|
Is that December 2009?
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Hey if they do add a 24MP version and discontinue the 12MP version then I for one will be extremely glad I bought when I did! Why?
1 - The 24MP sensor will not have the same low light performance
that the 12MP sensor has.
2 - I neither want nor need (nor will I pay for) a 24MP camera!
This whole MP obsession drives me crazy. What Canon and Nikon should do is take the signal to noise ration improvements they've made for their point & shoot-sized sensors, and use them to make a brand new 6MP sensor so we'd finally get some P&S cameras with real low light capability!
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Alright thanks for your responde i guess i dont need to think about refunding while two weeks havent passed
+vidabobida i am not quite sure but i think this year.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
 Cause that was yesterday so I'm wondering how soon the D700 will be discontinued.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
i highly doubt nikon would release a new d700 with only the d700 being on the market for about 6 months already. maby next year but i dont think this one ;D
oh yea just in case you didnt see the date on that post was nov-15
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
PippoWasHere edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
I read through the last page and it seems that the 24MP+ camera they were hyping as the new D700x turned out to be the 24MP+ D3x
I think we will see a D400 before we see a D700x or a D800, but hey, maybe there's a need for a pro-sumer 24+MP camera...seeing as how I haven't seen the HD video from a Nikon FX sensor yet, I can't judge how useful it might be...
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I don't think they'd discontinue the D700 anyway even if they did release a d700x. I'd love the drop in D700 price, or the increase in D700s on the market.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Damn... why did i have to read this post. Ignorance would have been bliss. :D
Seriously though... I have no aspiration for printing greater than an A3. I think I'd rather spend some time and compose and expose properly rather than worry about what i could have done with a 24MP sensor.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Oh, please. Isn't there something more important to discuss? Like how great is it that we can store up to 5 different custom WB settings!
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
rich_gersh edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
I would like to see the new d700 with more fps rate, I would like the same rate as D3.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
What 8fps vs. 9 fps will make a difference for you? Or is it the 11 fps in DX crop mode you want?
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Why such emphasis on FPS? I usually try to measure my exposures in SPF.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Reading that article makes my head hurt. Nonsense is all I see there.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
 |
yeyger [deleted] says:
8 fps is possible without mb-d10.
www.nikonwatch.com/2008/08/08/get-8-fps-frames-per-second...
if they can make a 24MP sensor with the same low light capabilities of the d3/d700 i'm in. until then, i'll stick with the d700. when the d3 comes down in price even more, i might consider it.
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
yeyger edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
yeyger [deleted] says:
also, that article says that the nikons and sonys share a sensor. hmm, take a look at this.
nikonrumors.com/2008/12/12/nikon-d3x-vs-sony-a900.aspx
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
also, that article says that the nikons and sonys share a sensor. hmm, take a look at this.
That part's not exactly new news. It just seems to've gained a little attention due to the 24mp cam coming out. There has been talk of Nikon doing their own sensor and of another company (starts w/ R, I think) involved, but I don't even know where to start in linking any of these statements. If it's an issue, Google it ;)
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
James on Flickr [deleted] says:
For the sake of mischief I shall create "D800" and "D700x" groups of all permutations and administer them with a healthy D700 bias ^_^
C'mon !!! Who's with me
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
My guess is that you're too late. They're probably already in existence.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I love my D700 for it's low light capabilities, I could care less about megapixel or I would have seriously considered the new Canon 5D!
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Soooo not cool Nikon.
If this is true, I'm selling my entire Nikon line .
This is nothing but pure greed.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
This rumour may be partially true in that Nikon may release a D700x. But there is no way they will discontinue the D700.
My main doubt is that Nikon has been shooting themselves in the foot with the D700 as it's so close to the D3 that it's been stealing sales from the higher margin camera.
I don't see them doing it again with the D3x/D700x.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
tracer.ca You might be very right cause it seem to be that D3X (24mp) should have come out as a repcement for D3, respectively together with D700x (D800) as a replacment for D700.
