Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?

  
 
jeffryscott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


I was going to buy a second D7000 to have a second body. But I may have a chance to trade up for a very reasonable cost to a D700. I've dealt with the seller before and have confidence in him.

I've owned a D700 before and was very impressed with it. I'm quite satisfied with the D7000 and as I try to restart some money making photography endeavors, I thought it would be prudent to own a second body. However, a D700 is, well, FF and quite a camera. It also opens up the world of nice wide primes (28 1.8, 35 1.4) that I enjoy.

So, D700, or dual D7000's with my existing Nikkors, the 12-24 and 80-200 AF-S? The 12-24 would be sold and either a 20-35 2.8 or 28 1.8 would be top of my list to replace it.

I am definitely leaning toward the D700 if the deal works out. It is just too good of a camera to pass up. But, I do really like the second body idea too ...

Hmmmm?




Nov 15, 2013 at 10:14 PM
Mataz426
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


I'm sure people will tell how the D600 has better image quality, the D7000 has mega pixels, and the D700 is old and heavy but you and I know that the D700 is one hell of a camera (I own one) and I've seen images that will blow us away, and I can't imagine creating better images.


Nov 15, 2013 at 10:35 PM
VinnieJ
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


From a business point of view, you need a backup. Maybe a D7000 and D700 when feasible.


Nov 15, 2013 at 10:57 PM
jeffryscott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


VinnieJ wrote:
From a business point of view, you need a backup. Maybe a D7000 and D700 when feasible.


I'm thinking that as well. Both will continue to drop in price, but the D7000 will be easier to get money for in six months if I do the D700 now.

As for the D600, if I had the same offer for a D600 as I tentatively have on the D700, I'd do the deal as well.

I had thought of a D300 as a backup, but I really like the high ISO of the D700 and D7000, and that is something that I often use.



Nov 15, 2013 at 11:11 PM
jeffryscott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


Mataz426 wrote:
I'm sure people will tell how the D600 has better image quality, the D7000 has mega pixels, and the D700 is old and heavy but you and I know that the D700 is one hell of a camera (I own one) and I've seen images that will blow us away, and I can't imagine creating better images.


The D700 certainly holds its own, even today. As an old newspaper photographer, it is probably about the most versatile camera out there - great for sports, and landscapes. A true do-it-all camera.



Nov 15, 2013 at 11:14 PM
Joseph.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


If you shoot paid gigs now, I'd say pick up another D7K for sure. Having a backup body is important. Another idea is go for D700 and then pick up a cheap D3000 as backup.


Nov 15, 2013 at 11:37 PM
lukeb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


Mataz426 wrote:
I'm sure people will tell how the D600 has better image quality, the D7000 has mega pixels, and the D700 is old and heavy but you and I know that the D700 is one hell of a camera (I own one) and I've seen images that will blow us away, and I can't imagine creating better images.


I own 2 D-700's, and have absolutely no intention of letting either one go, even at the point of a BB Gun.



Nov 15, 2013 at 11:55 PM
DavidWEGS
Offline
[X]
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


From someone who has used those two bodies together, and over probably 50 weddings/assignments, I think the D700 only ever got used for the portrait stuff/subject isolation. All the detail stuff I used the D7k's and while not the same look, they are lighter, and require less work to manipulate all day.

So, I would probably suggest another D7k for now, then swap one for a D700 later.



Nov 16, 2013 at 12:49 AM
chuhsi1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


second body for safety. refurb d7000's are sometimes less than $600. I think best buy is going to sell a new d7000 with the 18-140 lens for only $800.


Nov 16, 2013 at 01:08 AM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


I'd set my sights on obtaining one of each


Nov 16, 2013 at 06:21 AM
niXer
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


I don't see why you've ruled a D600.

I know you formerly owned a D700 but you currently shoot a D7000 which is in my opinion a DX version of the D600.

You're obviously OK with the D7000 so a D600 should fit right at home with the same controls, dual SD cards, newer technology etc.

Also right now used D600s are going for just a bit more than D7000s and a good deal under a D700.



Nov 16, 2013 at 04:25 PM
jeffryscott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


niXer wrote:
I don't see why you've ruled a D600.

