I am in a similiar quandary. My D3x arrives in the next couple of days, but what do I partner it with? My Heart says the D3 and Bank Manager says the D700!!
8mp to 12mp is a good jump and will give you much more scope for cropping which is useful. For field sports I think the only solution is bigger glass!
Sounds like you have got your heart set on the D700? That's a couple more Canon converts to this board! Very very helpful folk!!
I would get a used D3 body if I were you. Especially if you're used to shooting with a pro body already. I use the D2 series of cameras and they fit my hand very nicely, the D3 is even better (with the exception of the AE-lock button placement for me). The D3 gets you the integrated vertical grip and 9fps in FX mode and the dual card slots for instant backup, as well as the portrait mode (5:4). I have handled both the D3 and the D700+grip and the D3 is much better balanced to me. I suggest that you go to a store and try the same comparison. Also, in order to get to 8fps on D700+grip, you should get the BL-3 battery cover and a EN-EL4a battery. So to me, the cost advantage starts going if you factor those in.
As for lenses, if you don't need the VR, look around for used AFS 80-200 or even a AFD 80-200 (screwdriver motor - but will AF pretty fast due to D3's high-torque motor). For your "walkaround" range, try the older 28-70 f/2.8 which is a beauty of a lens. The 24-70 is even better but the 28-70 is close in IQ and costs you a lot less. At some point in the future, you can get yourself a 300 f/2.8
Sounds like you have got your heart set on the D700? That's a couple more Canon converts to this board! Very very helpful folk!!
Well, I wouldn't say I've got my heart set on it, but I figure if I go the D700 route then that longer lens my be in my bag sooner than later. I'm going to start checking the buy and sell board for a used D3, but frankly, I just can't understand why anyone would put such an outstanding piece of equipment up for sale!
Avi B wrote:
As for lenses, if you don't need the VR, look around for used AFS 80-200 or even a AFD 80-200 (screwdriver motor - but will AF pretty fast due to D3's high-torque motor). For your "walkaround" range, try the older 28-70 f/2.8 which is a beauty of a lens. The 24-70 is even better but the 28-70 is close in IQ and costs you a lot less. At some point in the future, you can get yourself a 300 f/2.8
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate it very much. In looking at your profile, it looks like you've got extensive experience with a great many Nikon lenses. Will the AFS 80-200 focus quickly? I certainly enjoy how the 70-200L snaps smartly into focus on my Canon Mark II.
If I can get by with the 80-200, maybe I can find a used 300mm prime and I'll be set.
Yes, the AFS 80-200 is a very fast focussing lens, on par with 70-200VR. The AFD lens on the D3 will also focus/track almost as fast, due to the high torque motor in the D3. Actually, it may be interesting to note that the D1H turns AFD lenses faster than the D2 bodies do! Anyway, useless trivia for you
Avi B wrote:
Yes, the AFS 80-200 is a very fast focussing lens, on par with 70-200VR. The AFD lens on the D3 will also focus/track almost as fast, due to the high torque motor in the D3. Actually, it may be interesting to note that the D1H turns AFD lenses faster than the D2 bodies do! Anyway, useless trivia for you
....
Ok, question. I think I know the differences between the D700+grip and the D3. I keep reading things about the 'D3 and high torque (AF) motor', does this mean the D700 doesn't have one?
The D700's focus motor appears to be fairly high torque as well. But the D3 is snappier, just feels that way. Does that makes sense? I must be honest that I've not tried AFD lenses on D700+grip... The D1H is snappier than D3 in terms of focussing speed FWIW
You won't be disappointed in the D700 for indoor sports either in terms of high ISO performance (phenominal) or AF performance (amazing tracking reliability... very very accurate). I own both a D700 and D300, and having the ability to interchange / remove / use the grip is a real bonus IMHO. I use EN-EL4a batteries with the grip and both cameras will do 8fps, although to be honest I don't use it too often.
The D700 is top shelf for hockey, and I love it mated to the 300mm f2.8 VR. Keep in mind the 70-200 f2.8's that are so perfect a focal length on a crop body seem too short for my tastes on the D700 / D3. Hence my love for the 300 on FX.
All these will be at ISO3200 with no NR done... exif should be intact:
Has anyone considered the Sigma 120-300? Sounds luike that would be a good fit for the D-700; would put you close to the 80-200 on a cropped body and give you 300mm cropped.......
Can't speak for the image quality wide open but those who have them seem to like them......
Well DJ, your images are astounding and that's the kind of stuff that motivates me to switch. However, if the 300 2.8 lens in the link below is the one we're discussing, then the $5000 price tag will be out of my league.
I'm just reading and catching - too many people to thanks so thanks to everyone
This is a big part of the reason I love the FM forums, great people.