BUT D3X comes out first, so here LATEST product line we have is
top range D3X with 24mp, and then D700, so spacing in price and productivity between the more popular D700 and (top product) D3 has incresed as D3x is not as comparable to D700 as D3
its all marketing - how to sell more to customer without knowing him that he doesnt need it ... :)
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
Max K. edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
DrNickBurton [deleted] says:
The D700x, whenever it appears, could have 600 MP for all I care. With the D700 I can shoot at 3200-6400 virtually noise free.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I'm planning on joining the D700 club next month if all goes as planned. Like DrNick, I could care less if it's a billion MP. All that means to me (for the most part) is that the files are larger and take more CPU power to process. No thank you. Low-light is what I'm looking for. I'd take a D700-x (less MP) if such was the case. I don't envy the D3x & mkII shooters their ginormous file sizes. Bleh.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
D700 is more than enough.. its then down to the man/woman behind the camera then….
You see many ppl out there with expensive camera.. but when its comes to taking a pic.. its a different story!
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Fried Toast - Woohoo! It's about time!
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
It's about time!
Well, Nikon's got a $300 back thing going on here in Japan (perhaps elsewhere, too, I imagine) until the middle of next month. Recently found 3 of the things for $2000/ea. If I get $300 off that ... well, I'd be stupid not to buy one. Just a matter of whether or not I can afford it after my Taiwan trip next week.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
D700 is more than enough.. its then down to the man/woman behind the camera then….
This is very right i use to sell 14X11 framed photos taken with 5mp NOKIA N95, for 30 quid (50 bucks)
BUT when it comes to technology, and when u spend 3000, 5000 grant (pounds dollars whatever :) ) it is better to get something what just came out and top of the best cause in 3-5 years they gonna mass produce 40mp matrixes and all other technologies like PCs, Printers, Scanners will have to catch up.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
MY CONCLUSION AFTER I READ THAT THERE IS NO WAY I WOULD RATHER WANT, D700X OR D3X, FROM SOME FORUM:
Potential Nikon D3x buyers beware - D700x is already in prototype! Compared
to the D3x, it's a no-brainer as to which is best. D700x has the same
sensor,
same AF, marginally less VF coverage, slightly slower shooting rate (4.5
fps
/6 fps in DX mode), smaller/lighter body (till you add the D700's
battpack),
same lowlight performance (like the D3x, iq is no good above 1600 ISO - if
you need high speed, D3/D700 is the way to go), slightly slower bootup
time,
almost the same lens compatibility - and an extra $4000+ in your pocket.
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
Max K. edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
yeyger [deleted] says:
i could care less who makes sensors for nikon. does ford make all their parts? toyota? big deal. sony can make all the sensors they want. however, it's obvious if the same sensor is used on the a900 and d3x
sony does not know how to make the best out of it judging from the image quality of their cameras! ;)
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
its all a money making game!
no need to upgrade ever few months.... yeah lets say a few years but not every few months.. its just a waste of money.... its shear stupidity!
id rather spend the money on decent lens, as they go for decades!
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
One camera comes out and before it barely hits the street, there is already a group of people looking for the next best thing.
Funny how we humans are never satisfied with what we have. Sometimes I think Nikon (and other manufacturers) pay someone to start rumors and build up hype for their next model.
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
LebronPhoto edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
|
Thats true better to invest in lenses but still they have technology 3-5 years ahead, and the lenses made by nicon 7-10 years will not give you same quality plus will NOT support some of the new camera's functions
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
The ability to take pictures in low light is my primary reason for getting the D700. 24 MP is nice, but Nikon needs to make it with a better (or at least equal) sensitivity as the D700 (or the D3). BTW, with 24 MP, I will also need to make sure my "old" lenses are not the limiting factor in realizing the picture sharpness that matches the resolution of the sensor:-)
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
"I would like to see the new d700 with more fps rate, I would like the same rate as D3. "
er, buy a d3 then?
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
Rob Sanderson - wedding photographer liverpool edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
|
i am quite happy with my D700 right now.... so i will stick to that....
the newer models are for others out there....
:-)
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
It's past December the 20th - No D700x yet :(
For anyone who thinks 12mp is enough, please be advised just to have a look for any MF Velvia drum-scan, and rethink. I'm mainly on landscape photography, impatiently waiting for the upcoming dream-camera, 24mp D700x. I wouldn't mind if it's 1fps if it yields that definition with high quality DR. All the concern is lenses are likely limited to match that resolution. Call me a troll if you want; I own a D300, and haven't shown any interest for D700 because it gives equivalent results at low ISO: kenrockwell.com/nikon/d700/sharpness-comparison.htm
If downsampled to 12mp (or shot on medium image size), I think D700x will give about the same noise level of D700 at high ISO like 3200 to 6400; so there will unlikely be any problem for low-light photography, maybe except for ISO 25600, but honestly who needs it?
