Does D700 have enough edge over D7K?

[night86mare]

I think what you said below is bold too. It's not fair for the users of D700 who expressed their user experience here, based on your pure observation.

well, if those unhappy d700 owners that claim that dxomark is not correct, and that their quantifiable, controlled tests are rubbish.....

would bother to do a proper comparison... i'm sure they would have a friend or two with the d7K.... to debunk these tests...

i think we'll be more than happy to accept their opinion.

otherwise, it's like having a good academic test being carried out (in controlled conditions, with quantifiable results and proper testing conditions) with the conclusion that coke is better than pepsi for your health... and then the pepsi lovers just sit there and repeat themselves that "it is wrong, pepsi is better" (because we say so and because we love it, yeah yeah yeah).

taken another way, it is like the owner of a canon 1d mark II sitting around and claiming that his camera's noise performance is superior to the 7d of today.

 

[akerue]

ppl ppl why cant we just get along....:bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[daredevil123]

ppl ppl why cant we just get along....:bsmilie::bsmilie:

and all this time Canikon is laughing all the way to the bank. :bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[kentwong81]

oklar, nikon, canon, sony, pentax, olympus, samsung, panasonic, sigma, leica all every model very best best :thumbsup:
no more argument. i've learned something new now.
go happy shooting.

ps: the sequence of the brand names above doesn't mean any rankings.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

I think what you said below is bold too. It's not fair for the users of D700 who expressed their user experience here, based on your pure observation.



Okay, based on your statement, we Clubsnappers here are better not to make any comment on any camera model because only the brand CEOs and R&D Head have the rights to comment(I believe neither coz they work for shareholders only, not consumers).
And now I have realised there is no common sense as everyone can make their own sense. You have your sense and I have mine. You can't say me wrong and I can't say you wrong too.

Regarding your last question, you also can ask those D7000 buyers who have made comparison against D300s and D700 whether they want to feel good inside. I believe I've made my points clear enough.

haiyah... my point has been misunderstood. Certainly you have the right to make your opinions heard. This is a forum after all.

If you wanna make any 'predictions' about the future range of cameras being better/worse, do make it a point to state that it is your personal opinion. I may be nitpicking, but I believe there is a difference between
a) "I have confidence that D700 replacement will be superior to D7000"
and
b) "D700 replacement will be superior to D7000"

There are a large number of personal review threads for various products on CS that don't receive negative feedback but encourage healthy discussion.

Like you said, there's no right and wrong. You think D700 is superior, and others think D7000 is superior. But everyone has a different set of criteria upon which they judge 'superiority', so do keep an open mind and allow for that.

 

[kentwong81]

my judgements are based on common sense from business point of view, like men don't wear skirts, but the scottish do, they are minority. Common sense are not always right, but they are normally right most of the time. Most of time when we talk in this forum, we tend to talk casually rather than making serious statement like giving shareholders report. Why so serious brother?
If D700 replacement is not superior to D7000, I would say it's a disaster for Nikon from the business point of view. Common sense brother......

haiyah... my point has been misunderstood. Certainly you have the right to make your opinions heard. This is a forum after all.

If you wanna make any 'predictions' about the future range of cameras being better/worse, do make it a point to state that it is your personal opinion. I may be nitpicking, but I believe there is a difference between
a) "I have confidence that D700 replacement will be superior to D7000"
and
b) "D700 replacement will be superior to D7000"

There are a large number of personal review threads for various products on CS that don't receive negative feedback but encourage healthy discussion.

Like you said, there's no right and wrong. You think D700 is superior, and others think D7000 is superior. But everyone has a different set of criteria upon which they judge 'superiority', so do keep an open mind and allow for that.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

my judgements are based on common sense from business point of view, like men don't wear skirts, but the scottish do, they are minority. Common sense are not always right, but they are normally right most of the time. Most of time when we talk in this forum, we tend to talk casually rather than making serious statement like giving shareholders report. Why so serious brother?
If D700 replacement is not superior to D7000, I would say it's a disaster for Nikon from the business point of view. Common sense brother......

as someone once told me, "common sense is not so common" :bsmilie:

For all we know, Nikon might shock everyone and decide to concentrate on DX for now. Maybe it's more profitable for them, which would be considered "common sense, from a business point of view". Though I feel it is unlikely this will happen, we can't rule it out.

anyway the thread has gone off-topic already...


to those still reading this thread because of the title,
D700 or D7000, which is better? Read the reviews, try both and decide for yourself

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

my judgements are based on common sense from business point of view, like men don't wear skirts, but the scottish do, they are minority. Common sense are not always right, but they are normally right most of the time. Most of time when we talk in this forum, we tend to talk casually rather than making serious statement like giving shareholders report. Why so serious brother?
If D700 replacement is not superior to D7000, I would say it's a disaster for Nikon from the business point of view. Common sense brother......

