So, I think I'm going to sell my D700 and pick up a D300 instead. I don't use the D700 that much and it seems like a bit of over indulgence for me and I can use the extra money.
I'm not a pro but, I'm wondering if anyone else has done this and did they regret it and why?
Depends what you are downgrading to. Even then, I don't think I could give up that viewfinder. I've still got my D80. It would take a hell of a lot to get me to sell my D700. The 24-70 AF-S would go first. Sad, but true.
I really enjoy my D700, Even though right now I am shooting a lot of sports and could use the extra reach of the D300 I wouldn't go back for anything. D700 is simply too nice of a camera. Viewfinder is great, and wide angle is amazing. I do miss my Tokina 12-24mm but I think my Nikon 17-35mm does as good of a job.
I will buy you a bnib D300s, if you trade me your D700. I currently have the D200, and have thought about the D300s, but don't want to have to buy another camera again for A LONG TIME.
Nov 13, 2009 at 01:14 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
kipkeston wrote:
I'd maybe move to something smaller, like the D90 while you're at it.
ewww I don't know. After using a D300 now for a couple of years, it would be hard to go back to a D90 level body full time (fine as a backup or generic walk-around). I think going from a D700 to a D300 would be much more comfortable. After all, it's not a downgrade, but a change in format where you trade high ISO peformance for greater pixel density.
d700 -d300 doesn't seem like much of a down grade to me, d700 - d90 would seem logical. selling bodies is a sure fire way to loose cash, you will get a better return in holding onto the d700 and off loading the expensive glass and pick up a 70-300vr and 24-85 afs on the cheap to go with you 50 f1.8.
My thought is if your shooting in good light, the D300 is a great camera, it's once the light levels start to deminish that D700 really shines ove the D300.
pawlowski6132 wrote:
So, I think I'm going to sell my D700 and pick up a D300 instead. I don't use the D700 that much and it seems like a bit of over indulgence for me and I can use the extra money.
I'm not a pro but, I'm wondering if anyone else has done this and did they regret it and why?
thanx in advance for your considerations.
Joe
DON'T DO IT !!!
It may make perfect analytical sense but you will regret it. If you were using the D700 regularly now, and maybe making money, would you dare sell it?
The problem will be that you will need to make a particular shot, or get a particular project, etc, and the D700 would have been the perfect tool. Lesser options are JUST THAT.
So, just remove getting rid of your D700 as a revenue source and say your prayers instead. In the meantime you can make fantastic pics and maybe sell some of them TO MAKE MONEY.
I wish I'd of purchased the D300 again when I trashed mine back on 1.27.09.
But now that I have the D700, I'll hope to win the lottery to re buy the D300, rather than give the D700 away in a sale or trade to go back to that beautiful DX !!
jamach wrote:
DON'T DO IT !!!
It may make perfect analytical sense but you will regret it. If you were using the D700 regularly now, and maybe making money, would you dare sell it?
The problem will be that you will need to make a particular shot, or get a particular project, etc, and the D700 would have been the perfect tool. Lesser options are JUST THAT.
So, just remove getting rid of your D700 as a revenue source and say your prayers instead. In the meantime you can make fantastic pics and maybe sell some of them TO MAKE MONEY.
Just DON'T do it!
Joe
I don't think that is necessarily true on all accounts.
First and foremost the OP never mentioned anything about using his equipment to make money, nor any intentions of doing so, in fact, they are looking for a way to free up some money.
Additionally in many ways a DX body can be a better tool for a given project. Lets say you need a very wide rectangular image. Now yes the 14-24 is the best thing going, but its also $1800 to get that image with that lens if you don't have it, and there are really no other UWA options for FX. DX however has a ton of choices such as the Sigma 10-20, Nikon 10-24 etc, all costing 1/4 to 1/2 the cost of the 14-24.
Additionally if you really need the reach, such as to fill the batters box from the outfield, a DX body can work great and is far cheaper than buying a 600 f4 for FX.
Obviously there are examples where the D700 would be the better tool, but its not ALWAYS the better tool.
Heck, I've bought a D5000 and am using that for many applications instead of my D700. Im actually thinking of selling my D700 and maybe going back to a D300 as a 3rd body, in addition to picking up another D3 or D3s.
There is no one correct or black and white answer.
D700 is a great camera in many ways, but for some applications such as travel it frankly sucks. I got feed up with hauling it around, its a brick and with a 14-24, 24-70, 24 and 45 PC-E etc it just wasn't worth it to me. Switched my lightweight hiking kit to a D5000 and recently also picked up a Panasonic G1 kit.
Wouldnt do a wedding with those, naturally would prefer my D3 and D700 but for other needs those FX bodies just don't work for me and dont view DX as a downgrade in the slightest.