D3x is way too expensive. Waiting till PMA '09, if Nikon doesn't make the announcement for an affordable 24mp camera, then I'll switch to either Sony A900 or Canon 5DII. C'est la vie !
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
hikingbabadag edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
|
"If downsampled to 12mp (or shot on medium size), I think D700x will give about the same noise level of D700 at high ISO like 3200 to 6400; so there will unlikely be any problem for low-light photography, maybe except for ISO 25600, but honestly who needs it? "
I don't get how this would help. The sensor will still have the same amount of pixels (same pixel density).
That said, I'm sure that as technology improves, noise will become less of a problem even on high MP cameras.
"For anyone who thinks 12mp is enough, please be advised just to have a look for any MF Velvia drum-scan, and rethink. "
Nikon is still a business and most people have enough with 12MP. The minority needing higher resolutions can go for the 24MP cameras out there (or those inevitably coming in the future), or even with the Medium Formats now available.
There's something out there for everyone. It just seems that people want Nikon to make a customizable camera to fit their needs. Maybe that's the next big thing, customizable cameras. Tell me wjhat sensor size, pixel density, frame rate and featuires you want, and we'll build it for you, just like a customized computer (of course, at a custom price).
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
They're two different markets. A D700x wouldn't replace the D700 in any way.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Maybe downsampling is not the brightest idea, since DR, clarity, or noise characteristics will be determined initially by pixel density; while optional pixel grouping is a much better idea, if the technology exists.
Then, photographer will select between 24mp or 12mp settings prior to shooting, among with non-reversible parameters as ISO & exposure values. This will allow the D700x to serve for both purposes; hi-res or a sensitive & fast camera on demand. Everybody will be happy.
Too wishful thinking? Or launch just a dedicated 24mp camera and keep the appreciated D700 together.
Originally posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
hikingbabadag edited this topic 42 months ago.
|
|
|
It's more complicated than choosing between high res or low light mode. The imaging sites on the D3 are physically larger than the D3x, which affects low-light performance regardless of effective resolution.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
At this point I could care less what comes out, I got what I want!
I'll be happy for years!
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
"If downsampled to 12mp (or shot on medium image size), I think D700x will give about the same noise level of D700 at high ISO like 3200 to 6400; so there will unlikely be any problem for low-light photography, maybe except for ISO 25600, but honestly who needs it?"
"I don't get how this would help. The sensor will still have the same amount of pixels (same pixel density).
That said, I'm sure that as technology improves, noise will become less of a problem even on high MP cameras.
"
Good reading about down sampling in relation to noise here blog.dpreview.com/editorial/2008/11/downsampling-to.html
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Off-topic, but peeps, when you say you "could care less", you mean that you care more than you think need too. E.g. "I could care less about megapixels" doesn't mean that megapixels aren't important to you.
What you ought to say is that "you couldn't care less because you already care as less as it's possible to do so. See incompetech.com/gallimaufry/care_less.html for an explanation. www.grammarblog.co.uk/2007/10/my-biggest-us-english-peeve/
It's okay if you now have an urge to flame me. I, for one, couldn't care more about grammar goof-ups ;-)
Originally posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
code_martial edited this topic 40 months ago.
|
|
wow. did you ACTUALLY dig up a 2 month dead thread to pick up grammar issues? did that REALLY just happen?
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
The Rockwell piece is flawed as he doesn't use the same lens on each body. Besides, the difference between the D300 and the D700/D3 at low ISO isn't just sharpness. The D700/D3 images look more like film. I had a D300 and shot about 4000 frames with it before getting a D700, which I have clicked about 3000 times. The D700 files look better; richer, better color, more dynamic range.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
- x2
- Go, shoot, enjoy; let this sleeping dog lie.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
ooh man.. i've got to sell my all NIKON GEAR..!!!! this is unacceptable anymore ! i cant afford this craziness ha.ah.ahha..:) oh i forgot.. must go out take some pictures.. adios ^-^
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'm happy with 12mp, and the only time I'll feel an upgrade is needed is when it goes up at least 400%, around 48mp. 8-)
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
How come when new cameras are on the horizon no one ever mentions latitude? Thats all I would ever want.Keep your megapxls/frame rates,etc. just give me exposure latitude.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
You can get latitude *and* longitude with GPS. ;-) (OK, cut me some latitude.)
