D700 - The LESS perfect stuff

[chanjyj]

Hmm.. the video is in a not easily understandable language for me... ;p
It's hard to believe because we know in the past only single digit F bodies have 100% VF, so I guess the anti-dust is just an excuse because that's what lacking in the D3.

The alignment accuracy is a more likely reason to have only a 95% VF.

Besides alignment I think stuffing a larger prism in might be problematic? For them to be able to fit everything FX into a D300 body might have posed some "internal limits". As it is, I see the selector switch for matrix, CW, spot has shifted position too.

And yah.. I don't like less-than-100% viewfinders. On my D40 D80 etc etc I tolerated it because those were lower end one. But for the D200 not to have a 100% viewfinder... so I didn't buy it. so my poolstock of cameras has a noticeable gap in them, the DXXX series. Only kept DXX and DXs/h. With the advent of the D300 with a 100% viewfinder, and a battery life way above the D200 I decided to get it instead of a D3.. for the first time.

As for the free D3, I load it out of my "poolstock" to my assistants. They only shoot at short focal lengths. For me, I still the the enhanced crop factor of DX for the telephoto side. I cannot afford to go buy new telephotos for FX!

 

[gooseberry]

Another would be a 100% viewfinder, or lack of.

They put one in a D300 and remove it for the D700? By golly, if not for this I would have bought the D700.

In practical shooting, never really found not having a 100% viewfinder too much of an issue - even back in the film days, the F100 only had a 96% viewfinder. If you want 100% accuracy, can always use liveview. Think even with suppsoed 100% viewfinder coverage, don't think you're guaranteed of getting a 100% accurate view - however you can be sure with live view what you're viewing is 100% what you'll get.

What was more important was that the viewfinder alignment was accurate - I've found some cameras to have this off by a few degrees (my D70 for example), so you're pictures ending up being not exactly aligned properly - ended up relying on spirit levels - nowadays live view can help too.

Anyway, below is an image I saw on the net comparing different sized viewfinders from different cameras - gives a good comparison of what you can expect when looking at the viewfinder. With the D700 since it is 0.72x 95% vs the D3 of 0.7x 100%, objects in the D700 viewfinder actually appear slightly bigger than on the D3, just that you have less coverage around the edges. Not too much of a difference between the two. All the others being smaller because of DX or APS-C sized.

From L to R: D3 (FX, 100%, 0,7x), D700 (FX 95%, 0,72x), D300 (100%, 0,94x), Canon 40D (95%, 0,95x), Sony Alpha 350 (95%, 0,74x)
image from http://shrani.si/

 

[mcn]

wah, sister

u just pull pics from the net and post here...

boleh tak ? :dunno:

better give debit to the owner

 

[chngpe01]

I really don't find any issues with the 95% VF all these years and neither do my clients. Not that they will only pay me 95% cos my viewfinder is 95%.

I just find that it is nit picking. Just go and shoot and enjoy the camera or go and make some $ out of it. If 95% not happy than pay more get the D3 lol

 

[gooseberry]

wah, sister

u just pull pics from the net and post here...

boleh tak ? :dunno:

better give debit to the owner

ok girlfriend, for the lazy sisters I've edited to put the URL of the host so that you don't have to right click on the image to know where it came from

 

[chisiang]

wah lao eh... what's all this sister girlfriend calling business? :bsmilie:

for me, any VF is still better than the pin hole D70 VF? Anyone got a smaller VF than D70? :bsmilie: and the LCD screen is smaller than some stamps :sweat:

 

[ortega]

if you have time, the nice 3" LCD is 100%

and i believe that the % is about how much of the resulting frame you see in your viewfinder and not the magnification of the image in the viewfinder

 

[ortega]

wah lao eh... what's all this sister girlfriend calling business? :bsmilie:

for me, any VF is still better than the pin hole D70 VF? Anyone got a smaller VF than D70? :bsmilie: and the LCD screen is smaller than some stamps :sweat:

yeah i remember the peephole of my D70

 

[yyD70S]

Don't remind me of pinholes & peepholes. I'll still stuck with it. :cry:

Anyway, looking forward to more test from chisiang.

 

[chanjyj]

I really don't find any issues with the 95% VF all these years and neither do my clients. Not that they will only pay me 95% cos my viewfinder is 95%.

I just find that it is nit picking. Just go and shoot and enjoy the camera or go and make some $ out of it. If 95% not happy than pay more get the D3 lol

No practical issues for most users. For me it is because I frame until the edge so I like 100% viewfinders. Then usually when I use the lower end bodies I end up cropping and wasting alot of time - I guess can call it bad habit of mine. My bad.

