Where to go from a D700

[michael_spirito]

<p>I currently have a D800 and a D700. I want to sell the D700 but Im wondering if I should purchase the 610. I shoot weddings so I dont want two 800's because of file size and Im thinking the DF is not good for on the go shooting. So am wrong about the DF or is the 610 and 800 a good combo for weddings?</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>Can't say anything about the DF, but the D610 is a great performer. Just wondering why not reduce the size of the file and shoot 800 for consistency ?</p>

<p>Les</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>It would cost you some money selling the D700 and buying the D610. If I were you I would just keep the D700 and using it. </p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>for some reason, Nikon decided to cripple the d610's AF and put the better AF module--the same one as in the d700--in the 800, despite its average FPS and large file sizes. so in some ways, the d610 is less capable than the d7100, which costs much less but is a DX format, and the d700. talk about circle of confusion! </p>

<p>besides the different MP count, control layout, and specs, you also have to use different batteries and chargers with a d800/610 combo. fully redundant gear makes the most sense for weddings or other occasions where you are using 2 bodies, so as Leszek points out, 2xd800, set to slightly lower resolution, could solve your problem. of course, you are also looking at paying much more for a d800 than a 610.</p>

[pge]

<p>You didn't mention why you wanted to sell the D700. It would be hard to determine which camera you should have as a backup without you stating where the D700 fails you.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>In these days, people use the word "cripple" casually. The Multi-CAM 4800 is certainly second best to the top-of-the-line Multi-CAM 3500, but it is still a capable AF system. I used it on the D7000 for two years with good results.</p>

<p>On the FX-format D600, D610, and Df, the main issue is that all 39 AF points are too concentrated in the center of the frame. In particular, there are only 9 cross-type AF points in a 3x3 matrix in the center. Under low-light conditions, it essentially forces you to use a center AF point. However, the D800's Multi-CAM 3500 is not that much better. In particular, in the vertical/portrait orientation, there is really a lack of AF points in the upper 1/3 of the frame. From my point of view, that has been an issue since the 2007 D3 and I am still experiencing it on the latest D4S.</p>

<p>The D610 uses the same battery as the D800 and takes two SD memory cards. If you don't want a second D800, the D610 should be a good choice with some AF limitation, more so than the D800, mentioned above.</p>

<p>The Df is a niche camera for a small group of fans. It has excellent high-ISO capability but so do the D800 and D610. The Df is a rather light, FX-format DSLR if that is what you want, but only a small number of fans are excited about its ancient controls. It wouldn't be my choice for wedding photography, especially since it has only one memory card slot.</p>

[michael_spirito]

<p>Thanks Shaun thats what I was thinking when you were reffering to the DF. The reason I want to switch is because the 700 is 7 year old technology and the longer I wait the less I can get for it. Also the 610 has far better results straight out of camera as well as other improvements. Ever since I got the 800 I have been a fan of the dual card slots. </p>

[mccosh]

<p>I am also a wedding photographer, and love my D600 it gives me amazing images <a href="http://www.mccoshphotography.com/Client-Galleries/Jack--Gabrielle">Samples </a>The AF is not an issue for me as I only use the central focus point with back focus. This way I am always in complete control on what the camera is going to focus on. Focus is always very quick and precise especially with f/2.8 lenses. The D600 / D610 also have dual card slots which I think should be a must for any wedding photographer, having them set up to backup each other gives you peace of mind. I have heard that the D600 / D610 has marginally better high ISO performance that the D800. In any case the high ISO is great as you will be aware with your D800. I went with the D600 over the D800 because of the file size and I haven't regretted it one bit. If you decide to upgrade your D700 to the D610 I know you won't regret it.</p>

<p>John</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>Sorry what's wrong with your D700?</p>

[Two23]

<p>I would just buy a second D800, used. The reason is the D610 AF is not as good, and there are other differences as well. Weddings are fast paced and the less you have to think about a camera the better. Having two of the same body just makes things simpler and smoother. The problem with a D700 is they are now getting older and I would worry about reliability. You can't go back and reshoot a wedding. For the record, I considered buying a pair of D800e for wedding use, but decided to just use a pair of D7100 since I was certain my customers would never see any difference, and it's less money tied up. Whatever I used, I did want a pair of the same thing though.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>May be you can reshoot a wedding! Some couples get divorced before they get the pictures delivered to them from the photographer. That way you could get 2 more wedding gigs. </p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>In these days, people use the word "cripple" casually.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>not really. if you consider that the d700 occupied the same price point/market segment as the d610 currently does (entry-level FX), the decision to put a lesser AF module in the d610 is essentially crippling it. admitting it has "AF limitations" compared to the 800/700 is basically saying the same thing, albeit a bit more politely. Nikon doesnt send me lenses and cameras to review, so i see no reason to beat around the bush when it comes to analyzing their choices over the past few product cycles. i think the OP should know what they're getting before investing further, and i also think the reason d700s have retained high resale value is because they weren't completely obsoleted by the d600/610 introduction. a shutter replacement would cost a lot less than a new camera.</p>

<p>that said, i agree with Kent that having two of the same camera is probably more important for this kind of work than almost any other criteria. personally, i would prefer to have the same AF capabilities in both cameras, as well as the same file sizes (which makes batch processing easier). so, 2xd800 would be best-case scenario for the OP, but you could also sell both the 800 and 700 and get 2x610 if you can live with its limitations.</p>

[Uhooru]

<blockquote>

<p>The problem with a D700 is they are now getting older and I would worry about reliability.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why? Has he had any problems with the D700? I've not heard of lots of tales of failures of D700's D300/S's or even D200's for that matter. They are pretty stout cameras. <br>

</p>

[Rick Helmke]