Actually, you can use Exposure Bracketing to compensate for tricking lighting.
And/or shoot Raw to recover any blown highlights (especially if you shoot to the right-side of the histogram).
Or use some of the auto features (Auto ISO, etc).
And last (and probably least), Active D-Lighting (OK, I've never used it on my D700: it compresses the shadows).
Originally posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
mausgabe edited this topic 40 months ago.
|
|
Please no panic. I think we should try to be happy with what we have and not always try and chase the latest. Everything will be followed by something newer and better. It's better if we try to focus on getting the pics right and using the best lens available and composition and exposure...
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I've just sold my 9 year old F5 and purchased a D700.
A little fact that the major camera manufactures would prefer you not to know -
The best cameras that are available today don't turn into bad cameras once a new one is released.
A D700 will always produce good images, always. Even if a better camera comes along in the next 18 months.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@ctetris: Naah, the discussion just came up in a search result for D700x. Was wondering if and when such a thing might be coming out and whether it'll cause a drop in the D700's price.
I have a feeling I can't live without an FX sensor and ISO 6400 any more but I still have a long way to go before I can save up enough to buy a D700 :(
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Code Martial: Find a way to buy your D700! The D80 is fun, and will still be very useful even when you have the D700, but the D700 is fantastic.
If I were able to make a change to the D700 to make it suit my tastes, I wouldn't change the sensor, but rather I'd remove the built-in flash and give it a 100% coverage viewfinder. But I'm not at all unhappy with it as it is.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
There's plenty of room on the market for both a 12 and a 24 mp amateur FX DSLR.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
If I wasn't investing in lenses at the moment I'd buy another F5 to complement my D700.
That would be a far more sensible option that another digital body or upgrading to a 24mp body.
F5's are becoming dirt cheep in the UK now. If one comes up at the right price in the next 12 months, I'm buying one.
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Before you go and buy that F5, check out this video:
fwd.five.tv/videos/challenge-blow-up-part-3
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
nikonrumors.com/2009/08/29/which-one-is-it-going-to-be-ni...
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Maybe a discontinued D700 for $650..? I'll take TWO...!!!
It would seem that since the D700's are getting such a good...no GREAT.... reputation, that there would be reason to wait until the demand drops somewhat...just my two cents worth.
Originally posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
Topeeka edited this topic 33 months ago.
|
|
If the D800 has a 5:4 crop mode I'd so get it.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
-- Maybe a discontinued D700 for $650..? I'll take TWO...!!!
It would seem that since the D700's are getting such a good...no GREAT.... reputation, that there would be reason to wait until the demand drops somewhat...just my two cents worth. --
Nothing at all like that took place this summer with the replacement of the D300 with the D300s. Nikon basically waited until the supply channels were dried up of D300 cameras.
They will most likely do the same to the D700 when they discontinue it. When its successor is named, availability of the old D700 will be very limited.
With the D300s, the price of the camera basically remained the same as the D300. If it is really true that the price of the D700's replacement will be dramatically more expensive, then now might be the best time to buy a D700, while one still can.
I certainly hope that Nikon does not do that, and keeps the price of any replacement reasonable. But with all of the price hikes that Nikon has made this past year, I don't have much hope for that happening.
--
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
dreamtwine [deleted] says:
shweet when the price drops i will get another D700.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
The more recent rumors seem to center around not a high-megapixel D700x but a D700s that adds video. Being able to shoot full-frame video at high ISO would be a compelling product in many areas, especially in Hollywood, where tricked out Canons are giving Red a run for the money.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
-- shweet when the price drops i will get another D700. --
This is nothing more than fanciful dreaming on the part of folks here.
--
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
-- Being able to shoot full-frame video at high ISO would be a compelling product in many areas, especially in Hollywood, where tricked out Canons are giving Red a run for the money. --
Not that many photographers are employed as paparazzi, despite what Hollywood stars may think.
