D300 or wait for D700

[fabianaino]

Now I am deliberating ... D200 is selling like hotcakes off the shelves. D300 seems like the very best crop frame camera at the moment. I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame.

NOW barely one month later after I heard that Nikon has the D700, and I dare say better than the direct competition ( unless the comp comes up with something better ) hehe ...

Now I am thinking should I wait for the D700 or just purchase the D300 since I have the 12-24mm, 17-55mm, 70-200, 50mm, 60mm, and 18-200. :think: If I do go for D700 there's 2 more lens to sell and 2 more lens to buy, I would probabaly keep the 18-200 for my current body.

When I think abt these, I go alittle crazy :sweatsm:

I need some mature advices from all the pros here ... please ... :sweat:

 

[CYRN]

tink you should do for the D3 instead.:devil:

 

[Leong23]

Do you really need a FF camera at this moment?

Or just because of this statement "I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame."

 

[fabianaino]

tink you should do for the D3 instead.:devil:

:sweat:

Do you really need a FF camera at this moment?

Or just because of this statement "I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame."

you got a point ... I feel like slapping them on the face as well ... lol

 

[yyD70S]

In my life, needs and wants almost always differ.

To keep it short...

I don't need FF. I want it.

I don't need to be a billionaire. I want it.

Do you really need a FF camera at this moment?

Or just because of this statement "I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame."

 

[btfiend]

I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame.

Going by his logic, those who shoot on 4x5 must be super duper good :bsmilie:

 

[ziiz01]

I'm no pro here
if you think you need all the possibilities from D700,grab it
As for me,if FF is concern,I rather go for pro body like D3
don't have to worry about the extra grip (just me)

 

[D60D60]

tink you should do for the D3 instead.:devil:

agree!!:thumbsup: :bsmilie::bsmilie:.......fabianaino....you can afford lens, invest more in D3 n rest your worries liao....hehehehe

 

[Leong23]

Ya, a D3 + 14-24mm f/2.8 + 24-70 f/2.8 will rest your worries.

 

[Leong23]

Ok, back to topic...

Maybe you should consider the type of photography you are heading for either one.

Example:
If you like portrait, FF will be very good.
Birding or Macro, Current DX still have a upper hand due to the 1.5x magnification.

 

[knpan]

It is a totally different camera for different needs so you should ask yourself, if you are a wide guy or a tele person

 

[fabianaino]

agree!!:thumbsup: :bsmilie::bsmilie:.......fabianaino....you can afford lens, invest more in D3 n rest your worries liao....hehehehe

No lar I can oly afford the 5-1 reflector from you ... hehe

Ok, back to topic...

Maybe you should consider the type of photography you are heading for either one.

Example:
If you like portrait, FF will be very good.
Birding or Macro, Current DX still have a upper hand due to the 1.5x magnification.

These days I am doing more people shots, though the 70-200 for portraits shots are good as well. Birding and insects are not really my thing. But I do like to take landscape and nightscape as well.

It is a totally different camera for different needs so you should ask yourself, if you are a wide guy or a tele person

I think I am 60% wide and 40% telepo. :sweat:

Going by his logic, those who shoot on 4x5 must be super duper good :bsmilie:

I think I made a mistake by posting his comment on the FF cam and being pro here ... I don't mean to demean any one who's thinking abt a FF. I just felt that if he would have waited for alittle longer, he wouldn't have to sell his whole arsenal and go for a dated technology.

more thoughts.....D300 is the King of Crop factor now but the D700 will always be in the shadows of D3 for being a FF, much like 5D will always be in the shadows of 1D ....

 

[ortega]

to me, i do not really need the FF sensor as i shoot mostly telephoto and my WA shots are served by my 17mm

the main plus point of the D3/D700 that attracts me is the amazing low noise with Hi ISO.
this alone will enable me to do things that my current camera cannot.

 

[grandmama]

the reasons I Want a full frame are that

I am a sucker for "bokeh". So naturally a FF has a big advantage per focal length. This is especially obvious at the wider angles.

