Does D700 have enough edge over D7K?
- Thread starter baggiolee
- Start date
- Status
of course.
Apart from ISO performance (which D700 still still slightly better), FX gives you a much wider Dynamic range.
has there been a proper dynamic range comparison on the net?
Some data (DXOMARK) says D7000 is better.
Please:sweat:
Why are there too much to compare
Just happy on what u have and what they had.
lol i dun have both. planning to get one of them.
there are other things than the IQ and ISO where FF camera is different from APS-C.
also, i suspect all the unhappy d700 users will brandish the valid point that it is 2 year old technology, maybe the d700 successor will trounce the d7k thoroughly, who knows.
anyways, it doesn't matter, the d7k is close to k-5, for me, the IQ and ISO are definitely good enough as a hobbyist. at the end of the day, i don't even know why so many hobbyists want optimal IQ and ISO when your uses don't even extend that far..
I haven't read much review about D7000 but assume D7000 is a competent camera compared to D700 in ISO department. There are traits of FX cameras that explain their high cost:
1) Bigger sensor normally means that pixel pitch is higher. This gives better sharpness. This is obvious when you want to print large. Webby image size you may not be able to notice the difference.
Bigger pixel size also means that it allows more light in and gives better color gradation (transition from one color to another is smoother)
2) Shallow depth of field. I started to like shooting with shallow DOF recently. With F2.8 lens you already can produce excellent bokeh on FX while you may need to shoot with primes on DX. Note that bokeh is difficult to reproduce in PP.
Bottom line: you get what you pay for / you pay what you need.
1) Bigger sensor normally means that pixel pitch is higher. This gives better sharpness. This is obvious when you want to print large. Webby image size you may not be able to notice the difference.
Bigger pixel size also means that it allows more light in and gives better color gradation (transition from one color to another is smoother)
2) Shallow depth of field. I started to like shooting with shallow DOF recently. With F2.8 lens you already can produce excellent bokeh on FX while you may need to shoot with primes on DX. Note that bokeh is difficult to reproduce in PP.
Bottom line: you get what you pay for / you pay what you need.
Last edited:
I dono, im still stuck with my d50. works for me becos I don care that much about the noise as i seldom shoot at those scenerio.
but for me, i believe the advantage of d700 over d7k right now is not the iq and iso, its the large sensor itself.
but for me, i believe the advantage of d700 over d7k right now is not the iq and iso, its the large sensor itself.
well.. you have to see what Dxomark is testing.
Anyway, this is from personal experience. If you think Dxomark is more applicable in your needs, by all means get the D7k.
In the end it your needs and your money.
As for myself, I am still shooting my D300s (and holding on to it). I don't think the quality of my shots will improve immediately if I start shooting a D7k or D700 now.
Last edited:
D7K is the 1st amongst the next generation of Expeed processors. The technology will filter down to their revised product lines very soon. Do expect that the next replacement for D300s will trounce the D7K. The next replacement for D700 will trounce D3s and so on.
That's technology. You can't compare D7K with D700 cos they are a different generation.
Agree with most of the above. According to DxOmark, D7k has better dynamic range, while D700 does better for low-light. D700 will also have shallower depth of field and wider field of vision. Which camera is more desirable depends on your shooting needs/style
D7000 is still miles away from D700. That's because it is a DX camera with a smaller sensor.
All this while D7000 is only selling its high ISO performance to attract new buyers. High ISO performance doesn't mean a good photo. Most of the time you will find that you don't shoot above ISO800. Will you still shoot above ISO1600-25600 under bright light condition to show high ISO performance of D7000?
And the richer colours, more details in the hightlights and shadows, faster focusing speed, much bigger and brighter viewfinder of D700 makes it superior to D7000.
But of course the gap is smaller now because D700 is already 2 years old. When the replacement for D700 is released next year, there is another story already :bsmilie:
All this while D7000 is only selling its high ISO performance to attract new buyers. High ISO performance doesn't mean a good photo. Most of the time you will find that you don't shoot above ISO800. Will you still shoot above ISO1600-25600 under bright light condition to show high ISO performance of D7000?
And the richer colours, more details in the hightlights and shadows, faster focusing speed, much bigger and brighter viewfinder of D700 makes it superior to D7000.
But of course the gap is smaller now because D700 is already 2 years old. When the replacement for D700 is released next year, there is another story already :bsmilie:
Last edited:
I'm waiting for that bro.. the next replacement :thumbsup:
Most likely, I will keep my belove D300s..
Last edited:
so, based on this logic, the oldest computers are the most powerful, because they take up more space? :bsmilie::bsmilie:
miles away, there has to be some quantification to make this statement.
i think, perhaps FF still has the edge, but the gap is drawing close... and the people who have invested heavily in FF are still in denial that it is much easier to push APS-C format to match FF, rather than pushing FF to move forward, because of costs involved.
Agreed too....I believe D300s is still the king of DX. When the replacement for D300s and D700 are announced next year, which is coming very soon, very less people will care about D7000.
haha, i don't know how to quantify it, but of cos I know that "miles away" is not a good judgement, just my joking only as it seems that a lot of people wanted to make irrational comparison between D7000 and D700.
The gap is definitely smaller with the help of latest technology. Not only D7000, a lot of m43 and compact cameras are closing the gap with DSLR too. But I believe the manufacturers will still leave a space for the FF for whatever reason.
The gap is definitely smaller with the help of latest technology. Not only D7000, a lot of m43 and compact cameras are closing the gap with DSLR too. But I believe the manufacturers will still leave a space for the FF for whatever reason.
since nikon have made significant improvement over the DSLR range this time round, i think buying a newer model will be more beneficial than 3 or 4 years ago.
i think D700 replacement will be the most ideal DSLR for me and for some people lol.
i think D700 replacement will be the most ideal DSLR for me and for some people lol.
- Status
Similar threads
