 |
Nikon D700
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent noise, versatile and intuitive functions, fast, good build to weight compromise, excellent file quality, super fast with the grip, great little flash for commander mode, excellent screen and lcd.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not 24mp.
|
|
|
IMHO, this camera is slightly over priced. Otherwise, it is a great value. I had a D3 and sold it due to the weight. I kept losing circulation in my neck! The D700 is everything the D3 is in a smaller body. The little pop up flash is so handy for the creative flash capabilities. With the grip, you almost have the speed of a D3. The file noise is so low it is amazing what you can pull out of shadows. My only beef with that is the shadows sometimes seem artificially clean. I would definitely buy a second if I weren't expecting a D700x to come out. Don't let anyone fool you, the Canon 5D is OLD by comparison. I suspect the MKII produces no better images than the D700, despite the pixel bragging rights. I bought a used 5D for fun and I felt I had stepped back at least two years in technology. The D300 is simply an aps version of the D700 with a few tweaks missing.
|
|
|
|
|
Tamron 28-105MM F/2.8 LD Aspherical (IF)
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great range, fixed aperature, sharp, versatile
|
|
Cons:
|
heavy, heavy, enormous filter and hood, plastic, some softness
|
|
|
This lens is a great general purpose, mine is bigger than yours, lens. I have had excellent results shooting scenery, stopped down on a tripod. I have experienced the soft glow, but that was on a Fuji S3pro and the same effect does not show up on my Nikon bodies. Tremendous zoom and focus range. Pretty durable for a plastic lens. Hood is very effective and keeping out stray light, branches and fingers.
|
|
|
|
|
Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,700.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
great zoom range, build quality, fast
|
|
Cons:
|
soft corners, soft corners, distortion
|
|
|
As a Nikon user, when Canon was producing full frame digital cameras and Nikon was spouting the advantages the APS sensor as a reason for not producing a full frame camera, you knew the full frame was going to come. SO, I didn't want to buy a lens that would be limited to the DX format. I had had a 20 - 35 and it was very solid, I wanted the wider angle and hoped for greater sharpness. Wider angle yes, sharpness depends. At wider aps, this lens is very soft in the corners. So much so I sent it in for a service check. When stopped down to 11, on a tripod, it is very sharp. Some corner fall off, definite barrel distortion at times. Most ocean horizons don't have the shape of a basketball! For clever lens owners, there are preset Photoshop corrections for the distortions. In the old days, you expected better. Compared to a 24mm prime, this lens sucks. In fact, I just bought a 24mm prime to replace this zoom. Saved about 4 lbs. and $1400. The zoom is only an advantage is you must shoot from awkward or varied positions. Otherwise, two primes is a much better choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
