Photography Shoutbox
- Thread starter Dinzdale40
- Start date
So any thoughts on the Nikon D700? I'm looking into getting a nice DSLR with full frame and this camera looks very nice. Yes I realize price of the body and lenses.
Sorry if there was discussion already. I didn't feel like scrolling through 50+ pages.
Sorry if there was discussion already. I didn't feel like scrolling through 50+ pages.
finch13
Well-Known Member
Why would you chose full frame over crop body for your first camera? That doesn't make any sense...
tnguyen600
Well-Known Member
damn. d700 for your first dslr..I'd start out with something more simple and less expensive just in case you don' really like this. Here's a link to Fred Miranda's Nikon section. You'll be able to read up on Nikon's dslr line up and maybe you'll find a camera thats more for you. Good luck
I've been using point and shoot for too long and I'm tired of it. It's so friggin limited and looks like chit when compared to SLR. I've used DSLRs in the past, just never owned one. As for knowing how to use it ... I'm pretty knowledgeable when it comes to photography. I learn quick if I don't know. I would plan on taking a class and make sure I cover all the basics.
The reason I was thinking full frame instead of a crop sensor is because of the amount of light that can travel through the sensor. I mean all the advantages are pretty obvious right? I love taking sunset pictures. There is a lot of landscape here in Hawaii too. Yeah the price is up there. I dunno maybe a Nikon D300 or Canon 50D? I was all psyched when I read the D700 reviews lol.
The reason I was thinking full frame instead of a crop sensor is because of the amount of light that can travel through the sensor. I mean all the advantages are pretty obvious right? I love taking sunset pictures. There is a lot of landscape here in Hawaii too. Yeah the price is up there. I dunno maybe a Nikon D300 or Canon 50D? I was all psyched when I read the D700 reviews lol.
ryan s
they dont think it
sunset and landscape = tripod
same with macro...without one, the pics just arent as good as they could be.
in my honest opinion, if you're ready to put down $3k+ for a d700 then go ahead and do it, but just think...three thousand dollars...
plus, youll need memory cards ($80?) extra batteries at $80/each, a good tripod cause you wouldnt put $3000 on a $20 piece of aluminum so theres another $150-600(?). lenses...well...depends on what you want...
i would say i have right around $1000 invested into photo stuff. BUT...i have tons of **** like 8 or so film cameras, scanner, development stuff, like 10 lenses, $130 bag, filters, flash and trigger and diffuser...it adds up pretty quick...even faster if you buy all new, all-auto stuff. it would make me sick to buy equivalent "new" lenses to what i have now
and also to be honest...we'd still make damn near the same pics.
so...if you're totally ready to put mad money down...it's your choice. just keep in mind that the most expensive gear won't give you magic...i dont mean this personally, but any SLR made today is more than capable. bad results come from the user. i should know...my camera is almost "pro" and i suck...it's all my fault, not the camera cause i tell it what i want it to do.
nikon's marketing strategy is working on you, just how they want. they lure you in with an expensive camera then sell you a little lower model. well...canon does this too, as do most companies in every industry. "the upgrade path" is a common nickname for it...giving you something to look forward to.
if i were you...i'd start with a simple 8-10MP cam like a used canon 20/30d or nikon d70/80. figure out what lenses you might like in the future, pick a brand, figure out how to use it, and then you'll get a clear picture on what you really NEED instead of WANT
also consider pentax for landscape use...weather sealed bodies and lenses that are affordable, built-in IS/VR (known as Shake Reduction) for those times without a tripod, and best of all: amazing colors. dont let anyone fool you...pentax has most of the lenses you'd ever want/need...or sigma/tamron fill in the weird spots like the 8mm fish-eye.
same with macro...without one, the pics just arent as good as they could be.
in my honest opinion, if you're ready to put down $3k+ for a d700 then go ahead and do it, but just think...three thousand dollars...
plus, youll need memory cards ($80?) extra batteries at $80/each, a good tripod cause you wouldnt put $3000 on a $20 piece of aluminum so theres another $150-600(?). lenses...well...depends on what you want...
i would say i have right around $1000 invested into photo stuff. BUT...i have tons of **** like 8 or so film cameras, scanner, development stuff, like 10 lenses, $130 bag, filters, flash and trigger and diffuser...it adds up pretty quick...even faster if you buy all new, all-auto stuff. it would make me sick to buy equivalent "new" lenses to what i have now
and also to be honest...we'd still make damn near the same pics.so...if you're totally ready to put mad money down...it's your choice. just keep in mind that the most expensive gear won't give you magic...i dont mean this personally, but any SLR made today is more than capable. bad results come from the user. i should know...my camera is almost "pro" and i suck...it's all my fault, not the camera cause i tell it what i want it to do.
nikon's marketing strategy is working on you, just how they want. they lure you in with an expensive camera then sell you a little lower model. well...canon does this too, as do most companies in every industry. "the upgrade path" is a common nickname for it...giving you something to look forward to.
if i were you...i'd start with a simple 8-10MP cam like a used canon 20/30d or nikon d70/80. figure out what lenses you might like in the future, pick a brand, figure out how to use it, and then you'll get a clear picture on what you really NEED instead of WANT
also consider pentax for landscape use...weather sealed bodies and lenses that are affordable, built-in IS/VR (known as Shake Reduction) for those times without a tripod, and best of all: amazing colors. dont let anyone fool you...pentax has most of the lenses you'd ever want/need...or sigma/tamron fill in the weird spots like the 8mm fish-eye.
Red02Accordv6_2
Well-Known Member
Understand that more expensive will not make you a better photography. Also, the price of pro full frame zoom lens to go with your pro full frame body is outrageous. (14-24 = $1400, 24-70= $1700, 70-200=$1900)
What do you shoot or would like to shoot? Low light? Sports? Wildlife? Landscapes? People? Candids? Would you feel conspicuous shooting with a monstrous $3-4k camera/lens in hand?
I agree with everyone else, start small and work your way up. Get a used d80 and learn the basics first, you can already resell the d80 when you buy your d700.
What do you shoot or would like to shoot? Low light? Sports? Wildlife? Landscapes? People? Candids? Would you feel conspicuous shooting with a monstrous $3-4k camera/lens in hand?
I agree with everyone else, start small and work your way up. Get a used d80 and learn the basics first, you can already resell the d80 when you buy your d700.
ryan s
they dont think it
thats right...forgot about that...the d700 is HUGE. with a fast f/2.8 zoom, you will probably get kicked out of places and/or told to stop photographing.
ask around the net...there's a few stories out there. you'll be seen as a "pro" who sells pics for a living...some people (especially the government) dont like that idea.
ask around the net...there's a few stories out there. you'll be seen as a "pro" who sells pics for a living...some people (especially the government) dont like that idea.
Also consider, a full frame camera has very large pictures. VERY large. You might have to upgrade your computer just to be able to open the pictures, just editing them with Photoshop is going to suck up a lot of RAM. And with 20+ megapixel files you're going to need a lot of external harddrive space.