 

[theRBK]

for me, any VF is still better than the pin hole D70 VF? Anyone got a smaller VF than D70? :bsmilie: and the LCD screen is smaller than some stamps :sweat:

my old Oly E-10's might be smaller... haven't used a D70 so can't tell definitively... tiny LCD as well... but that was a camera from many many years ago before the D70... ;p

 

[chanjyj]

my old Oly E-10's might be smaller... haven't used a D70 so can't tell definitively... tiny LCD as well... but that was a camera from many many years ago before the D70... ;p

:bsmilie::bsmilie:

My old Canon EOS 500N was the best - can hardly see anything. Couple that with a cheap kit lens that I use for light work (I always carry a camera with me everywhere).. and the viewfinder turns... grey.

 

[chngpe01]

No practical issues for most users. For me it is because I frame until the edge so I like 100% viewfinders. Then usually when I use the lower end bodies I end up cropping and wasting alot of time - I guess can call it bad habit of mine. My bad.

Any working pro, will apart from getting exposure etc correct in-camera will also frame to the desire output. Not to waste time cropping and post processing unnecessarily, basically for efficient and fast workflow, the maxim of faster delivery=faster invoicing= faster revenue recognition. But to crop of the 5% because of 95% VF ? wow I have never been that precise, fortunately I never have this "habit" of "nitpicking framing" anyway to each his own, as long as "huat ah" can already lah.

I shall not OT or else have to infraction myself ;p

 

[theRBK]

at the risk of OTing as well :embrass:

for a Pro, it depends on what the shoot is about... for events and products, maybe its ok to shoot as tight as possible... but for some advertising campaigns or advertorials or other stuff, sometimes after the shoot is done and images approved on set, the art director/direct client/some lacky or other/the lacky's lacky might call up and ask if they could have some extra space on the side/can we graft something in from another shot/can we clone something in... :angry::sweat:

but back on the D700, I don't think the lack of 100% VF is that bad a deal... they did make it big and bright so that's good... at least that's the case for me

 

[mismis]

Hmm. I remember reading somewhere that the viewfinder frame coverage is essentially only 90%

 

[Ansel]

wah lao eh... what's all this sister girlfriend calling business? :bsmilie:

for me, any VF is still better than the pin hole D70 VF? Anyone got a smaller VF than D70? :bsmilie: and the LCD screen is smaller than some stamps :sweat:

e

Ahhem....I have great respect for the d70 because for it's day it was as good as can be, especially the price made it possible for me to own a DSLR, and I dare say it to be true for many of us here. I humbly salute the D70 for its contribution to my photography.

Well, I also must say the the D700 is many leaps and bounds better than the D70. And like all IT product, it will always have it's bugs but they should be fixable with firmware upgrades.

To complain that the D700 is too small, no grip, etc, well my Porche 911 also has a very serious flaw: I can only take one passenger other myself. But I'm not complaining.

 

[Zenten]

e

Ahhem....I have great respect for the d70 because for it's day it was as good as can be, especially the price made it possible for me to own a DSLR, and I dare say it to be true for many of us here. I humbly salute the D70 for its contribution to my photography.

Well, I also must say the the D700 is many leaps and bounds better than the D70. And like all IT product, it will always have it's bugs but they should be fixable with firmware upgrades.

To complain that the D700 is too small, no grip, etc, well my Porche 911 also has a very serious flaw: I can only take one passenger other myself. But I'm not complaining.

Bro, it doesn't seem right leh.... ahem ......:think: You own a Porsche and you actually say that you barely started off with a D70 .............. yours must have been some kinda rags-to-riches story .......

 

[mcn]

next, she'll tell u she drives the f1 fellali... so say sorry to eveyone...
can't take any passengers as only 1-seat

 

[Ansel]

Bro, it doesn't seem right leh.... ahem ......:think: You own a Porsche and you actually say that you barely started off with a D70 .............. yours must have been some kinda rags-to-riches story .......

It was only a hypothetical comparison, please don't take it too seriously. One day....one day, I will order that 911. And yes, I will not complain.

 

[Ansel]

next, she'll tell u she drives the f1 fellali... so say sorry to eveyone...
can't take any passengers as only 1-seat

Auntie, every one can share my experience via the built-in cameras all over the F1 car.

Sorry TS and all, I shall not OT anymore. :embrass: