flintflameinferno
New Member
Maybe after D800 launched, D700 can be cheaper and become "Poor man's FF DSLR"...
Wait for D800 or buy D700 now
- Thread starter Goldfishub
- Start date
Maybe after D800 launched, D700 can be cheaper and become "Poor man's FF DSLR"...
theRenaissance
Senior Member
SLR Revolution
Funan digitalife mall
109 North Bridge Road
#04-18
179097
Singapore
Do take note of the change in unit number as they have shifted down.
Goldfishub
Member
Alamak, will go check it out again.
hendralely
Member
I think most people will wait at this time, especially after seeing the DX improvement Nikon brought with D7000.
baggiolee
Senior Member
yeah right. it's rude to tell that..to people who has been waiting for D700 replacemet. feel good? then buy it? wth are you trying to say? :nono: btw, it's not easy for most people to save up enough to buy what they wanted.
and there's nothing wrong for us to wait for newer model ESP if we know what we want, what to expect and when it's coming.
Last edited:
Actually, that's quite hard to say as well. I had a similar point of view, but looking back here's how things looked:
1. In theory, the D700 should have made the D3 obsolete. It did, to a point, but the D3 is still an awesome camera to date.
2. The D3s which replaced the D3 is over twice as expensive as the D700, and the D3 was discontinued. What does this mean for buyers? Not many people will sell the D3 for that much more than a used/new D700, depending on condition. People who, based on their needs, would have bought a D3 bought a D700 instead, while action and street photographers who shot for a living and wanted the extra 1/3 stop performance, went for a D3s instead. The D3x is far more expensive but fills a different niche, so it's not even a fair comparison. Bottom line is, I wouldn't expect the D800 to be priced at the same level as the D700. I'd expect it to be priced between the D700 and the D3s, but my speculation is based on historical data. When the D7000 was released, many people expected the price of the D90 or the D300s to drop, but they didn't, at least not by much at all. Of course, one could also argue that when the D3100 was launched, demand for the D3000 plunged as the price difference wasn't much, though D5000 prices remained fairly stable since it was the only model with an articulated display.
3. As someone rightly pointed out, the D700 is more camera than most people need. My reasons for getting the D700 was for the improved low-light performance, which I have found useful for sports and concert photography, but also because I didn't see the point in getting a D300s/D7000 and then upgrading again later to an FF. It just didn't make sense to upgrade several times along the way when I could just bite the bullet once and get a decent FF. But that's just me, and others may beg to differ from that point of view. Having a built-in Commander model for remote flash triggering with CLS hasn't been a bad thing either.
Did I regret getting the D700 back in December? No. It is an amazing camera that has delivered on many occasions, and the amount of control I have within easy reach has opened up new discoveries and lessons for me. Would I buy a D800? That depends on the pricing - if it was priced no more than 20% over the D700, offered 18MP with the same low-light performance as the D3s, I would probably seriously consider getting one.
Question for the OP is, with the D3s at SGD6k+ and the D700 at SGD3k, would you buy a D800 at SGD4k? Remember that this is just for the body only, and you won't have the benefit of more affordable DX format lenses.
A couple of professional photogs I know in Dubai run a dual-body setup - one DX (usually D300/D300s) and one FX (D700/D3/D3s/D3x), and reason I brought this up is because if the price of the D800 comes up to SGD4k+, it might actually make more sense to buy a used D700 (approx SGD2.8k for a practically new one) and a used D300 (around SGD1.3k) for a really killer combo.
Last edited:
I've been told that the D7000's low-light performance is just one stop slower than the D3/D700. If so, this might be useful for many people who shoot action at night or indoors, and could do with the extra 1.6x 'reach'
You'd have to admit that baggiolee does have a point. It's like people who ask if they should wait for the next-gen Macbook Pro, iPhone 5, iPad 2, etc. The answer really depends on how urgently the buyer needs it. The next-gen is almost always a better product (except for the Canon G10, which I hear was a disaster), but as I mentioned earlier, Nikon might not price it at the same level, which is usually the case for consumer electronics (e.g. iPhone prices are same for every model, assuming without operator subsidy, same for iPad, Macbook, netbooks, etc).
Too much guesswork involved, and at the end of the day, if someone can afford both, then get both. If the buyer can afford only one with a budget of SGD3k, then it depends on whether he/she needs it NOW, or can wait awhile longer, understanding that the new model may be more expensive than the D700.
That said, perhaps it also depends on whether Nikon actually feels the need to replace the D700, or to introduce a D700s or D700x for slightly more specialized needs. Can anyone confirm if Canon has any cameras that go head to head against the D700? I had considered the 7D but that's an APS-C type sensor, and the 5D MkII isn't well-known for it's AF (or so I'm told). if the D700 has a relatively unchallenged niche, Nikon may just introduce a D800 to take on the 5D MkII as a high-megapixel shooter with better high ISO performnce.
