Help! Advice needed for choosing between D700 & D7000


007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#1
Hi, Bros and Sis,

I am currently in a dilemma in choosing between D700 & D7000.

Previously I used Canon APS-C, using the following setup:
Tokina 116
Sigma 35 f1.4
Tamron 17-50
50 f1.8
580 EX II
Have cleared all canon items.

Background of my dilemma is actually waiting for D800 but due to the highly possible that the rumoured D800 might be delay, have to choose between D700 & D7000. I would like to wait no more as I do understand I did lose quite a lot of great opportunities taking great photos.

Currently I have read all the thread I am able to find in this forum but seeking advices from forumners here.

My budget is around 10k (can add up more if necessary)

Currently I am torning between zoom and prime too. Previously I have great experience with primes however I do admit the practical use of the zoom.

Dilemma between D700 & D7000. Choosing D700 because would like to try FX camera (but strongly feel that D800 would be even better). Would like to get D7000 for temporary but still need to get tokina 116, also cannot fully utilize the benefits of FX lens.

I shoot mainly landscape, street and potrait. Preferable to do some food macro shots too. Main purpose to get this set is for travelling. As I might travel to some under developed countries, I do worry that my gears will attract unwanted attention. (I do get prepared in case all gears lost, able to rebuild)

Would like to get the set of camera and lens to get better bargain.

I have listed some of the lens possibilities:

16-24,24-70,70-200
24mm,35mm,50 f1.4, 85 f1.4
Macro lens 60mm, 90mm, 105mm & 135 mm.
Speedlight
Accessories (still have some filters)
Camera bag (Considering the new vertex)
 

Last edited:

Lighthouse

Deregistered
Aug 22, 2005
64
0
0
#3
Your question should read DX or FX. It seems u have the budget for a set of good lens to go with the FX. The Tokina 116 can be used on FX from 15mm onwards. I would recommend u to take the FX route.

As for security and traveling, if you can loose a set of FX gears, I don't see why a set of DX gears are safer. Both are equally prominent being SLR. If it bothers you, get a set of EVIL instead.
 

wmayeo

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
1,571
0
0
Singapore
#6
(not relevant to your question) But I also fear this & that when thinking & preparing travel trips.

This may sound crude or lame... if you fear this & that, bring a PnS for travel. :D

If not... I think 24-120/4 or 24-70/2.8 can be your good overall lens on a D700 with batt grip MB-D10.
Add two primes... 105/2.8 macro and 85/1.4 portrait.
Flash SB-700 smaller package is always nicer to manage for travel.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#7
For travel I will never bring a battery grip (I do not own one yet). A grip can come in helpful if you have very heavy lenses. It kinds of balances it out a little.

There are many alternative options in terms of lenses for FX. The popular ones are:

UWA: Tokina 16-28/2.8, Samyang 14/2.8
Fast standard: Sigma 24-70 HSM, Tamron 28-75/2.8, Nikon 28-70/2.8
Primes: Sigma 85/1.4, Sigma 24/1.8, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikon 135/2DC
And you do not need that many macro lenses in that range. I would say Tamron 90mm (or Nikon 105/2.8VR) and a Tamron 180mm (or Nikon 200/4) will be good.
 

Last edited:

Cowseye

Senior Member
Mar 7, 2010
3,786
0
0
Singapore
www.ttlo-cowseye.com
#8
I think TS only wants one micro lens bah. Just listing his options and typo an 'and'

With your budget D700 is a no brainer. With 10k, I might even get a D3s and slowly grow my lens collection.

If you wish to take advantage of the crop factor, get both D7000 & D700. Use D700 for street and landscape while use D7000 for macro or birding.

Bro, I really envy you :) upgrading my current D90 to D300s is still a major conflict within myself...
 

