit easier to set up with the U1 and U2 menu memories.
    Right now I will probably go with the D700 also for the reason that its done the worst of its depreciation and my lens purchases will stay compatible with future models in FX. In two years of so I would probably get a used D800 (or whatever). I don't think I would ever buy new, as the depreciation is just brutal. Adorama have Nikon warrantied D700, refurbished, for just a bit over $2k...thats tempting.
  31. When I posted the question two months ago I did not realise just how many responses there would be! I think that this demonstrates what a healthy on line community we have in Photonet.
    Update is I have ordered the D700 and await its arrival sometime today. I got a good deal from Amazon and it is supplied directly from them and is not a gray import. Nikon UK have told me that they will honour the warranty in the unlikely event something goes wrong.
    It will be used with the following lens: 20mm Sigma (this is a great lens), 24mm PC Nikon, 35mm Nikon, 50mm Nikon, 85mm PC Nikon and 180mm Nikon.
    My intention, and finances, mean I will keep this kit for a long time along with the F5 and Mamiya 7 kit although the latter may eventually be sold.
    Thanks again to all for their input.

Share This Page