Hard to say, it's all speculation at the moment. The only thing we know is that the OP has SGD3k to spend, and what current models are priced at.
kentwong81
Senior Member
Remember higher resolution sensor(16MP, 18MP, 24MP, etc) requires better lenses that can resolve more detail and yield expected results from the price you pay for a D800. And better lenses always come with a deadly price tag too, just look at the price of 24mm f1.4G, 35mm f1.4G, 70-200 f2.8 VRII, 14-24mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8, etc.
So be prepared for a much higher budget($6k at least??) for a D800 and a better lens so that you won't complain it underperforms when you mount a crappy lens on it.
So be prepared for a much higher budget($6k at least??) for a D800 and a better lens so that you won't complain it underperforms when you mount a crappy lens on it.
Last edited:
That too, plus, since the sensor size isn't getting bigger, the higher the megapixels, the poorer the high ISO performance. This is one reason why the D3s and D3x appeal to different shooters - action/street vs studio photogs
If the OP was prepared to get a D700, he'd face the same issue with lenses, though Nikon does makes some really decent units like the 35/2, 50/1.4D, 50/1.8D, 85/1.8D where primes are concerned. As for the pricing of the D800, it's very much in the air at the moment, though I'd stick with a 4k-4.5k range over a 6k range as that smacks squarely into D3s territory, unless Nikon wants to offer a mini-D3x for people with D3s budgets
The D3x would appeal to people who have control over lighting and shoot largely in the day, while the D3s is magical to have during a concert or when shooting skaters at a skate park at night. To me, high ISO performance is more important since I prefer to shoot in ambient light rather than with strobes.
Since I have a D700 to deal with high-ISO situations, my next target would be a high-MP FF for shots that I can REALLY blow up
Lenses aren't so much of an issue for me at the moment as I already have the Trinity, 50/1.4G, 85/1.4D, 105/2DC, 135/2DC, and a 60/2.8G macro, and they all play nice with Nikon bodies
Last edited:
Depends on the price, I guess. The D200 is probably a nicer camera to use than my D3100, and I've seen some seriously awesome shots on Flickr taken with a D200
Depends on the price, I guess. The D200 is probably a nicer camera to use than my D3100, and I've seen some seriously awesome shots on Flickr taken with a D200
Absolutely, the D200 is actually still more than adequate for many people's needs. I liked my D200 and D700 and I also like my D3100, which is really bang for buck. There are also people who would go and buy a film camera. But if I am seriously looking to get another FF body, I would look forward to newer technology and not backward.
Oh, definitely
That said, there's a certain charm about a certain X100 that's going to be released. Makes for a nice walkabout camera that's much less obvious compared to a D700
Fills a different need, when I don't need to shoot 'seriously' :bsmilie:
As for the pricing of the D800, it's very much in the air at the moment, though I'd stick with a 4k-4.5k range over a 6k range as that smacks squarely into D3s territory, unless Nikon wants to offer a mini-D3x for people with D3s budgets
My guess (and sources) say the D700 replacement should be priced in the 3.8k region when first released (expected Sep). Probably have to wait for several months before the pricing will stabilize at around 3.4k.
So for folks thinking of getting the D700 or D700 replacement, just know that it may be almost a year out before you see the new camera's pricing stabilize.
Oh, definitely
That said, there's a certain charm about a certain X100 that's going to be released. Makes for a nice walkabout camera that's much less obvious compared to a D700
I think the X100, or any camera, can be used to shoot seriously if the shooter knows how.
kentwong81
Senior Member
Maybe it will be sold cheaper in Malaysia at $3.2-3.5k range.
Mount D800 with a 24mm f1.4G or a 70-200mm VRII, it will become $6.6k setup...wow :bigeyes:
Mount D800 with a 24mm f1.4G or a 70-200mm VRII, it will become $6.6k setup...wow :bigeyes:
Yup. And the 3.8/3.4k price tag on the d800 doesn't look too bad either
Kinda hard to lump lens and body costs together la. Lenses are pretty much long term - I was just messing about with my dad's F2 with 50/1.8 ai-s lens and that lens still works on my d700 practically 30 years later!
The nice thing about lenses is that you never really have to reinvest. If you have the trinity, the only lenses left to look at are the portrait trio, a 50 and maybe a 24/1,4 if you're really hardcore
The nice thing about lenses is that you never really have to reinvest. If you have the trinity, the only lenses left to look at are the portrait trio, a 50 and maybe a 24/1,4 if you're really hardcore
hendralely
Member
Agreed.
Those who say to get D700 at this point of time are those who already have it
It makes much more sense to wait now.
Similar threads