--
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Well, maybe I now have to eat my own words. I see that B&H has lowered the price on the D700 to $2,449.00 now, which is $650 more than their price for the D300s
--
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Hollywood is a lot more than the papparazzi. I was speaking of the hundreds/thousands of film-makers out there who have to rent expensive HD gear to shoot digital. A D700s would give them a unique set of options, with access to a wide range of glass and an ISO capability they currently do not have. I live in Los Angeles and know a bit about the crews and the equipment they use.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Did anyone notice the new FF Sony alpha 850 @ US$ 2K? It is so close to the 900 in specs that I wonder if there is an effort out there to make FF purely more affordable. If true, then certainly FX is the future of digital SLR.
And what has Nikon gone and done? It has given us the two best cameras for ANY light conditions at 12 MP per frame. What next?
I would like to see a D4 with the same burst rate and low-light ability of the D3 @ 16 MP and a D700X sharing the sensor and image rendering engine, with 4fps (7-8 with grip) with better autofocus. NO video please.
D3 and 700 virtually took the tripods away, no point bringing them back for just a bigger print size. If I wanted that, I would buy a Hassy for what it is good at.
A FF @ 2000 from Nikon will make the day for many serious ams and a pro body with premium service guarantee and legendary low light performance and DR @4000 will make red carpets run out.
Thoughts?
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I can't help but giggle at pros that get themselves all wadded up about video being in the dslr, as if just knowing that it's in there somehow fouls up the entire camera and destroys their reputations as serious photographers. Do you feel that way about all the features you don't use, or is there something about having the video option in the camera that makes it heavier? Does video in SLR's have bad karma? Was it particularly mean to your childhood puppy?
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
sit back and enjoy your D700 ... it is a fabulous camera!
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
-- Did anyone notice the new FF Sony alpha 850 @ US$ 2K? It is so close to the 900 in specs that I wonder if there is an effort out there to make FF purely more affordable. If true, then certainly FX is the future of digital SLR. ---
Yes, many reviewers have noticed that too. The Sony Alpha 850 is definitely a strong competitor for the D700 among consumers, for whom price is an important factor.
And now with the new Canon EOS 7D being announced today, the D300s will be facing stiff competition from it. That camera is clearly targeting folks who would buy the 300s.
I sure hope that the D700 gets more than just a minor face-lift when it is updated.
Can Nikon compete with two 12 MP cameras against cameras that instead offer 18 MP ( Canon 7D ) and 24 MP ( Sony Alpha 850 ) ??
I have made such a big investment in Nikkor and Nikon mount lenses, that I must remain loyal to Nikon.
--
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
"Can Nikon compete with two 12 MP cameras against cameras that instead offer 18 MP ( Canon 7D ) and 24 MP ( Sony Alpha 850 ) ??"
Why not?? We don't have to be envious towards camera's that have 18mp or 24mp.... The Iso performance of both (Canon 7D and Sony A850) is crap compared to the Nikon D700 and D3. It's all about pixel-size and not pixel-amount.
And being worried about full-frame camera's having HD video??? Don't be. It's cool, i agree... but no prosumer of professional is going to use it anyway. (or am i wrong?) ;-)
Cheers,
JK
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Well, images that I have seen from the Sony Alpha 850 have looked OK up to ISO 1600, but indeed seem to turn into crap once one goes higher than that.
On the other hand, images from the new Canon 7D are looking impressive so far. While they may not match the 300s, I don't believe one can discount their quality that much.
Imaging-Resource.com already has test images from their review that one can use to compare with other cameras. See this web page:
www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E7D/E7DA7.HTM
They also have test images form the Sony Alpha 850, and you can compare it with the D700 there, and see how the Sony's IQ falls apart at higher ISO, compared to how well the D700 performs.
--
Originally posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
LanceSpring edited this topic 33 months ago.
|
|
freddocat [deleted] says:
Suffice to say I am extremely happy with my D700 - especially in low light. For the first time since moving to digital I feel the quality is approaching that of film. This coupled with the use of prime rather than zoom lenses and I'm once again enjoying photography...
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Yep, I bought my D700 specifically for its low light performance. Doubling the MP and losing the ISO ability would be a huge step backwards for me.
