Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/14/2018 9:49:34 PM EDT
Acquired a Nikon D700 a few days ago. Came also with a 35mm 1:2 D lens. Batteries. Original box. Manuels. Shutter count is a bit high at 77,000, but I got it from the original owner and the guy was very legit on his explanations. Guy also had a D4, D300, a few killer lenses, and had a D500 arriving later in the day. Paid $375 for everything.

Anyway, straight out of the camera, my pics are blowing my D7000 out of the water. I mean, look at this pic.......this is right out of the camera. Sure the pic is awful with how it is composed, and my skills are terrible, but the detail I get out of this camera is way better than my D7000. I know this pic looks awful to you guys, but for me, I'm happy with the level of detail this camera delivers.

Have a lot of messing around to do, to get use to the camera (I like how the setup is very similiar to my D7000), but I'm excited on the quality this thing can output......providing I step my game up.

Lens was a Tamron G2 70-200mm 2.8

Link Posted: 5/14/2018 10:17:55 PM EDT
Pretty sweet.

I do note, however, that the seller was ditching an FX for a DX sensor , which are quite capable of taking sharp, detailed shots.

Caillie In the Truck by FredMan, on Flickr
Link Posted: 5/14/2018 10:48:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/15/2018 3:17:55 AM EDT
I come from the 35mm film world, and the APS-C/DX crop sensor is God-send because I can get along just fine on 3 lenses for general photography, and maybe a macro in the future. Getting the same performance from a FX would probably cost me $10k+, which more than I am willing to spend, and not mention carrying around a lenses that extra weight.
Link Posted: 5/15/2018 11:18:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/15/2018 11:24:25 PM EDT by Hammbone]
I wanted to move up to a full frame but the D500 had what I wanted. I shot my son's little league game and ripped off about 700 shots and I missed focus on about 5 shots not to mention I still had good quality photos at 8,000 iso.

" />
Link Posted: 5/15/2018 11:55:20 PM EDT
True ARFCOM answer is Both.

Full frame for quality and better low light and small sensor for sports.

YMMV
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 12:20:07 AM EDT
Went from a D700 to a D600. Very nice upgrade.
Link Posted: 5/16/2018 10:35:15 AM EDT
Not sure if my youngest kid is gonna go back and get her bachelors degree, so for now, I need to watch my money hard......but for $375, this is a good rig for me, and my DX lens' work on it fine.

Was keeping an eye on the D7500 and D500 prices, but this D700 came along.

Link Posted: 5/18/2018 11:13:03 AM EDT
Might just be the newness factor.

My cameras went N70->N80->D70->D200->D800 and most recently bought a D7100 for my daughter.

I've been impressed with the D7100. I was just editing some photos we took a couple weekends ago. I was using the D800 and she was using the D7100. Hundreds of photos, and I'd get confused about who took what and with what camera.
Composition. Sorting through the unedited photos, I could tell which ones she took based on composition differences.
Sharpness. While editing the photos, I noticed the D7100 being slightly sharper than the D800, some of it was in her particular camera settings, and some of it had to do with us using two different lenses - with me using a wider aperture.

I've also been migrating photos over from separate drives into a single drive system. In doing so, I was looking at some photos from 10 or more years ago, and was scratching my head at who could have taken the photos. Turns out, it was my daughter. Either with the D70 or D200. I didn't even bother to look at the exif, because I was just impressed with how good the photos were. As long as the lighting allowed ISO 800 and below, the photos were great. Those older DSLRs, however, really fell apart at the higher ISOs. Today's cameras bear that out.

However, compared to most of the film I've shot, the D70 and D200 images blow away the film. I've been scanning a lot of my old negatives recently, and have been aghast at the results. Negatives were, for the most part, a wreck. Positives, for the most part, were good to great, depending on whether that was the exposure range I was really after.

I have one 11x14 on my wall where I don't know if it was ISO 100 slide film or a D70. Same composition. Same lens. Two different camera bodies. Now that I think about it, I have another 11x14 that I might be unsure of.
Link Posted: 5/18/2018 3:46:03 PM EDT
OP, Nikon sells DVD's for specific cameras on how to work them. I bought one (and a thick book) specifically for my D600. It helped me tremendously as I could go back & re-listen to something until I got it.

Nikon has lots of entry to intermediate level DVD's that are well worth watching.

My .o2
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 12:54:07 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 7mm-08:
True ARFCOM answer is Both.

Full frame for quality and better low light and small sensor for sports.

YMMV
View Quote
That's what I do. My 70D does about 7fps and the extra reach really helps with things. When it's time to shoot dances or non-sports stuff, it's time for the 5D2.
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 8:52:58 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zack3g:
I'm quite the opposite. Unless a D850 falls from the sky and lands in my lap, I don't plan to go for another FX sensor. I did it already. The D750 was nice, but it just couldn't stand out well enough against the D500.