<p>I wonder how good AF has to be in a wedding shoot. Any camera that's been mentioned in this post is easily capable of good wedding work, even the D200 which I still use two of. The D700 will be fine as long as it hasn't been run to death. In any case I would keep it as a backup and go with a 610 or a Df (my personal choice).<br>

<br />Rick H.</p>

[Two23]

<p><<I wonder how good AF has to be in a wedding shoot.>></p>

<p>As someone who does them, my experience is the more solid the AF performance, the better. There are times (the dance, the reception) when the light is low and the AF module of the D7100/D800 is absolutely what you want. Many candid photo ops are fleeting and have a camera that will lock focus instantly can make the difference between a great shot and a near miss. The D7100 will focus by moonlight, and I've actually used that a few times for a couple of night weddings. I assume a D800 will do the same. As for D700/failure, what I would NOT want to do is even have to worry about it. I would not relish having to rely on a six or seven year old electronic camera in a clutch. All in all, for me it still comes down to having identical bodies so I don't even have to think about where this or that button is--I just shoot it. My fingers know where all the buttons are. I concentrate on nailing those fleeting shots.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i wasnt suggesting that a d610 was incapable of handling wedding shoots, just that it has worse AF than the d700 (and d7100). if you shoot a lot of quick action or in low-light, that's important.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>I just don't know why one would worry about it. Its a great second camera. Even a first camera. The camera's been out for 6 or 7 years, doesn't mean that's how old his camera is. Very dependable. But you can spend all the cash you want to for that extra piece of mind if you need it for your back-up.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>And I should add, that if its bad condition, then of course you don't want to have to rely on it. But generally these cameras if not thrashed, are very dependable.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>if you consider that the d700 occupied the same price point/market segment as the d610 currently does (entry-level FX), the decision to put a lesser AF module in the d610 is essentially crippling it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Eric, you know very well that the D700 was $3000 when it was originally introduced. Now that the D800 occupies that price point.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, the D600 was $2100 when introduced and the D610 $2000. They are about 1/3 cheaper than the D700 and are overall lower-grade DSLRs but newer models. For example, the D300, D700, and D800 have the 10-pin accessory connector that is on all higher-end Nikon DSLRs while the D600, D610, Df, D7100, and D7000 don't.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>i think the OP should know what they're getting before investing further</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Absolutely. There is no question that the D610 is a lower grade DSLR than the D700. Nikon deliberately puts a lower-grade AF module on the D600/D610 to differentiate it from the D800/D800E. However, suggesting something is crippled means it is partially disabled, not quite useable. I see people call the D7100 "crippled" all the time too because it has a shallow buffer; meanwhile, I use it to photograph wildlife on a regular basis with good results while my D300 and D7000 sit idly on the shelf.</p>

<p>I find calling the D600's AF system "crippled" very misleading to the OP as well as other people reading this thread. That is unhelpful and is why I am calling this out.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Maybe a clean used D4?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe a clean used D4?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You would be talking about somewhere around $4500 to $5500.</p>

<p>A couple of days ago I bumped into someone using a D4. He told me that he bought it used from B&H about a month ago for $4500. It turns out to have only some 2800+ shutter actuations. However, prices I have seen from a few well known stores seem to be a little higher than that.</p>

[mccosh]

<p>With no disrespect to anyone. There has been a lot of discussion on here about how the AF system on the D600 / D610 has been crippling to the camera. What I would like to know is how many of these people who have claimed this have actually used the camera or are they just speculating that it must be from the specs.</p>

<p>As an owner of a D600 for over a year now and having shot over 30 wedding's with it in that time I have never once been let down by the auto focus on the D600. Even shooting in candle light. The D600 is a great camera and my camera of choice for wedding photography. I personally discarded the D800 as the file size is too large as far as I am concerned for weddings and would just slow up my editing processes as well as requiring larger storage and larger USB Flash Drives for my clients.<br /><br />I agree that since the OP has already got a D800 then the best option for them is to get a second D800 as familiarity with your gear is critical for a wedding photographer. But having said that it is my view and personal experience that the D600 / D610 is very capable camera for wedding photography and the AF system does not effect the operation of this camera in anyway for shooting weddings. <br /><br /><br>

John<br>

</p>

[alan_bessler_sr]

<p>I actually own a D610 and I find the focus performance to be very good indeed. I believe as you say how many complainers actually own a D610? Not many I'm sure.</p>

[bob_bill]

<p>John and Alan, I sometimes hear similar complaints on 1.4 lenses. I think in many cases it's the 12 inches behind the camera that creates many issues. Do you two spot focus using only one focus point. Do you focus on an area of contrast as opposed to an area of uniform contrast? On the d700 I can send it hunting for focus if I try to focus on an area with no contrast but if I shift the spot to a contrast area, ie, the eye lid to eye line, instant focus even in low light and right where I want it. </p>

[mccosh]

<p>Hi Bob,</p>

<p>Depends what I am shooting as to how I have my focus set up. I use the user settings to quickly switch from both these options.</p>

<p>U1 - Weddings and outdoor portraits - Camera set to Back Focus on just the center focus point, as I need to be in complete control on what the camera is going to focus on especially when using shallow depth of field.</p>

<p>U2 - Studio shots. As the camera is set on Manual mode with a high aperture and my subjects are pretty much at the same distance from the camera, I leave my camera on standard focus using the shutter button and 39 points. Unless I am trying to be creative then I will switch back to back Focus and single point.</p>

<p>I agree that you need to focus on the edge of something with some contrast then your focus will snap into focus. But this is the same for any focus system on any digital camera and should be second nature to focus on an area with contrast. I just do it automatically that I don't even think about it.</p>

<p>John</p>