I dunno if you know this, but if anyone crosses the line on a forum and makes politically or racially-charged statements for example, you can be held accountable in a court of law. So there is a level of seriousness there.

To me, making bold statements as though it is factual, simply raises tension levels from supporters of both opposing opinions. That's how brand/model wars start...
So I would say "why bother to make those statements in the first place?"

 

[daredevil123]

as someone once told me, "common sense is not so common" :bsmilie:

For all we know, Nikon might shock everyone and decide to concentrate on DX for now. Maybe it's more profitable for them, which would be considered "common sense, from a business point of view". Though I feel it is unlikely this will happen, we can't rule it out.

anyway the thread has gone off-topic already...


to those still reading this thread because of the title,
D700 or D7000, which is better? Read the reviews, try both and decide for yourself

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Like how Olympus will "concentrate more" on m4/3 and "less" on 4/3 development.

Do know that DX camera bodies make up most of the sales for Nikon (and Canon) year after year. And with the new afforbility of DSLRs, DX is actually a lot more profitable (in absolute monetary value terms, not margin) business line than the FX.

 

[kentwong81]

well, it's common sense not to make politically or racially statements whether in the forum or public, i know it, thanks.
no worries, i've already learned something here. rather than saying certain model not good, i would say all is best best, just buy buy and go shooting. no waste time.
every model has it own camp of supporters :sweat:

I dunno if you know this, but if anyone crosses the line on a forum and makes politically or racially-charged statements for example, you can be held accountable in a court of law. So there is a level of seriousness there.

To me, making bold statements as though it is factual, simply raises tension levels from supporters of both opposing opinions. That's how brand/model wars start...
So I would say "why bother to make those statements in the first place?"

 

[coolthought]

I believe the people who bought D700 recently never started a thread to ask if D700 is better than D7000 or D300s in terms of high ISO performance or whatever. At least I can't find such a thread in this forum, right?
However, I've seen enough of threads started by D7000 enthusiatists to say/ask D7000 is better than D300s and D700 in this forum recently. I believe they did so to justify the price they pay for the newly launched D7000. Or no?
Yes, D700 is two-year-old model, but it is still in production. As common sense, Nikon won't make a DX camera to kill D700, but they will make the gap smaller and when the D700 replacement comes out, the gap is bigger again. That's the 2 years cycle. Chasing gear or not, it's upto individual's pocket depth and priorities in life. Some people can spend 40k in car COE, so what justify about it?

becos we stop looking at other cameras after getting a new camera and go out there to shoot. Normally, we buy camera to take photos and not use it to compare with another camera.

 

[DrSpock]

Wow, a lot of :flame: :hammer: :complain: flying around

Maybe the person who has D60, D90, D300s, D700, D3s must now go buy a D7000 and play with it before can qualify and have the authority to give opinions in this forum

Chill fellas, make :love1: NOT:kok:

 

[kentwong81]

Long term wise I'm not sure, but within these 1-3 years, the camera makers with major marketshares do still produce good full frame cameras I think. Not to say DX, even the compact cameras and m4/3 are chasing up against DX. :sweat:

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Like how Olympus will "concentrate more" on m4/3 and "less" on 4/3 development.

Do know that DX camera bodies make up most of the sales for Nikon (and Canon) year after year. And with the new afforbility of DSLRs, DX is actually a lot more profitable (in absolute monetary value terms, not margin) business line than the FX.

 

[s1221ljc]

becos we stop looking at other cameras after getting a new camera and go out there to shoot. Normally, we buy camera to take photos and not use it to compare with another camera.

Cool thoughts indeed. If we are to avoid "brand" war, we should also avoid "model" war. Its only those who like to compare to make themselves feel superior or justified that start comparison threads as to which is better, resulting in all these arguments here. Better to share technical knowledge aimed at improving skills & to go to take more photos... & stick discussions to own brand own model.