..
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I won't be surprised to see D700s with video. Yeah, I don't give a damn about video but it's another bullet point that nikon can't afford to miss out for marketing reasons.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
If you can't make a great picture with the d700 then you can't make one with a D800 or D900. All of this banter about gear...befuddles me. Photography is about capturing light and not the Latest Gear.
Technology and Photography is a slippery slope...b/c on one side it makes doing certain things easier and on the other it's automation is starting to make things too easy and cheap. Sometimes, I think Gear Heads want a camera to do everything for them...even tell their subjects where to stand and how to pose...even control a device in space that can manipulate the sun's rays.
Spend more time shooting and mastering your art/craft and you'll realize that the camera is just a tool...Photography is ART not automation.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
D700S or a faked picture?
www.flickr.com/photos/32599917@N05/3818407616/
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Selbosh [deleted] says:
It belongs to the "Image Manipulations" pool.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Personally, if it is on the Internet, I DO believe it....!!! And, you should too...!
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Without reading the whole thread, I would think a d700x would be a great addition. In no way will it replace the d700 for what most of us use it for. Like the d3x, a 24mp would give professionals near medium format quality images for around 5 grand~ Making it great for studio and landscapes.
Some clients now are indeed demanding more resolution. Mostly for studio shoots.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I think that they should just leave the D700 alone. Leave it as is. Its a great camera. Just add the 5:4 crop like the D3.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
If the D700x had decent video, none of this 720 jello crap; better high iso; and (assuming it will have the 24mp d3x sensor) an option for sRaw like the MkII, then I'd sell my d700 and cut my losses.
I almost joined the darkside when the MkII came out because I would use the video function a lot, but in the end ergonomics won me over.
The 24mp would be nice to have at my disposal every now and then. I'm too poor for lenses and the longest I have is a 50mm. The ability to take a photo with the intention of cropping down would be very useful. Also I recently found myself needing more MP for a project at school. So while I'd use the sRaw option 95% of the time, the higher option would be nice.
Better high iso and improved video would be a must though. I think it's a possibility too. The blog quote from nikon rumors says it could make them sell all their canon gear. Simply creating a nikon MkII wouldn't be nearly enough to make someone sell all their canon gear.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
@zero12?
Why do you need better high-ISO than the D700 already has???
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
If the new D700x could have 24mp and the SAME low-noise images as the current D700 I would upgrade....but this seems like a fantasy
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
It has good iso but I still find myself pushing it sometimes. 1/8 @ 1.2 and 12,800 iso on buses at night just about makes it. Being able to speed the shutter up a bit would be nice.
But mostly it would help me justify upgrading more. It would be my last upgrade for a very long time.
Originally posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
zerotwelve edited this topic 33 months ago.
|
|
|
I've heard that before.
Domdog31,
They're consistantly improving the ISO as the pixels get more crowded. Look at the 6 or 7 pixel cameras now compared to the 4 pixel cameras a couple of years ago. I sort of doubt there'll be a significant improvement in the D700x or the D800, but you can bet that they'll keep it going, even as the pixel count goes up.
But I see what you're saying, doubling the pixel count while maintaining the ISO performance is quite unlikely.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I dont go above ISO 3200 as the quality is already starting to degrade by then.
I made a school boy error on a shoot a couple of weeks ago and shot everything at 6400. The noise at 6400 is ghastly.
My fault as I normally reset my ISO to 200 at the end of every shoot and then reset everything before I start shooting again, depending on what the conditions are. This time I did'nt bother and paid the price.
Even at 3200 I know I'll be reducing the noise in Adobe camera RAW
How people use Hi 1 and Hi 2 is beyond me.
ISO 1600 and f1.4 is simply wonderful though.
I think that Nikon may introduce a new sensor, maybe around 15 or 18 megapixels in FX format. The problem is that it's not enough to justify upgrading for most people and if you go any higher the performance at high iso's will suffer.
All in, I think the current sensor will be around for a while yet and may even filter down into the consumer cameras.
Ooooh - a D40 type camera with an FX sensor, now that would be nice.
Originally posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
:-{ edited this topic 33 months ago.
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
Nikon D700 /
Discuss
It's about time! 
Feed – Subscribe to Nikon D700 discussion threads
