I've been holding off buying a FX camera body for a while now, but now I'm really considering it. Over the years I've given into my NAS and really got some of the best FX lenses despite owning a DX body (like the 24-70, 85/1.4, 80-200 afs) so the switch should be easy since I hardly have any DX lenses left.
Now my question is whether or not to get a D700 now, so wait and hope for a D700S (the d700 version of the D3S) to come out before April 2010. What do you guys think? I would say if the difference is $1000 dollars that it would be worth it to have video capability and even better low light shooting. I don't really pay attention to what the release dates have been so I can't really estimate when a D700S would be released so if you guys have any speculation I'd appreciate it!
I'm not one to talk about need vs. want. Fortunately I was in a position to be able to afford my want. If you're happy with the images you can get out of your D300 and D40 then wait and maybe just buy a dedicated video camera for video. I myself am toying with the idea of video but I know that I won't go with an SLR with video. The technology is not there yet. Now the choice between FX & DX that's a different story all together. I never bought DX lenses. All my lenses were FX cause I came from Nikon Film to digital. It gets back to can you do what you do with what you have or is it just want. Sorry I'm no help.
I doubt they'll make a D700s, for no other reason than it'd fit my needs perfectly and I'm not that lucky. Word on the street is we'll see a D800 next year instead of a d700s/x. Some thing that's in between the D3s & D3x sensor wise. I think the rumor is 18mp, I would hope the high ISO quality can be brought to D3s levels, hard telling. If it's close and has dual card slots I'm game.
I do have high hopes for 2010 release wise. If you get a D700 now you can always resell and recoup most of what you payed.
I hope the D700's successor will have even better low-light capability and maybe dual memory cards, but I honestly couldn't care less about video with a DSLR.
A D700s is exactly what I don't want, but bring on the 'x' or a D800. I have no intention of becoming a videographer. That's not why I'm here.
p.1 #11 · Any speculation of "D700S" release date?
My feeling is buy the D700 now and use it. I was on the fence waiting and a couple months ago purchased the D700 and now wondering why I waited, it is a amazing camera.
p.1 #15 · Any speculation of "D700S" release date?
Don't buy any camera. There are too many photos in the world as it is.
Seriously, the D700 is all the camera I need, especially since buying a dedicated video camera. I say go for it, it really is a significant improvement over the D300.
p.1 #17 · Any speculation of "D700S" release date?
Just waiting for this to come out...then I will dump all my Canon and switch
7D+ 12-24 + 24-70L + 100-400L +50 MKI +Tamron 28-75+filters (yes the D3000 convinced me to switch..... was thinking about D5000 but the setup will be a bit hard...so I guess I will stick to what I have for now and wait for the FX ....)
p.1 #18 · Any speculation of "D700S" release date?
Ask yourself this - how many photos are you going to miss by waiting till April? If you don't take a lot over the winter, no biggie on the wait. If you do, then get a used D700 now, and sell when / if the new one comes out AND is what you want.
Don't be somewhere incredible WISHING you had a D700.
p.1 #19 · Any speculation of "D700S" release date?
Gary Clennan wrote:
I would buy now. The D700s (if it even comes out) may not even be what you wanted. Spend the money now and enjoy the D700.... Life is too short.
p.1 #20 · Any speculation of "D700S" release date?
I have a D300 and D700, and the IQ improvement going from the 300 to 700 is nothing short of amazing when I need it. 95% of the time, though, I'm taking a shot that will look _exactly_ the same regardless of which camera I took it with. A daylight shot at ISO200 or 400 posted to Flickr or Facebook will have no discernible difference based on the camera. At this point I can't give up the 700 in situations like low-light gyms, the customers expect that kind of quality now.
That being said, it doesn't sound like you are constantly saying "Ugh, I missed that shot because I don't have a D700," because if that were the case you'd already have it. If your current setup is getting you by most of the time, I would suggest renting the 700 for those situations where you want all of your bases covered, or where you know you're going to need it, if video is something you're really interested in waiting to invest in.
Nikon is really losing the war right now with Canon in the video arena. Like others have said, video on these things still has some major drawbacks, and I get the feeling (no proof of this) that Nikon is letting Canon play the incremental game, with each generation getting a little bit better, and they're working on a real solution that won't feel so much like someone took a still camera and glued video onto it. I know they have bodies out with video right now, but if they were really standing behind the tech. there wouldn't be more consumer bodies with video than pro bodies. Nikon is the king of product segmentation, so it doesn't make any sense that they put video into the D90/D5000 before the D3, or that the reigning champ of prosumer bodies doesn't have video yet. I think they're are probably just putting decent video capability into these bodies now so they can match Canon on paper and in marketing. I wouldn't be surprised if they introduce a much better solution within two quarters, even if that means the relatively new D3S suddenly becomes a D4, maybe with some system components like a EVF or something to compete with the RED Scarlet; Nikon generally likes to get things right at the expense of affordability.
In conclusion, if you want video, and I were you, I would wait. I think it will be worth the wait, and you're not really missing all that much without a D700. Yes, it's great, but when I bought my D300 that was great, and when I got my D70s, that was great too.