2nd, i use prime lenses. I was a film shooter, and I am accustomed to say 28, 35, 50, 85 perspectives. To get the same perspectives I found myself making all kinds of weird compromises , like using a 20mm as roughly 28, using 24 as roughly 35, using 35 as roughly 50, which is an expensive way to do things, and depth of field suffers big time. I missed those 35/f2 shots I got on my old nikons and leicas. With the crop factor everything just looks FLAT. I get the same perspective, but it doesnt look as nice anymore. This consideration may not apply to everybody though, espeically you use zoom lenses.

And one big draw is of course absolute picture quality itself, and I dont mean resolution. People who are used to film hunger for the tonal richness and range of film. I see a bigger sensor having that advantage.

Noise is not an issue, because 1600 film is noisier than many digital camera images nowadays anyway. BUT it is the LOOK of the grain that makes a difference. I am never so concerned about getting noiseless images, but film-like grains. I've heard good things about the "filmy" look of D3 at higher iso. Thats a draw.

 

[yyD70S]

Fast forward one digital year and we "may" be hit by an FX DSLR at current D300 price but the build and weight of the current D80 bundled witha a DX crop megapix count of that of the D50/70S.

Good evening.

 

[asdfg]

Now I am deliberating ... D200 is selling like hotcakes off the shelves. D300 seems like the very best crop frame camera at the moment. I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame.

NOW barely one month later after I heard that Nikon has the D700, and I dare say better than the direct competition ( unless the comp comes up with something better ) hehe ...

Now I am thinking should I wait for the D700 or just purchase the D300 since I have the 12-24mm, 17-55mm, 70-200, 50mm, 60mm, and 18-200. :think: If I do go for D700 there's 2 more lens to sell and 2 more lens to buy, I would probabaly keep the 18-200 for my current body.

When I think abt these, I go alittle crazy :sweatsm:

I need some mature advices from all the pros here ... please ... :sweat:

A full frame camera doesn't make a good photographer, and truly good photographers don't need full frame cause they make do with what they have. FF and DX have their benefits so its best you weigh them but I prefer DX because i like wildlife photography. As for wideangle a sigma 10-20mm or Tokina 11-16mm is pretty much wide enough for me, and if say the next Full frame Pro model has ISO 51200, thats 3 stops above the max ISO of 6400 on the D300 and I guess 3 stops doesn't exactly justify a FF upgrade for me. Other benefits like bokeh etc aren't a big deal just yet. If you want a FF camera the D700 is great, the D3 better but everything depends on money doesn't it.

 

[theRBK]

horses for courses...

like ortega and asdfg mentioned, if one stays with telephoto more, a DX camera might be advantageous... as well as for situations where more depth of field and pixel density might be useful like in macro shooting... the advantage for FX would be in wider coverage for a given lens and at the moment superior ISO performance...

as for bokeh or the quality of the out of focus rendition, I don't think that is affected by focal length but by lens design, all else being equal... this gets mixed up with the ability to reduce the depth of field to render backgrounds out of focus... anyway, the apparent difference between FX and DX depth of field is dependent on angle of coverage rather than focal length... with the same lens and shooting the same scene at the same position, both FX and DX should have the same depth of field, but obviously the FX camera would capture a wider area...

and if depth of field selectiveness and absolute quality is most important and money is no object, why stop at FX... the term full frame by itself is a misnomer cause there are certainly bigger sensors out there... "pros" can always try shooting the new Hassey H3DII50's back with a 4x5 camera... and rumours of full 645 format sensors are spreading ;p

like I said, horses for courses... bottom line, buy what you need, not what someone says pros are shooting with

 

[anarkia]

Now I am deliberating ... D200 is selling like hotcakes off the shelves. D300 seems like the very best crop frame camera at the moment. I met a Nikon photographer ditching his N for a C....going for 5D cos he mentioned that ALL good photographers uses a full frame.

NOW barely one month later after I heard that Nikon has the D700, and I dare say better than the direct competition ( unless the comp comes up with something better ) hehe ...

Now I am thinking should I wait for the D700 or just purchase the D300 since I have the 12-24mm, 17-55mm, 70-200, 50mm, 60mm, and 18-200. :think: If I do go for D700 there's 2 more lens to sell and 2 more lens to buy, I would probabaly keep the 18-200 for my current body.

