My Nikon D700 is not sharp!!!

[tony_poesch]

<blockquote>

<p>"There is just no noise, which does make the image look slightly softer than the D300 did, which had noise even at ISO 200. Try adding some noise in Photoshop. Suddenly your images will look "sharp" to you." Dave Lee</p></blockquote>

<p>Hello Paul<br>

I probably can unstand your problem. I had the same experience when I switched from D200 to D700. At first I thought, the D700 is out of focus with my 50mm 1,4. But I think Dave Lee is right. It is because there is so less noise on the D700. Some people think it is texture, when they look at images from a D200 or D80. But I think it is just noise.</p>

<p>I've made some crops for you: three steps of sharpening in PS. Objektively you would say the first pic is the sharpest, but there is only more noise and contrast. The third is the original without any changes and noise. Please notice the noise in the backround of the first two images:</p>

<p>pic1: very sharp http://www.photo.net/photo/8592254<br>

pic2: sharp http://www.photo.net/photo/8592257<br>

pic3: original http://www.photo.net/photo/8592253</p>

[nolax_montemar]

<p>that's quite impossible..D700 is the sharpest camera i've tried (d80 and d300) to match with nikkor 24-70. the lcd is even clearer than d300. you can see right there on the lcd the difference between the two cams (d300 and d700). .with or without noise, d700 still has the sharper and cleaner image. i love the tones of this cam as well.</p>

[ned1]

<p>Is it possible you've got a dirty sensor?</p>

[michael_oxford]

<blockquote>

<p>so D300 has a higher resolution sensor but that doesn't mean that D300 can capture more detail or a sharper image from a particular scene compared to D700 because the sensor <em>areas</em> are different.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Yep, we're on the same page. awesome, thanks for the info!</p>

[vadimphoto.com]

<p>I purchased D700 one week ago from company A.</p>

<p>The very first shot I took, literally, frame number 1 - I noticed it wasn't as sharp as my D300. I thought may it was due to shallower depth of field which I wasn't used to. I must mention here that I shoot a lot - as of today I clocked 50k shutter actuations on my D300. So, I'm pretty used to chimping and a quick look to LCD is often all I need to estimate image sharpness quite well.</p>

<p>Next few hours were spent pixel peeping. I shot close to 100 images with D300+24-70 and D700+24-70 side by side, with the same settings, same lighting, even attempted to frame the subjects in the same manner so that they appear the same size at 100% magnification on each camera. Most of the shots were with the cameras resting on some sort of a surface, higher shutter speeds and some with speed lights. Out of those 100 images only few were more/less similar in terms of sharpness. To my royal disappointment majority of the D700 shots were softer than D300. Next morning I returned the camera back.</p>

<p>The following day I purchased D700 from company B (could have exchanged the first one, but was worried about potentially faulty batch so decided to purchase it from a different store, even though it was almost $100 more)</p>

<p>The day it arrived I ran countless tests and almost all D700 shots were as sharp as D300. Few a little sharper. No D700 shots exhibited lesser sharpness that D300. I'm keeping this one :)</p>

<p>I shoot raw, factory defaults, use Capture NX2 for pixel peeping.</p>

[lester2]

<p>I bought my D700 about a month ago along with the 24-70mm and 14-24mm 2.8 lens, took it with me on a road trip to Utah, Arizona and Nevada, I used mostly the 24-70mm, tried to avoid changing lens in the very windy and dusty desert, I think my pictures came very sharp, well I upgrade from a Nikon D60, unfortunately I don't have any other high end camera to compare with, I got some pictures posted on the http://saulau.smugmug.com/<br>

Only those desert and canyon photos are taken by the D700, feel free to leave me comments, thank you!</p>

 

[dave thursfield]

<p>Hi Paul, I've had my D700 for about 2 months now, and was initially very disappointed with the results I was getting compared to my D50! I mentioned it to my friend, who is a printing boffin; he suggested I bring him a file over for printing, the resulting print (@ISO 1600) was superbly detailed and ended all my concerns. If anyone is interested in joining I have started a D700 owners website and forum at <a href="http://www.d700users.com/">http://www.d700users.com/</a></p>

[akshun]

<p>Hey Pal, very simple solution to your problem, put it on a tripod then try a few shots, if its sharp then its your unsteady hands that are the problem, if not, send it back to nikon!</p>

