D7000 vs D700

jdeg

^ broke something
Staff member
I don't really think the 2 are in the same league as far as professional features (DX vs FX), but if you want to compare basic features the D7000 does offer a lot for the price:

D7000:
  • New EXPEED 2 CMOS sensor - 16.2mp 23.6 x 15.6mm (DX)
  • ISO 100-6400
  • Highest movie resolution of 1920x1080p @ 24fps w/ autofocus
  • 39AF points
  • 2 SD card slots (SDXC supported)
  • 6fps continuous shooting
  • 780 grams (1.7lbs)
  • Street Price (body only): $1200
353_25468_D7000_front.png


D700:
  • CMOS 12.1mp 23.9 x 36.0mm (FX)
  • ISO 200-6400
  • No movie capability
  • 51AF points
  • 1 CompactFlash
  • 5fps continuous shooting
  • 995 grams (2.19lbs)
  • Street Price (body only): $2700

353_25444_D700_front.png


They both share the same 3" 921k dot screen


http://nikonites.com/d5100/2500-d5100-vs-d7000.html
 

minicoop63

New member
Re: Current DSLR Street Prices

Hi jdeg - I'm a new member today...thanks for the price post. I've been saving to get the D700, but last week saw the D7000 and now I'm not sure which would be my best bet. I have enough saved to buy the D7000 as soon as it comes out. What is your opinion?
 

jdeg

^ broke something
Staff member
Hi minicoop - I moved your post to this thread. To answer your question you should determine if you want DX or FX format. If you need FX go with the D700 - DX, D7000. The FX format is what makes the D700 a 'pro' camera. It also has a lot of small features that make up for the price difference. If you don't need all those features and want to save some money, go with the D7000.
 

goz63

Senior Member
The D7K will also open up some lenses you can't really use effectively on the the D700. You can use them but you crop out a portion of the FX sensor which defeats the purpose of having an FX camera. Another thought...
 

MwCapel

Senior Member
the d7000 is actually my next camera body to me its a great upgrade alot of people should realize that yes FX bodies are great but if your not doing anything that demands the full frame then the dx body will be just as good.
 

Eltari

New member
well I prefer full frame sensors, the pixels are bigger and are spaced out more meaning they don't interfere with each other so you get a much sharper image. The colours are also a lot nicer.

If it where me than D700 over D7k everytime, but if you where wanting to buy now i would wait and keep saving. the likely hood of them releasing a D700 replacement next year is quite high.
 

johnwartjr

Senior Member
You could shoot a lot with a D700 waiting on that replacement :) I held off for months and finally broke down and bought one.

Let's face it, people start talking about the replacement the day after a camera is released.. :)
 

Eltari

New member
well yeah there is still a about a year to wait for it, but if you can wait that year then do it. they won't let canon stay at top with a 21mp full frame for much longer
 

Gladiator

Senior Member
So now i hesitate in buying it and going after the D700 after all that waiting anyways.
Correct me if i'm wrong but yes the 7K has more effective pixels but as we know pixels doesn't always mean better. Compared to the D700 it has a smaller sensor size 23.1 x 15.4mm over 36 x 24 for the D700 now that affects the quality right there. And the uncompressed format is «NEF», D700 has «RAW and TIFF».

I always thought that RAW was considered the clean slate for any pros wanting large format and those using software like Photoshop? What the heck is NEF, never heard of it.

Doing a lot of outdoor photography in winter will the D7K handle the cold-resistant Nikon EN-EL4a battery.

I do love the D7K for the HD video option and it has a better viewfinder range and of course a better price :)

Any opinions? Maybe i'm just clueless... The D7000 is more like a D90 upgrade, since it will be phased out.
 

Gladiator

Senior Member
Silly question but what makes a model FX and the other DX? What differs between both format, besides the price...

Hi minicoop - I moved your post to this thread. To answer your question you should determine if you want DX or FX format. If you need FX go with the D700 - DX, D7000. The FX format is what makes the D700 a 'pro' camera. It also has a lot of small features that make up for the price difference. If you don't need all those features and want to save some money, go with the D7000.
 

Gladiator

Senior Member
The D7K will also open up some lenses you can't really use effectively on the the D700. You can use them but you crop out a portion of the FX sensor which defeats the purpose of having an FX camera. Another thought...
I plan of using the Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200mm will that be an issue if i get either one of them? Thanks
 

johnwartjr

Senior Member
NEF is the Nikon file extension for RAW, like CR2 is the Canon extension for RAW. Different camera manufacturers use different extensions for their RAW files - RAW is the raw data from the sensor. Nikon RAW is not the same as Canon RAW is not the same as Sony RAW.

FX is Nikon's 'full frame' sensor, which is 24x36mm
DX is Nikon's 'crop' sensor, which is 16x24mm

The sensor is the most expensive part of a DSLR body - so the cameras with DX sensors cost less than FX sensors.