I'll do so research myself on the 700/D3, both sound so good - I'm a 6.3" guy large hands and large works well for me with my long fingers and that's part of the reason I'm attrached to the D3.
The hockey pics are asstounding, it almost hurts to look at them they're so clear!!
Thanks also for the picture of your niece Gregg, it's a particularly good picture not only because she's in mid role but the the variety of textures and tones make it quite facinating to study all the elements.
I shot the MKII and the 70-200 IS 2.8L for a few years until a few weeks ago in similar situation, Indoor High school sports, Cross Country and Track. I hesitated with the D3 and D700 dilemma. I don't see myself getting two bodies but I always wished for the lighter body during travels and vacations. So the D700 did the trick for me. The one thing to be concerned is by the time you add the grip, a EN-EL4 batteries and the adapter and charger for the new battery you will be out another $400-$600 bucks.
You would need:
BL-3 Battery Chamber Cover for EN-EL4 Used with MB-40 or MB-D10 $40
MB-D10 Multi-Power Battery Grip $260
EN-EL4 battery $119 * This is what's going to push it to 8fps or the provided chamber for 8 (AA) batteries.
MH-21 Quick Charger for Nikon EN-EL4 & EN-EL4a Battery $124
True that you can use AA batteries and that's where I am now using the eneloops. They work fine but I am also no longer doing the days of shooting 6000 images for cheerleading competitions.
The D3 feels great (period) and the D700+grips does not IMHO but it is a nice compromise. I found the AF system and ISO quality a huge upgrade coming from the 1D MKII.
One thing to consider is the loss of the 1.3 crop factor. I think a true 200 for Soccer will be short but for Hockey it should be good.
All and All, I am very happy with my decision and If I had the money now, I would not consider a second body (D3) but a 200 F2 VR lens. I rented one recently with the D700 and it had to be pried off my Kung Fu grip hands.
Great post. Thanks for the very detailed list and cost breakdown. I'm going to have to give this a little thought.
I'm sorry not to have replied sooner but I was off shooting (you guessed it) hockey at the Wisconsin boys HS state tournament.
It was a crazy night for me. The local newspaper could not spare a staffer to go shoot and asked me to do it. Not a big deal because my son plays for one of the teams, and I go to all the games anyway, but tonight, he sustained a pretty good concussion early in the game and needless to say, that complicated my night quite a bit.
Concussions are something else. He doesn't remember anything about the game, or the team hotel he's been in for the last 36 hours, or even the names of the teams. Our team won and advanced to the semifinals, and he didn't even remember that. But he'll be fine after a couple days rest so no cause for concern.
Oh, how I wished I'd had Nikon gear for tonight's shoot!
It definitely isn't cheap... but there are less costly alternatives that will still do the trick very nicely... like the 300/f4 AF-S for starters, or a used copy of the AF-S 300/f2.8's version 1 or 2, pre-VR. Also, as someone else mentioned, a lot of people just love the Sigma 120-300 f2.8. I could never get the hang of the whole "Miss Siggy" focus technique in my short time playing around with it (zoom then refocus) but I've been told it isn't hard to get that second-nature.
At any rate... best of luck with the decision. Make sure it makes sense for you economically - never cheap switching camps... but I'm sure you'll do your research. Cheers!
It definitely isn't cheap... but there are less costly alternatives that will still do the trick very nicely... like the 300/f4 AF-S for starters, or a used copy of the AF-S 300/f2.8's version 1 or 2, pre-VR. Also, as someone else mentioned, a lot of people just love the Sigma 120-300 f2.8. I could never get the hang of the whole "Miss Siggy" focus technique in my short time playing around with it (zoom then refocus) but I've been told it isn't hard to get that second-nature.
At any rate... best of luck with the decision. Make sure it makes sense for you economically - never cheap switching camps... but I'm sure you'll do your research. Cheers!...Show more →
DJ, or anyone else who knows...
With my Canon gear, I'd never even consider anything less open than f/2.8 for night soccer ambient light. My question is, with my newfound Nikon high ISO capability, if I start my kit with a 300 f/4, will I be able to use it at night, in your opinion?
With my Canon gear, I'd never even consider anything less open than f/2.8 for night soccer ambient light. My question is, with my newfound Nikon high ISO capability, if I start my kit with a 300 f/4, will I be able to use it at night, in your opinion?
Thanks,
Steve
Don't have my Nikon kit yet so can't really comment.
All I will add is that increasing the ISO should give you a high enough shutter speed, but the other advantage of an f2.8 lens is that the AF points become high precision ones, thus more accurate. Not familiar enough with Nikon yet to fully understand how they work.