 

[daredevil123]

Long term wise I'm not sure, but within these 1-3 years, the camera makers with major marketshares do still produce good full frame cameras I think. Not to say DX, even the compact cameras and m4/3 are chasing up against DX. :sweat:

Errr... Pentax don't have FF cam... They are major too... But they have a Medium Format offering, which owns all FF cam performance now... LOL...

Sony's A900 and A850 are very very dated also.

Yes, compacts and mirrorless are coming close. Especially APS-C mirrorless, because they use the same sensor.

But with the Pentax K-5, D7000 and Sony A55, DX/APS-C is power up once again. . I believe FX/FF will receive their power up next year. I think Sony will release their A900/A850 replacement, and of course the D700 replacement... and both camps should be using the same sensor.

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

well, it's common sense not to make politically or racially statements whether in the forum or public, i know it, thanks.
no worries, i've already learned something here. rather than saying certain model not good, i would say all is best best, just buy buy and go shooting. no waste time.
every model has it own camp of supporters :sweat:

again you missed the point I was trying to make...
sigh... but anyway no point carrying on with this.

We agree to disagree, how about that? :angel:

 

[daredevil123]

Cool thoughts indeed. If we are to avoid "brand" war, we should also avoid "model" war. Its only those who like to compare to make themselves feel superior or justified that start comparison threads as to which is better, resulting in all these arguments here. Better to share technical knowledge aimed at improving skills & to go to take more photos... & stick discussions to own brand own model.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Numnumball]

So much heat and debate in this thread. What value does it serve? haiz...

Owning both models, i would say they are both good in their own way and is indispensable to me for the way and the things i shoot.. i can't be bothered to even compare the ISO performance, dynamic range etc etc.. Why? becos i know both fulfill my needs and tats all it matters. Afterall they are still only an equipment to me.. Its no value added.. We buy cam to shoot not to compare, sibeh boh liao lor.. i rather spend valuable time honing my technical and compositional skills.. Why not go out there and shoot and justify our purchase?

Note : Even if there's so much rave gg on abt hw gd D7K is.. and that its even on par with D700 or blah blah blah. The fact still remains, DX's still DX, u cant never replace FX with DX becos of 1. DOF, 2. True Wideness 3. ISO Sensitivty etc.. Bigger sensor size still prevails over most aspect..

 

[akerue]

So much heat and debate in this thread. What value does it serve? haiz...

Owning both models, i would say they are both good in their own way and is indispensable to me for the way and the things i shoot.. i can't be bothered to even compare the ISO performance, dynamic range etc etc.. Why? becos i know both fulfill my needs and tats all it matters. Afterall they are still only an equipment to me.. Its no value added.. We buy cam to shoot not to compare, sibeh boh liao lor.. i rather spend valuable time honing my technical and compositional skills.. Why not go out there and shoot and justify our purchase?

Note : Even if there's so much rave gg on abt hw gd D7K is.. and that its even on par with D700 or blah blah blah. The fact still remains, DX's still DX, u cant never replace FX with DX becos of 1. DOF, 2. True Wideness 3. ISO Sensitivty etc.. Bigger sensor size still prevails over most aspect..

:thumbsup::thumbsup: well said from someone who actually owns both model.....

 

[daredevil123]

So much heat and debate in this thread. What value does it serve? haiz...

Owning both models, i would say they are both good in their own way and is indispensable to me for the way and the things i shoot.. i can't be bothered to even compare the ISO performance, dynamic range etc etc.. Why? becos i know both fulfill my needs and tats all it matters. Afterall they are still only an equipment to me.. Its no value added.. We buy cam to shoot not to compare, sibeh boh liao lor.. i rather spend valuable time honing my technical and compositional skills.. Why not go out there and shoot and justify our purchase?

Note : Even if there's so much rave gg on abt hw gd D7K is.. and that its even on par with D700 or blah blah blah. The fact still remains, DX's still DX, u cant never replace FX with DX becos of 1. DOF, 2. True Wideness 3. ISO Sensitivty etc.. Bigger sensor size still prevails over most aspect..

Well said. Talk less, Shoot more. Then all our pictures will not suck as much.