When I think abt these, I go alittle crazy :sweatsm:

I need some mature advices from all the pros here ... please ... :sweat:

Bro your D80 is good enough. Your collection of lens is already powerful! :bsmilie:
Photography is expensive. Used it untill it is broken into many pieces then change ma!
I do wedding, i have seen many pro wedding photog using D80..and have a very good portfolio. "from what i think"

 

[Big Kahuna]

Unless you have budget constraint or desperately needed a semi pro body, I rather wait or buy a D40x for stop gap, the trend is FF and everybody will eat, sleep, talk about FF(although it might not improve your photography)....you can't help it and sooner or later will itch to lay your hand on one to stay relevant :lovegrin:

I do mostly traveling and landscape....so D700 is what I long dreaming for....hope it's properly priced when it roll out here :lovegrin:

 

[fabianaino]

the reasons I Want a full frame are that

I am a sucker for "bokeh". So naturally a FF has a big advantage per focal length. This is especially obvious at the wider angles.

2nd, i use prime lenses. I was a film shooter, and I am accustomed to say 28, 35, 50, 85 perspectives. To get the same perspectives I found myself making all kinds of weird compromises , like using a 20mm as roughly 28, using 24 as roughly 35, using 35 as roughly 50, which is an expensive way to do things, and depth of field suffers big time. I missed those 35/f2 shots I got on my old nikons and leicas. With the crop factor everything just looks FLAT. I get the same perspective, but it doesnt look as nice anymore. This consideration may not apply to everybody though, espeically you use zoom lenses.

And one big draw is of course absolute picture quality itself, and I dont mean resolution. People who are used to film hunger for the tonal richness and range of film. I see a bigger sensor having that advantage.

Noise is not an issue, because 1600 film is noisier than many digital camera images nowadays anyway. BUT it is the LOOK of the grain that makes a difference. I am never so concerned about getting noiseless images, but film-like grains. I've heard good things about the "filmy" look of D3 at higher iso. Thats a draw.

actually I am now trying to fall in love with the "noise look". And talking about perspectives wise, I realised that I lost alot of FOV between a crop and a FF. When I first compare a 17mm in both camera, within seconds it was a WOW to me. I was losing so much through a crop lens.

I am not so much concen abt tonal range if I am show my photos to ther people so long as it stays within reach of most current LCD screens now I am satisified. if the cilent screen is lower res than mine, they couldn't see it anyway. The issue now lies with printing the work. Does most printer supports a wide gamut?

Bro your D80 is good enough. Your collection of lens is already powerful! :bsmilie:
Photography is expensive. Used it untill it is broken into many pieces then change ma!
I do wedding, i have seen many pro wedding photog using D80..and have a very good portfolio. "from what i think"

Thanks bro. Ya I spent on them hoping to keep them for a loooong time. =)

horses for courses...

like ortega and asdfg mentioned, if one stays with telephoto more, a DX camera might be advantageous... as well as for situations where more depth of field and pixel density might be useful like in macro shooting... the advantage for FX would be in wider coverage for a given lens and at the moment superior ISO performance...

as for bokeh or the quality of the out of focus rendition, I don't think that is affected by focal length but by lens design, all else being equal... this gets mixed up with the ability to reduce the depth of field to render backgrounds out of focus... anyway, the apparent difference between FX and DX depth of field is dependent on angle of coverage rather than focal length... with the same lens and shooting the same scene at the same position, both FX and DX should have the same depth of field, but obviously the FX camera would capture a wider area...

and if depth of field selectiveness and absolute quality is most important and money is no object, why stop at FX... the term full frame by itself is a misnomer cause there are certainly bigger sensors out there... "pros" can always try shooting the new Hassey H3DII50's back with a 4x5 camera... and rumours of full 645 format sensors are spreading

like I said, horses for courses... bottom line, buy what you need, not what someone says pros are shooting with

Money is THE object.... lol

Unless you have budget constraint or desperately needed a semi pro body, I rather wait or buy a D40x for stop gap, the trend is FF and everybody will eat, sleep, talk about FF(although it might not improve your photography)....you can't help it and sooner or later will itch to lay your hand on one to stay relevant :lovegrin:

I do mostly traveling and landscape....so D700 is what I long dreaming for....hope it's properly priced when it roll out here :lovegrin:

Actually I am very impressed by the photos taken by the nationa geograpic photographers. Some of the photos has a very bright lit background and the subject was directly infront of the light. With no flash involved viewers are still able to make out the details on the subject.

Does this got to do with the metering of the camera of just very fast lens?