| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/08/2009 05:19:03 PM · #1 |
| I'm in serious need of a full-frame body and the D700 is the logical choice. My only concern is whether or not a "D700x" or something like that is on the horizon? There are always rumors obviously, but when can we reasonably expect a successor/replacement to come out from Nikon? I know there are lots of hardware junkies around here so someone must know something! :) |
|
|
|
09/08/2009 06:00:15 PM · #2 |
| You can alway Google Nikon D700x and find all sorts of rumors about it... |
|
|
|
09/08/2009 06:46:19 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by peterish:
I'm in serious need of a full-frame body and the D700 is the logical choice. My only concern is whether or not a "D700x" or something like that is on the horizon? There are always rumors obviously, but when can we reasonably expect a successor/replacement to come out from Nikon? I know there are lots of hardware junkies around here so someone must know something! :) |
Do you NEED more than 12MP? Why is a "full frame" in serious need?
One surprise I had when doing from a D300 to a D700. The D700 are far more sharper and seems to have much more detail. At base ISO both sharpening at 3, 12 or 14 loss less raw, processed in CNX2.
My only concern about the D700X is that the price of the D700 will go down a lot, making it more affordable.'
The noise levels of the D700 are not much better than the D300, D90 and D5000, it just is able to retain more detail.
BTW, if you are getting a D700, you're gonna need to be prepared to get used to the new matrix metering behavior. And the "point and shoot" like highlight role off.
Message edited by author 2009-09-08 18:47:42.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2009 07:36:00 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by ben4345:
The noise levels of the D700 are not much better than the D300, D90 and D5000, it just is able to retain more detail.
BTW, if you are getting a D700, you're gonna need to be prepared to get used to the new matrix metering behavior. And the "point and shoot" like highlight role off. |
1) What you mean noise levels are the same for a D700 and D90? I must not be understanding you right.
2) I've heard people complaining about the meter overexposing shots. That's ok since it seems to be a consistent error so exposure comp could probably take care of that. Besides, I'll be shooting mostly manual anyway. |
|
|
|
09/08/2009 07:54:59 PM · #5 |
This site has a detailed comparison of noise between the D700 and D300. In general, the objective and measurable noise performance of the D700 is superior.
I believe the D90 uses basically the same sensor as the D300
This dynamic range discussion is interesting, and be sure to read to the bottom--2 stops of RAW headroom in the d700 as compared with others....
Message edited by author 2009-09-08 20:00:54. |
|
|
|
09/08/2009 08:01:12 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by peterish:
Originally posted by ben4345:
The noise levels of the D700 are not much better than the D300, D90 and D5000, it just is able to retain more detail.
BTW, if you are getting a D700, you're gonna need to be prepared to get used to the new matrix metering behavior. And the "point and shoot" like highlight role off. |
1) What you mean noise levels are the same for a D700 and D90? I must not be understanding you right.
2) I've heard people complaining about the meter overexposing shots. That's ok since it seems to be a consistent error so exposure comp could probably take care of that. Besides, I'll be shooting mostly manual anyway. |
The, "OMG the D700 has so much less noise and shiznits" is not 100% true. Better? Yes. How? It has more details (sharpness) at high ISO's. But Grain for grain, I find that the D700 is a small advantage.
The metering isn't "bad" but it takes awhile to get used to. I shot with the D300 since the day it came out. I learned to rely on the D300's matrix metering almost 100%, it isn't perfect but it was very predictable. So learning the D700's matrix metering is a bit frustrating to me.
Here is an example, I am taking a snap shot of some one in the shade, on a bright sunny day. My D300 would about nail the exposure, blowing out the backround and exposing the person in the shade a usable level. The D700 would blow out the background AND cause my subject to be a silhouette. Highlights tend to feel more "chopped off" with the D700.
The -.3 comp all the time doesn't work very well, the metering to me will unpredictably get it right. Hence if you have -.3 comp dialed in, you will under expose.
I hope my insight helps.
Also, be aware of many D700 owners in denial of ANY problems, they get VERY upset if you point out any problems with the D700.
Originally posted by chromeydome:
This site has a detailed comparison of noise between the D700 and D300. In general, the objective and measurable noise performance of the D700 is superior.
I believe the D90 uses basically the same sensor as the D300
This dynamic range discussion is interesting, and be sure to read to the bottom--2 stops of RAW headroom in the d700 as compared with others.... |
Labtests, Labtests, Labtests, Labtests, Labtests, Labtests, Labtests....
=
Meaningless, Meaningless, Meaningless, Meaningless, Meaningless, Meaningless, Meaningless....
Oh, and why is there only a hand full of sources claiming better DR?
Message edited by author 2009-09-08 20:04:10.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2009 08:04:56 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
This site has a detailed comparison of noise between the D700 and D300. In general, the objective and measurable noise performance of the D700 is superior.
I believe the D90 uses basically the same sensor as the D300 |
I have a hard time believing that website... I'd like to see an exact protocol for the data analysis shown in their plots. I can't see why the D700 would have noise levels even comparable to the D300. The D700 came out after the D300 AND it has pixels which are 1.5^2 = 2.25 times larger. Each pixel essentially gathers 2.25 times more light. Of course, the sensor noise might be limited by the electronics, but it would still be surprising that the D300 would perform better at ISO 800 to 3200.
Also, there's something sketchy about the D300 noise being lower at ISO 800 than at ISO 400. That just freaks me out... |
|
|
|
09/08/2009 08:26:36 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by labuda:
Originally posted by chromeydome:
This site has a detailed comparison of noise between the D700 and D300. In general, the objective and measurable noise performance of the D700 is superior.
I believe the D90 uses basically the same sensor as the D300 |
I have a hard time believing that website... I'd like to see an exact protocol for the data analysis shown in their plots. I can't see why the D700 would have noise levels even comparable to the D300. The D700 came out after the D300 AND it has pixels which are 1.5^2 = 2.25 times larger. Each pixel essentially gathers 2.25 times more light. Of course, the sensor noise might be limited by the electronics, but it would still be surprising that the D300 would perform better at ISO 800 to 3200.
Also, there's something sketchy about the D300 noise being lower at ISO 800 than at ISO 400. That just freaks me out... |
They test based on default settings, that means the D300, D90, and D5000. Have lower noise because the noise reduction kicks in at ISO800, that is default for those cameras.
D700 is default with "off"
|
|
|
|
09/08/2009 08:42:20 PM · #9 |
I wrinkled my nose when I saw that ISO comparison. My D300 performs better than that. *pats the camera on its hot shoe*.
Anyway, a D700s seems like a much more believable rumour than a D700x. I for one don't think we'll see a D700x.
The way I see it (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that the D3x is a "bordering to medium format" camera. It has a mirror flipping up and down at 5fps, but that's more or less it. It has fantastic detail and is useless at higher ISO than 800. Sounds like a lower end medium format to me. Splendid camera for fashion shooters and extreme landscape artists, so I don't think that sensor in a smaller body is very likely.
D700s as they did with D300s, seems logical. Adding video, boosting the fps and maybe the buffer, maybe better noise performances, that's more like it. But I do wish they could come up with an affordable camera that could outshine the 5dmkII... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:25:24 PM EDT.
