D700's I suspect are going to be just a hair under 2K, depending of course on the exact specs and reviews of the D800. I don't want to generalize for other people, but I bought a D700 because I wanted the superior low light performance and shallow DOF of FF. I went from a 12mp camera (d90) to a 12mp camera (D700). IF the D800 is just/merely an improvement in megapixels and/or is a steep price increase, I don't think the D700 will drop so fast in price. I will certainly keep mine.
But....as to what is the best value.....I think a d700 is great, cheapest FF nikon that is 90% of a D3 while still being a semi-reasonable size. I value size to much to jump to a d3 (unless for some reason I start needing pro-body features for paid gigs)
for DX value, I would go D5100 or D7000, I would skip D3000/5000/90/300. The D5100 has a better sensor than the D300 for much less cost and less weight. I think the D7000 is overall, however the most appealing DX camera
A D3, even with 80k, is a steal for the $2500 they're selling for. Doesn't mean that's what you need though, if you want a small body with a crop sensor, the D7000 is great, even if it's not going for 1/2 the original retail price.
I'd have to agree with the D90 as well. I'm just finally selling mine to upgrade to the D7000. I don't have a single complaint about it. I think I was lucky to be able to slide into a D90 as my first camera. I learned an awful lot using it!
i just bought a d5000 for my daughter, and so far she really likes it. the low price point of the 5000 enabled her to also get a flash which she wanted. the op didn't mention a budget, only 'best value'....to me the d5100 seems to be a great value at about $550 or so used these days....big price jump up to the 7000. the 300 is fantastic but is a different level of camera altogether. so many good choices....
^ + freakin' 1 and well worth the extra $100 or so over the price of used D90
6-8 fps, far superior Cam3500 AF, pro build/controls, 100% viewfinder, 150K rated shutter, AF fine tune...yada, yada, yada.
I personally think the D7000 in the ~$950 range is a great value right now. I use 3x D3's and a D7000 and I'm frequently impressed with the D7k image quality. To me its biggest downsides are the small viewfinder and slow buffer, but these are balanced by its great video quality and overall feature set in such a small/light body.
I've owned two D700's and agree it's awesome, but I wouldn't consider it a "value." In the right hands, the D7K image quality comes very close at less than half the price of a used D700.
I've also owned two D300's and while yes, that's a good value when considering its used:new pricing, I'd pick the D7000 over it any day.
Yup. The D300/s is Nikon's best used value camera easily. I remembered they MSRP at nearly $2000 but one can frequently get see them on CL for about $800-900. Saw a non-S going for $750!
I just recommended a relative get a D70s. She found one in great condition for less than $200. It may be a little behind the other recommendations in IQ, but the extra physical controls, taking CF cards, and higher max shutter speed are all things that someone may prefer over a D5000/similar. And for the price, it's practically a throw away if the need to move up to something newer arrises rather quickly. AF-D support to boot.
If you want a smaller body the D90 would be very tough to beat. It is a fantastic camera. For a larger body the D300 would get my vote. Another wonderful camera.
The thing that really impresses me about the D90 is that you can still get a brand new or refurbished one for shockingly cheap, considering how much camera you're getting. I think I might take a brand new D90 over a heavily used D300.
The D300 is a really nice camera as well, but for whatever reason I don't love mine, even though it was my main camera for over two years.