D5000 gives me more much less weight, better choices of glass in the UWA range, not to mention far cheaper, flip out LCD, far lighter weight and a kit that gets the job done just fine and that cost about 1/4th the price so I don't have to worry about loss/damage as much.
Tough call...I remember hearing someone say "The best camera is the one with you."
If you dread the thought of carrying around a beast like a gripped D700 + 24-70, then yeah - it'd make you think twice matched up against the more svelte D300.
I have both and I shoot both whenever the scenario dictates a specific need, that need being weight, low light performance, reach, macro, nature etc...
I, for one, can't give up the low light performance of the D700...so many more quality shots are in within my reach now that I never would have been able to take in the past, and that's too much of dealbreaker for me to ever want to consciously let go.
If money's a concern and you can live without the features of the D700, then do what you have to do to get the rig YOU want to shoot...Only you have the answer for which camera fits that bill.
I don't see a problem with going back. The D700 is a real nice camera, but the D300 is equally great. I keep thinking I want to upgrade to a D700 but the additional cost of FX lenses that I'll want (24-70, UWA) just isn't worth it for someone who only occasionally gets paid to shoot.
I did shoot a wedding with a pair of D300 bodies last weekend (and admittedly, good glass) and I never felt like I was missing out by working with a DX setup. The rest of my shooting is travel, sports, or casual, and I don't think I would give up the features of DX for any of those applications.
sorry to all the D300 aficionados, but it does not do ISO 3200, 6400 very clean at all. For that one needs the D700, D3, or D3s.
I am also sure that the D5000 also does not perform at the D700 level.
So, if one got over their head buying gear, or nature calls with this bad economy here in the US, or one needs the money and a lesser camera will suffice, etc, then by all means do what you have to do. This also includes making some money with the gear if at all possible.
I've considered it many times. It becomes a trade-off between the pluses of the D700 (high ISO and lower noise at all ISOs, large viewfinder - I wear glasses) and the pluses of the D300 (lower cost and weight - including lens options, "reach").
I chose to stick with the D700 partially because I figured I would use it more, but mostly because it would allow me to shoot the 70-200 VR1 for my daughter's high school basketball games at ISO 3200 (and ISO 6400 when needed).
Unfortunately, she injured her ankle in the summer late in league play, and it has not recovered enough strength for her to play this season. She has no problem with day to day walking and playing around. She just can't put a lot of pressure on it that comes from playing basketball. She will be in rehab for most of her junior year. And I suspect that she may not come back for her senior year.
So now I am once again thinking about this very same switch. I've obsessed about high ISO for the last 3-4 years. It was important when considering indoor HS basketball. But now, I am back to thinking about my "regular" shooting. Candids, family and friends events, vacation, coastal landscapes, etc. Amazing that I could even shoot those with ISO 100-400 film!
It certainly makes sense to sell something if you need the money for your family, etc. It's very easy to accumulate thousands of dollars worth of photo gear (like I'm one to talk!) with money that could be serving your over all or family better. It makes even more sense to sell a camera because they lose value SO fast. You probably paid something like $2,500 for it, and they can now be had for <$1,900 on eBay. That's a lot of money tied up for just a camera.
I once sold a Nikon D90s and bought a F5 because it was supposed to be the "hot" camera all the pros were using at the time. The thing was huge and weighed as much as a cinderblock. It turned out that it didn't fit my style of photo'ing at all, and was just "dead" money tied up. I sold it and bought a used F100. That was half the $$ and a much better fit. With the extra money I bought a Nikon 28mm PC lens. I still use the lens and it's worth about what I paid for it.
You didn't give any clue what you like to photo, but the D5000 uses same sensor as D300 but is MUCH lighter and compact. It also has a cool fold out LCD screen. If you like to travel, this seems to be Nikon's best compact camera at the moment. Otherwise, look at refurb D300 from someplace like Cameta Camera on eBay. You can probably repurchase a D700 a year from now if you want for something like $1,400.
In these tough times we all need to do what we all need to do.
I have both the D300 and the D700 and the D300 does not get used.
The high ISO performance alone will change the way you look at photography.
Plus.... I know that this is subjective... But I never was very fond of what the D300 did with the highlights? The histogram would read fine but the detail would be lost?
Plus... my editing time has decreased a ton with the D700....It just processes the information much better.
Howerver...bird season is getting ready to start back in South Florida and I might use the D300 some because of the DX sensor?
It would seem to me that each of us has a good feel for what we need and don't need.
I wouldn't presume to suggest to you what is best for your needs.
My approach would likely be different than yours - and others too! The best that we can do is offer our own experience. Mine is to have a variety of equipment available to meet my needs - within my budget.
You've been around so you are the best person to make that emotional/practical/financial decision.