Michael

New Member
Apr 5, 2005
829
0
0
47
Thailand
www.pbase.com
#9
You clearly say you want FX and the D7000 would be only temporary. So go for D700 it's replacement is still far away you seem to have the $$ to get the D700 on temporary basis. You van also buy second hand
 

Cowseye

Senior Member
Mar 7, 2010
3,786
0
0
Singapore
www.ttlo-cowseye.com
#10
Oh yah, also wait until this week is over. There are 2 announcements happening this week. Just to make sure the D800 is not coming out soon.
 

kentwong81

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2010
1,793
1
38
Singapore
www.kentwongphoto.com
#11
For me, I won't play the waiting game, especially the D800 may take more than 9 months to arrive in Singapore. A lot of things can happen within 9 months and a lot of beautiful things you can capture too.
D700 is already a very powerful FX camera, I'm not sure how D800 can be "much better" than D700. You can buy a 2nd hand D700 now, practise and get used to FX system first. When D800 arrives in Singapore, you can sell away the 2nd hand D700 with lesser loss compared to buying a new D700 and get a D800 as you wish.
 

Dfive

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2008
3,141
10
38
Singapore lah....
#12
Hi, Bros and Sis,

I am currently in a dilemma in choosing between D700 & D7000.

Previously I used Canon APS-C, using the following setup:
Tokina 116
Sigma 35 f1.4
Tamron 17-50
50 f1.8
580 EX II
Have cleared all canon items.

Background of my dilemma is actually waiting for D800 but due to the highly possible that the rumoured D800 might be delay, have to choose between D700 & D7000. I would like to wait no more as I do understand I did lose quite a lot of great opportunities taking great photos.

Currently I have read all the thread I am able to find in this forum but seeking advices from forumners here.

My budget is around 10k (can add up more if necessary)

Currently I am torning between zoom and prime too. Previously I have great experience with primes however I do admit the practical use of the zoom.

Dilemma between D700 & D7000. Choosing D700 because would like to try FX camera (but strongly feel that D800 would be even better). Would like to get D7000 for temporary but still need to get tokina 116, also cannot fully utilize the benefits of FX lens.

I shoot mainly landscape, street and potrait. Preferable to do some food macro shots too. Main purpose to get this set is for travelling. As I might travel to some under developed countries, I do worry that my gears will attract unwanted attention. (I do get prepared in case all gears lost, able to rebuild)

Would like to get the set of camera and lens to get better bargain.

I have listed some of the lens possibilities:

16-24,24-70,70-200
24mm,35mm,50 f1.4, 85 f1.4
Macro lens 60mm, 90mm, 105mm & 135 mm.
Speedlight
Accessories (still have some filters)
Camera bag (Considering the new vertex)
FYI - I have heard the D700 is discontinued in AUST this month.... standby for some announcement soon.... and a product around AUG 2011 ;)
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#13
Dfive said:
FYI - I have heard the D700 is discontinued in AUST this month.... standby for some announcement soon.... and a product around AUG 2011 ;)
That is also unclear now and is anyone's guess. All FX cameras have been manufactured in Nikon's Sendai plant in Miyagi prefecture. Your guess will be as good as mine.
 

nightwolf75

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 18, 2003
17,857
14
38
really MORE diaper changes
#14
do you foresee yourself shooting a lot of low light, no flash situations? or is the quality of bokeh/DOF a priority? if so, then FX. else, DX cameras have come to a point that very little separates DX from FX when it comes to image quality (unless you are a pixel peeper), considering that most of us don't exactly print our images to poster size.

when it comes to the traditional bugbear of wide angle lenses in DX, again, IMO it is no longer an issue like before since 3rd party manufacturers have come up with some pretty good UWAs for DX... which are (some) even cheaper than the UWAs for FX of equivalent focal lengths.

and... as for the fabled D800 (or whatever)... IMO, nowadays with the newer nikon EXSPEED sensors, all the current cameras are already performing far better than the older cameras to the point that that technology has reach LDMR (if you have used a old DX camera for low light vs the current DX cameras, u will know why) unless it is ground-breaking in technology or price, the D700 is still a pretty darn good camera.
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#15
Hi, All, thanks for the advise.