Enjoy it!
View Quote
This is where I am at. I love telephoto shots and action and for that the D500 rocks.
I love the DX format. I would like a 850 it it fell from the sky as well but won't buy one.
My D7200 is also a very capable camera.
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 9:02:11 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 9:16:13 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zack3g:

See, I don't care what anyone else says. Some of you 17ers are alright.
View Quote
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 9:22:08 PM EDT
I just got a Nikon 200-500 F5.6 zoom. While it is not as sharp as my VR2 70-200 it is nice for getting a bigger
image on the sensor. Of course it has rained constantly since I got it

Initial tests I have done show I got a decent sample and I am excited to try it on planes.
Link Posted: 5/19/2018 9:23:53 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/20/2018 8:28:48 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cistercian:
I just got a Nikon 200-500 F5.6 zoom. While it is not as sharp as my VR2 70-200 it is nice for getting a bigger
image on the sensor. Of course it has rained constantly since I got it

Initial tests I have done show I got a decent sample and I am excited to try it on planes.
View Quote
Focus tune it. For shorter lenses, FoCal works great, but for this beast I taped up a focus target on the side of my truck and then zoomed on it from the other side of the yard, maybe ~50-60 yards away. With the camera and lens secured on a tripod well, run AF tune 13 times, writing down the adjustment the camera makes. Toss the highest and lowest adjustment. then average the rest for your end adjustment to input. Mind you, do this on the focal you'll use most often.

Is it as sharp as my 70-200mm f/2.8 VR G? No, but stopped down it's pretty damn close. These were at f/5.6, 1/2000 to 1/2500, ISO 400 or lower (I think) on my D850 with the 200-500mm f/5.6. Just remember that Facebook brutalizes the images on upload.



Link Posted: 5/20/2018 8:33:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/20/2018 8:33:51 PM EDT by NorthPolar]
I'll admit I miss the perceived reach of my D7200 and will (at some point in the future) probably pick up a D500 for wildlife and aircraft shots. But I have to say for shorter/wider shots, especially wide aperture stuff the full frame is freaking amazing. Like knocking my socks off awesome. Hell, for aurora shots I was halving my ISO and exposure time at points which is insane.

Probably one of my favorite shots with the D850 so far. Once I get the time, I'll go back and edit it more carefully to make sure there's no fringing on the hangars, add some noise to prevent banding in the sky, etc. But for a rush job, I still like it.

Link Posted: 5/20/2018 8:45:42 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By vmax84:
Not sure if my youngest kid is gonna go back and get her bachelors degree, so for now, I need to watch my money hard......but for $375, this is a good rig for me, and my DX lens' work on it fine.

Was keeping an eye on the D7500 and D500 prices, but this D700 came along.

http://i.imgur.com/Rpb8wvH.jpg
View Quote
Just wait till you put a good lens on it.
Link Posted: 5/20/2018 11:25:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/21/2018 5:28:12 AM EDT
I started on APS-C, then switched to Micro 4:3... Olympus OM-D EM-5. Now I have a Mark II.

Badass little camera.
Link Posted: 5/21/2018 5:34:49 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zack3g:
The d850 and d500 have roughly identical pixel density. A cropped d850 to dx size is more or less equal to what you'd get from a D500. That's one of the neat things about that camera. It's also why their noise performance is similar.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zack3g:
Originally Posted By NorthPolar:
I'll admit I miss the perceived reach of my D7200 and will (at some point in the future) probably pick up a D500 for wildlife and aircraft shots. But I have to say for shorter/wider shots, especially wide aperture stuff the full frame is freaking amazing. Like knocking my socks off awesome. Hell, for aurora shots I was halving my ISO and exposure time at points which is insane.

Probably one of my favorite shots with the D850 so far. Once I get the time, I'll go back and edit it more carefully to make sure there's no fringing on the hangars, add some noise to prevent banding in the sky, etc. But for a rush job, I still like it.

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/31957956_416990055441122_3160684308780285952_o.jpg?_nc_cat=0&_nc_eui2=AeHSM2f3epyo_Xsa9z0L1hlaTxVlGw1ksdsK_jKy-JL_bJ4IeSx5_ltZYmT5F1k1PiJZ5dyQzUC4QPyCs5R0yI1n-J1IXx3d60Sm6T8cxRCTbg&oh=6312c799ee6fefb4b64e3b288e98ae31&oe=5B799C4C
The d850 and d500 have roughly identical pixel density. A cropped d850 to dx size is more or less equal to what you'd get from a D500. That's one of the neat things about that camera. It's also why their noise performance is similar.
Huh, I didn't know that. Something to take into consideration when I pick up a second body down the road then.
Link Posted: 5/21/2018 5:41:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/21/2018 7:12:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2018 7:13:27 AM EDT by RaptorFuel]
I have had a 7D for years and loved it. This year I decided to treat myself and bought the 7DII which I returned because they made some design decisions in the new one I couldn't live with. I ended up buying a 5DIV on a Black Friday sale. I'm loving the full frame sensor. The only downside is telephoto action shots but the increase is MP gives me some crop room so when cropped it's similar to my 7D. I almost wish I had the 7DII only because I usually take telephoto action shots.
Top Top