D700 Preview


Status
Not open for further replies.
Ha Ha... Luckily didn't invest heavily on DX lens. :sweatsm:
I have never looked through a full frame before. Always on a 1.5X crop camera. Lol good to stick head in ground sometimes. Dun see something better won't get tempted easily.
 

I have never looked through a full frame before. Always on a 1.5X crop camera. Lol good to stick head in ground sometimes. Dun see something better won't get tempted easily.

If you shoot sports with tele lenses, DX is better;
if you shoot ultrawide angle, FX is better;
if you shoot portraits, FX is better;
if you travel light, DX is better;
if you shoot general, DX is cheaper...

Just like medium format and 135, both formats will probably coexist for some time to come.
 

Hi

In what way is FX portrait better than DX?
Better bokeh?
 

Much better bokeh e.g. when using the same lens.
 

Hi

In what way is FX portrait better than DX?
Better bokeh?

You could use a longer lens for the same angle of view -> better bokeh and background compression and less distortion. Why do you think many people prefer using medium format for portraiture? ;p
 

Much better bokeh e.g. when using the same lens.

Not when using the same lens. Using the same lens would only give you a wider angle of view. FX allows you to use a longer lens to achieve the same angle of view, so you get the benefits of a longer lens like background compression and shallower DoF for the same aperture.
 

If you shoot sports with tele lenses, DX is better;
if you shoot ultrawide angle, FX is better;
if you shoot portraits, FX is better;
if you travel light, DX is better;
if you shoot general, DX is cheaper...

Just like medium format and 135, both formats will probably coexist for some time to come.

To add on, if you shoot macro (insect) or birds, DX is better.
 

To add on, if you shoot macro (insect) or birds, DX is better.

Yup. Astro too.. FX= heavier body will load the equatorial drive on telescope mounts more... ;p
 

This D700 is still a touch too much for me...

I'll stick with my D70(S instead of 0) for the time being but make the switch when FX sensor prices normalise and filters through to the masses. Then, a light-weight MIT FX equivalent will hit the street... good for travels.

While it's true than the FX sensor outresolves many existing lenses, I bite it (D3, D700, etc) if my wants "outresolves :bsmilie: my needs.

Needs and wants are very personal... affordability is one thing; dreaming of owning one is another. It's all relative.

Not everyone needs a fast car to run around a traffic-lights laden city like our city; I don't mind having a Ferrari.

Not everyone needs luxurious living / lifestyle; give me Sentosa Cove anytime.

Do I really need FX? No. Would I really like one? Yes.

Overall, the D700 must be more good news than bad.


For the time being, I'll make do with these sample images:

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d700/sample.htm
 

OMG! Is quite sometime I have been to this section and saw this D700 thread. Looks like I can add one more 0 to my D70 to make it D700!
 

OMG! Is quite sometime I have been to this section and saw this D700 thread. Looks like I can add one more 0 to my D70 to make it D700!

tat's a good idea. i'll do it tonight so can tahan the urge to buy one :bsmilie::bsmilie:
 

I don't think D700 is comparable to 5D to go head to head because D700 is missing a very vital feature... the Print button.
 

time to throw away all the DX liow. Full frame will be the future.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.