By the way, I have narrow down the following, need some pointers:

Main list:
1) D700
2) Wide prime: 20 2.8D / 24 2.8D / 28 2.8D/ 35 2D ? (which one better?)
3) 50mm prime: AF-S / AF 1.4D? (which one better?)
4) Medium zoom: N24-70
5) 85mm prime: 85 1.4D IF
6) Tamron 90mm macro
7) SB 900
8) Accessories (filter etc)
9) A camera bag (to be decided)

The reason why I chose these setup because I would like to travel in moderate weight. I have great experiences with prime in the past. Hence I came out with this list: conservative walkabout lens 24-70 with couple of prime cover the comfort zone. For the 2 of the legendary 2.8 trinity lenses i.e.: 14-24 & 70-200 have to wait for future upgrade.

Any comment about this setup mostly welcome.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit
Made some reading ever since, found the following should suits my style well:

1) D700
2) Wide prime: 20 2.8D
3) 50mm prime: AF-S / AF 1.4D? (which one better?)
4) Medium zoom: N24-70
5) 85mm prime: 85 1.4D IF
6) Tamron 90mm macro

I chose this set up is because:

a) 20mm is used as wide prime for scenery/ landscape (equivalent to 13mm in DX, another words, in Tokina 11-16 term, I think should be the range that will be used most)
b) 24-70mm as all round walk about lens which will be used most of the time.
c) 50mm & 85mm for potraits & people.
d) 90mm for macro.

This should cover all or most of the travel shots. I hope that this set up complete the range I need, at the same time will not be that heavy.

Any comment welcomed.
 

Last edited:

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#16
I suggest taking a look at some 3rd party lenses. Some are excellent, some are very good, some are bang for the buck.

UWA:
Tokina 16-28/2.8

primes:
Samyang 14/2.8 as well.
Sigma 20/1.8
Sigma 24/1.8
Sigma 50/1.4
Sigma 85/1.4 hsm

midrange fast zooms:
Sigma 24-70/2.8 HSM
Tamron 28-75/2.8

For macro 90mm for FX is a little short. Consider Nikon 200/4 or tamron 180/3.5
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#17
I suggest taking a look at some 3rd party lenses. Some are excellent, some are very good, some are bang for the buck.

UWA:
Tokina 16-28/2.8

primes:
Samyang 14/2.8 as well.
Sigma 20/1.8
Sigma 24/1.8
Sigma 50/1.4
Sigma 85/1.4 hsm

midrange fast zooms:
Sigma 24-70/2.8 HSM
Tamron 28-75/2.8

For macro 90mm for FX is a little short. Consider Nikon 200/4 or tamron 180/3.5
Bro, thanks for the advice.

Asking your opinion, currently deciding between set 1 and set 2:

Set 1:
2.8 trinity

Set 2:
20mm, 50mm, 85mm + 24-70

Both set with a macro lens and a teleconverter (1.4/1.7/2.0)

In dilemma because I read a thread regarding misconception about zooming with foot using primes & primes / zoom related.
Beside sharpness, contrast, tone, colour renderation; image quality of the photos taken by prime/zoom also different.
Whereby zoom has the versatility of zooming, prime does train ones composing skill.
However, since zoom has the versatility, the weight is the drawback.
On the other hand, prime does have the tendency makes one lose good shots.
Difficult decision.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#18
Bro, thanks for the advice.

Asking your opinion, currently deciding between set 1 and set 2:

Set 1:
2.8 trinity

Set 2:
20mm, 50mm, 85mm + 24-70

Both set with a macro lens and a teleconverter (1.4/1.7/2.0)

In dilemma because I read a thread regarding misconception about zooming with foot using primes & primes / zoom related.
Beside sharpness, contrast, tone, colour renderation; image quality of the photos taken by prime/zoom also different.
Whereby zoom has the versatility of zooming, prime does train ones composing skill.
However, since zoom has the versatility, the weight is the drawback.
On the other hand, prime does have the tendency makes one lose good shots.
Difficult decision.
Why do you need to buy everything at one go?

Get the body and a couple of lenses first. Start shooting and figure out what is your style. Then you will know.

BTW, if you look at zooms, most people tend to use a zoom lens at maybe 3 points in the zoom, the 2 extremes, and maybe somewhere in the middle. Many just use the 2 extremes. For primes, there will be situations you cannot get closer, or walk backwards for wider. The main advantage of primes is the wide apertures and the superior IQ they offer.