<p>I have this very same lens and body, high iso or whatever, even if there was a bad day going on, this set-up is dead nuts SHARP! <br>

Id also ask if you are using cheap filters of any kind, i am using a B+W UV filter(0) Good quality .<br>

good luck!</p><div></div>

[jim_isham]

<p>Paul--I bought a D700 for the same reasons you did. I traded in my D90, and am now sorry I did; it was a super camera. The D700 is just not as sharp with a variety of pro and amateur Nikon FX lenses. The D90 was much better. I bought my D700 grey market, which might make a difference. There are a couple of other problems with it, too, which leads me to believe that the seller (Adorama) sent me a used or defective unit. Given some other experience I've had with Adorama, I wouldn't be surprised. Anyway, I'm reasonably sure I got cheated, and I don't know what to do about it. This is discouraging enough to turn me off to photography altogether, something I had dreamed of doing in my retirement. --Jim</p>

[phule]

<p>I really wonder why, Jim, you chose to ignore all the excellent advice given in this thread.</p>

 

[borgis_karl_johan1]

<p>Any D700 body(!) claimed to be "unsharp" must be defective or technique/ optics may be at fault.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>No offense, if your use a D700 and it is not sharp, the first thing I would check in photographer technique. While the problem could come from elsewhere, in most cases the problem is the photographer. If you can exclude that, then look elsewhere.</p>

[helen_oster]

<p>Jim<br>

I was extremely concerned to read your posting and firstly would like to offer a sincere apologogy for any disappointment or frustration that may have been caused.<br>

The receiving and dispatch units in the Adorama warehouse are quite separate from each other,<br>

<a href="

and while the used department warehouse is in New York, all new items are warehoused in new Jersey.<br>

We don't of course open boxes up to test the contents or they would have to be sold as 'used' or 'open box', but it is entirely possible that a less-than-perfect unit slipped by on the Nikon conveyor belt.<br>

This is why you have a full Nikon warranty with all new items, which includes a 30-day returns period to Adorama, to ensure your complete satisfaction.<br>

Could you please email me with your order number and a couple of shots, which I can get one of our Pro Department team members to take a look at for you and advise whether it needs to come back to us - if you are within the first 30 days from purchase (or to Nikon if longer than that).<br>

Of course, if it is defective and you send it to us we will cover the shipping costs and return it to Nikon, and you can choose either a full refund or an exchange.<br>

You can contact me here: Helen@adorama.com<br>

<strong>Helen Oster<br /> Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador</strong></p>

 

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I bought my D700 grey market, which might make a difference. There are a couple of other problems with it, too, which leads me to believe that the seller (Adorama) sent me a used or defective unit. Given some other experience I've had with Adorama, I wouldn't be surprised. Anyway, I'm reasonably sure I got cheated, and I don't know what to do about it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Wait, Jim claims that the D700 he bought from Adorama is gray market. Does Adorama sell gray-market Nikon DSLRs?</p>

<p>Any new camera can potentially be defective; in that case it is not Adorama's fault. I wonder why Jim doesn't get in touch with Adorama for an exchange. If he think the camera is used, the EXIF data should indicate the shutter actuation count.</p>

[helen_oster]

<p>You are right, Shun!</p>

<p>I was so falling over myself to apologize that I missed that he said it was direct import completely....</p>

<p>No, we don't sell direct import Nikon bodies. So either Jim bought a used unit from us, or he bought it GM from somewhere else.</p>

[joseph_nowak]

<p>What aperture was used on the D300. Try the same lens on both cameras set at the same focal length AND aperture.... maybe f/5.6. I have the 24-70 f/2.8 zoom and almost without exception the images are tack sharp to 16 x 20, using auto focus. Do the above, with the metering a autofocus set EXACTLY the same way. I'll bet that if you look in an area of fine detail, the D700 with Nikon's latest 24-70 f/2.8 lens you will see better results with the D700, even though the D300 and D700 have a similar number of image sites (pixel count). If you'd like to see some examples of what the 24/70 Nikon lens can do, check out some photos I took. All EXIF data is there for each imagee. Check out the outdoor shot of a church I shot in Oklahoma in my Fine Art Photography Set.<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/joe_nowak/sets/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/joe_nowak/sets/</a><br>

Joe Nowak</p>