D700 quality (Page 2): Those numbers wouldn't confuse you if you go back about ten years (D300). That said the D300 was a pro build DSLR of it's time, and could undoubtedly, in the...

Kuzano

drklrd wrote:

Did you miss a zero from the listed Nikons. I thou... (show quote)

Those numbers wouldn't confuse you if you go back about ten years (D300).

That said the D300 was a pro build DSLR of it's time, and could undoubtedly, in the right hands, still shoot as many weddings as it did that many years ago. A Pro who has tweaked all the capabilities of an older high quality DSLR could probably shoot weddings as well as a self professed Pro who is always learning new camera's because of the spin of evolution in models.

So much for the post indicating "you would never shoot MY weddings" from the poster who probably couldn't find a bride if he tried.

I didn't read far in this post before realizing it's all about who can knock down a street lamp with their dick!!

The thread was three posts in before helpful information for the OP began to show up.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I have D700, along with a D800e. Both are great, with the 800 being better. The D700 works well at higher ISO settings. I find little wrong with it.
--Bob

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there.
Just wondered what opinions there were regarding the Nikon D700. Right now i have two D300 that i use for weddings, portraits, and headshots. Wanting to go to full frame body due to the fact that 4 of my 5 lenses are FX now. What is the noise like at iso 1600/3200, quality of print at sizes 16x20 max. Any other help is much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.

phlash46 Loc: Westchester County, New York

Kuzano wrote:

Those numbers wouldn't confuse you if you go back ... (show quote)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

They say a picture is worth a 1000 words. So, here's one done with my D700 a few years back.
--Bob

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there.
Just wondered what opinions there were regarding the Nikon D700. Right now i have two D300 that i use for weddings, portraits, and headshots. Wanting to go to full frame body due to the fact that 4 of my 5 lenses are FX now. What is the noise like at iso 1600/3200, quality of print at sizes 16x20 max. Any other help is much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.

(Download)

agillot

i also use a D300 for birds , the only negative is could use more pixels on small birds that need to be cropped a lot , beside that a great camera from 10 yrs ago .

WayneL Loc: Baltimore Md

SharpShooter wrote:

You shoot weddings with a D300?
About the only thing a 700 will get you is a bigger sensor.
Maybe you could beg, borrow or steal and at least get a D800.
You'd never shoot MY wedding!!! Good luck with that 10 year old camera!!!
I'm not trying to be negative, but you're a professional!
SS

So if the D700 was good enough when it came out to shoot weddings then why is it no good now.

MCoomber Loc: Hamilton ontario

WayneL wrote:

So if the D700 was good enough when it came out to shoot weddings then why is it no good now.

You make sense Wayne. I noticed that there are a lot "gearheads" that have very bad cas of GAS.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

...my D700 was wonderful when I bought it and even better after I sold it. I really miss it. If you get one you will be seamless AFA the menu...

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there.
Just wondered what opinions there were regarding the Nikon D700. Right now i have two D300 that i use for weddings, portraits, and headshots. Wanting to go to full frame body due to the fact that 4 of my 5 lenses are FX now. What is the noise like at iso 1600/3200, quality of print at sizes 16x20 max. Any other help is much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.

Maybe post some photos that you have shot with your camera. Then we can put a different spin on this. It's not the camera but the shooter and his skills.

Kuzano

phlash46 wrote:

Illegitimi Non Carborundum....... Had this plaque on my desk at the bank.

On the back it said "Don't let the bastards grind you down!"

"GRRRRRRRR!"

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

Jules Karney wrote:

Maybe post some photos that you have shot with your camera. Then we can put a different spin on this. It's not the camera but the shooter and his skills.

Jules, all he wants to do is upgrade to full frame...I, at least, think maybe he knows what he's doing. If he's successfully shooting weddings with a D300, anyhow. Neh?

Hbuk66 Loc: Oswego, NY

I believe when it came out the D700 was a $3000 camera, I own both the D300 and D700 and I love the results I get with either one... but I'm a 68 year old rookie...

WayneL Loc: Baltimore Md

MCoomber wrote:

You make sense Wayne. I noticed that there are a lot "gearheads" that have very bad cas of GAS.

I made many 20x30 prints from my 12mp D90 and D300 and they looked great.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

chasgroh wrote:

Jules, all he wants to do is upgrade to full frame...I, at least, think maybe he knows what he's doing. If he's successfully shooting weddings with a D300, anyhow. Neh?

I am sure he knows what he is doing. I am just curious to see his work as I am sure the rest of us would be too.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

Jules Karney wrote:

I am sure he knows what he is doing. I am just curious to see his work as I am sure the rest of us would be too.

...true that. ;0)