A 10MP DX sensor has as many pixels as a 10MP FX sensor - but the sensor is smaller on the DX camera, so the pixels are smaller - which starts to create more noise at even low ISO.

A D300 has a 12.3 MP DX sensor, a D700 has a 12.1 MP FX sensor - percentage wise, not a huge difference in number of pixels - but since the D700 has a larger sensor, with larger pixels, it is less sensitive to noise.

One of the things I've wondered about the D7000 is how noisy it is at lower ISO. You're adding roughly 33% more pixels over the D300/D90, but the sensor is the same size. That seems to lead me to believe it has the potential to be noisy.
 

larry50

New member
I love both my D90 and my D700, but once you've used a full frame FX, there's really no going back. The picture quality is just better. That big bright juicy viewfinder is reason enough. I do take my D90 to travel with though because of the weight and bulk differences, and I invested in top quality DX lenses for the D90. (I stopped buying DX lenses some time ago). The D700 is a bit of a boat anchor when you travel, even loaded with something lightweight, like the 50mm f/1.8.
 

AmandaBrenchley

New member
FX is Nikon's 'full frame' sensor, which is 24x36mm
DX is Nikon's 'crop' sensor, which is 16x24mm

The sensor is the most expensive part of a DSLR body - so the cameras with DX sensors cost less than FX sensors.

A 10MP DX sensor has as many pixels as a 10MP FX sensor - but the sensor is smaller on the DX camera, so the pixels are smaller - which starts to create more noise at even low ISO.

A D300 has a 12.3 MP DX sensor, a D700 has a 12.1 MP FX sensor - percentage wise, not a huge difference in number of pixels - but since the D700 has a larger sensor, with larger pixels, it is less sensitive to noise.

One of the things I've wondered about the D7000 is how noisy it is at lower ISO. You're adding roughly 33% more pixels over the D300/D90, but the sensor is the same size. That seems to lead me to believe it has the potential to be noisy.

I found this to be really helpful as I was pretty stumped on whether to get the D7000 or D700.
See the one thing that had made me question about getting the D700 was because you can hold 2 memory cards in the D7000 which I thought would be handy to have one full of raw files and the other with jpegs but then I thought, why bother I may as well just have memory cards on me at all times and change over when I run out of room!
 

FoxfireGallery

New member
I still would choose the D700 over the D7000, alone for difference in fp and it still has greater noise reduction than the D7000. I am jsut waiting of an upgrade to the D700, which hopefully give us more mp. The moment Nikon adds video capabilites, you know it is an amateur camera and will never satisfy a dedicated photographer. I move away from the label Pro and Amateur, as these are in my mind only defined by the quality of their photography.
 

crycocyon

Senior Member
I had a D700, and loved it. But then I got a D7000 (actually it was for my wife since she kept wanting to use my D700). I sat around one day taking photos with a new 55-200 DX VR lens I got for her camera testing the VR function. Then I switched the lens to the D700 and took exactly the same photos. And I was surprised. The D700 gave a richer image somehow, but the D7000 had better resolution. I was surprised that one could have less resolution but a better image in terms of the quality of the image, the depth.

And here are the actual comparisons. D700 on the left and D7000 on the right, same lens, same distance, same lighting. Keep in mind that the stuffed animal was sitting inside a plastic box so the sharpness isn't that great. The D7000 image is downscaled to the size of the D700 image. (click on the images to enlarge to full resolution)

First, the nose area. Somehow the fur seemed to be resolved better on the left image, the D700 than the right image, the D7000.

D700lD7000Rtest2.jpg



Next, I photographed the eye which gave me a dark object against the light background. Notice how you can see more fur on the D700 left image than the D7000 right image even though the D7000 has higher pixel resolution. The "sparkles" are also clearer on the D700 image.

D700lD7000Rtest1.jpg



But then, I looked at higher resolution at just the eye area. And then everything was clear to me on how these two cameras differed. On the left, the D700 image had better optical resolution, but less pixel resolution, whereas on the right for the D7000, there was better pixel resolution, but poorer optical resolution. This is especially apparent when you look at the fur just behind the eye. It is much clearer with the D700. The eye itself is better rendered with the D700. And yet, when you look at the individual fur hairs just in front of the eye, the D7000 renders each individual hair better than the D700.


D700lD7000Rtest3.jpg



So, in this case for me the D7000 won because I preferred having each individual object rendered more clearly with pixels than having superior optical resolution that didn't really matter on account of there not being enough pixel resolution.

So at this point, with some disappointment in the D700, I sold it in order to get the D800. I loved the D700, but the D7000 focused faster, it gave consistently good exposures time after time, and was just quicker overall. I couldn't justify keeping the D700 when the D7000 would perform better overall, so at that point I decided on getting the D800.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
One thing to bear in mind is that the FX will have shallower depth of field in your test. When I got my D800 is was surprised at just how shallow at wide apertures. This can make the FX look less sharp in certain tests.
 
Top