Upload & Sell: On
So I bought a D700 a few weeks ago, already put about 6000 shots on it and I absolutely love it. The problem with that 6000 shots is well, my D700 is rated for 150k and the next camera up (D3) is rated for 300K. I could care less about the settings and differences between the two other than the shot count difference. I'm really just curious: DOES THE D700 SHUTTER HOLD UP AS WELL AS THE D3...
This is all I want to know. I'm looking to Trench and a few other regs to answer this. I'm a skilled enough photog that I can make a D700/7000/5200/akjf;lksdjf;lkdajs whatever you want look the same under 6400. All I want to know is if the D3 has seriously proven to last longer than the D700.
ALL I WANT TO KNOW IS IN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE HAS YOUR D700 LASTED AS LONG AS YOUR D3
Still currently using both D3 and D700, they have 110k and 90k actuations respectively. Odds are they will last as long as I own the cameras. If they ever need a new shutter, it can be replaced for a few hundred dollars. I utilize more than one camera. If one fails and goes to the shop, there's another one to take its place. In theory the D3 will last longer. Theory and practice don't always agree. Like an other mechanical part, it could fail early in life, it could go on for decades. Knock on wood, have yet to have a shutter totally fail.
In almost 30 years of using Nikon gear, shutter life is one of the last criteria I have used for body selection. Other factors such as overall handling, synch speed, TTL, AF capabilities, and now in the digital age, dual card slots, dynamic range and noise performance are more important to me.