I know you formerly owned a D700 but you currently shoot a D7000 which is in my opinion a DX version of the D600.

You're obviously OK with the D7000 so a D600 should fit right at home with the same controls, dual SD cards, newer technology etc.

Also right now used D600s are going for just a bit more than D7000s and a good deal under a D700.


I've by no means ruled out a D600. I just have the opportunity to trade my D7000 and a bit of cash for a D700. I posted a FT ad wanting to trade toward either a D700 or D600 and the D700 offer has come up ...



Nov 16, 2013 at 10:14 PM
jamesmorophoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


get two 610's


Nov 17, 2013 at 12:04 AM
ozpall
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


i had a d7k and d700, now i have 2 d700s. just saying.


Nov 17, 2013 at 12:08 AM
lukeb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


ozpall wrote:
i had a d7k and d700, now i have 2 d700s. just saying.


+1



Nov 17, 2013 at 12:19 AM
Frogfish
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


You must have a back-up for paid gigs, however if you are keen on the FX 'look' (as I am) then the D600 is a helluva camera, and, whilst no D700, it has newer tech, fabulous DR, and would make a great alternative to your 7000. You should be able to pick one for a good price now the D610 is out.

You'll still need wider than a 28mm though.



Nov 17, 2013 at 12:46 AM
jeffryscott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


D700 deal fell through. So looks like a second D7000. FF will have to wait.


Nov 17, 2013 at 10:28 AM
matthewsaville
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


I'm surprised we got all the way through this without anybody asking what Jeff what he shoots, ?

The D700, IMO, would be a hands-down winner for challenging situations such as weddings, portraits, low-light sports, etc. I'd rather have a D700 that I know is well-maintained and unlikely to go kaput mid-wedding, with something super-cheap like a D90 as a backup, than two D7000's.

Then again, if I shot in pretty much ANY other environment that doesn't demand 90% of my images to be shot at ISO 3200 and with flagship-grade autofocus accuracy, ...a pair of D7000's would be sublime!

=Matt=



Nov 17, 2013 at 07:07 PM
jeffryscott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


matthewsaville wrote:
I'm surprised we got all the way through this without anybody asking what Jeff what he shoots, ?

The D700, IMO, would be a hands-down winner for challenging situations such as weddings, portraits, low-light sports, etc. I'd rather have a D700 that I know is well-maintained and unlikely to go kaput mid-wedding, with something super-cheap like a D90 as a backup, than two D7000's.

Then again, if I shot in pretty much ANY other environment that doesn't demand 90% of my images to be shot at ISO 3200 and with flagship-grade autofocus accuracy, ...a pair of D7000's would be sublime!

=Matt=


I'm a former newspaper photographer (25 years), so shoot just about anything in any environment - thus my interest in the D700. That said, I'm not shooting professionally right now, but wanted to get back to DSLR for sports that my kids are involved in, often in dimly lit venues - hoping to maybe share my skills with other parents in exchange for cash.

But, since the D700 deal fell through, looking at a second D7000 or maybe a D300. The D300 is the D700 equal in build quality and speed, but not the equal in image quality at high ISO. The D300 is a better sports camera than the D7000, but the D7000 is a better high ISO camera. That is the reason I was excited by the D700 prospect - it does all of those things really well. That said, a D7000 and D300 may balance each other nicely as they each have their strengths, and it provides a backup body for a safety net.

Ultimately, my decision will partly be based on what is available here when the cash is available, probably early this week.



Nov 17, 2013 at 07:28 PM
matthewsaville
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Decisions ... one D700 or two D7000's?


Yeah if you're going to get anything for sports on a budget, get a D300s not a D300, or just get a 2nd D7000. I did shoot low-light action (kids gymnastics and theater) with the D300 and honestly it is extremely difficult for me to "put up with" that image quality again periodically now that I've been so spoiled by the D700. I found the D7000 to be my new "bare minimum" of performance for ISO ~3200. Having shot those things (gymnastics and theater) all the way back to the days of the D70, I definitely would rather have significantly more acceptable ISO performance than marginally better AF performance. But that's just me.


=Matt=



Nov 17, 2013 at 09:19 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.