The difference in focal length and walking in, is the perspective you get. If you have a 24mm prime, and you walk in towards your subject till the FOV is equal to a 85mm lens. The resulting picture will be very different from the one coming from the 85mm lens standing further back. It is all about perspective and compression.

There is a good article about the subject http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)

Here iare articles about focal length in portraits
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/focal-lengths-in-portraits-5687
http://www.ontakingpictures.com/2010/08/impact_of_focal_length_on_port/

So in the end, you have to decide for yourself what is the best strategy for you. And the only way to know is to shoot more and discover your style and preference. As for me, I use both. I get cheaper zoom lenses because at certain situations, I need and/or prefer the versatility of zooms. I also have several prime lenses I work with quite a bit.

Primes: 24/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4
MF primes: 28PC, 50/1.2, 85/2, 105/2.5
Zooms: 11-16/2.8, 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, 80-200/2.8
 

Last edited:

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#19
Why do you need to buy everything at one go?

Get the body and a couple of lenses first. Start shooting and figure out what is your style. Then you will know.

BTW, if you look at zooms, most people tend to use a zoom lens at maybe 3 points in the zoom, the 2 extremes, and maybe somewhere in the middle. Many just use the 2 extremes. For primes, there will be situations you cannot get closer, or walk backwards for wider. The main advantage of primes is the wide apertures and the superior IQ they offer.

The difference in focal length and walking in, is the perspective you get. If you have a 24mm prime, and you walk in towards your subject till the FOV is equal to a 85mm lens. The resulting picture will be very different from the one coming from the 85mm lens standing further back. It is all about perspective and compression.

There is a good article about the subject http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)

Here iare articles about focal length in portraits
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/focal-lengths-in-portraits-5687
http://www.ontakingpictures.com/2010/08/impact_of_focal_length_on_port/

So in the end, you have to decide for yourself what is the best strategy for you. And the only way to know is to shoot more and discover your style and preference. As for me, I use both. I get cheaper zoom lenses because at certain situations, I need and/or prefer the versatility of zooms. I also have several prime lenses I work with quite a bit.

Primes: 24/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4
MF primes: 28PC, 50/1.2, 85/2, 105/2.5
Zooms: 11-16/2.8, 17-50/2.8, 28-75/2.8, 80-200/2.8
Bro, thanks for the pointers.
I like to buy all in 1 go because I would like to cut the hassle to keep on buying lenses (and selling lens).
I did consider to get one FX + 24-70 to try out first.

As for the perspective, I do understand that. "Zoom with feet" is actually a misconception.

Maybe I should view all my past photos to decide.
(Maybe I know myself better) but if pure all prime set up, i have the versatility to travel light, nice bokeh & IQ plus train up my composing skill more (in a way concentrate on the composing instead of zoom-in, zoom-out).
Whereby for the tele/zoom set up, I am able to own 2.8 trinity and cover 14mm to 200mm! However, 1st and 2nd trinity both weigh ~1kg respectively :eek: 3rd trinity weighs about 1.5 kg! even more ":eek:"

I do understand that most photog own both tele and primes. However, based on your experience, your circle, most photog tends to favour which set up? Or what's the transition from prime to tele or vice versa like? e.g.: using kit lens, then expanding f3.5 line up, then to 2.8 then to prime?
 

Last edited:
Jan 28, 2011
566
0
0
#20
I wonder which shop will be lucky enough to spot you :)
I bought the d7000 initially but sold it off shortly, now that i own d700 ... i am really happy with its performance.
Pretty sure you will like it.

During the course of buying/selling/trading my gear ... i came across some nice shops, here they are
1) Parisilk (HollandV) - prices are very competitive and attitude not too bad. quite willing to help.
2) John3:16 (Funan) - great service, not the lowest price in town ... after sales service consistently good.
3) SLR revolution (funan) - customer service differ from sales to sales, wide variety of products ... overall not too bad but their prices are the highest among.
4) Orient (SLS) - Prices are cheap. Service 7/10 ... not bad.

If prices didn;t really differ by a great deal, I normally visit John3:16 ... else it would be Orient.
happy shopping man ...
Try to avoid SB :)
 

Top Bottom