Nikon D3 vs D700
- Thread starter Wickedred
- Start date
daredevil123
Senior Member
I am not too sure Nick. Seems like age is the more probable one. That pool ranges from 50-80k shutter actuations all the way to one body that had 2.5 million actuations (on the 4th shutter assembly). The AF module is not related to the shutter assembly though, since it sits below the mirror.
davidnholtjr
Senior Member
I have both and love them both.
If you want speed, longer battery life and dual cf cards then get the D3
If you want a smaller package and on camera flash with commander mode then get the D700,
If you want speed, longer battery life and dual cf cards then get the D3
If you want a smaller package and on camera flash with commander mode then get the D700,
Hi,
I am a bit late to this thread. All that I write hitherto is my opinion only and if you don't like it, just skip to the next post. And sorry for this long post.
I have D3x, D3s and D700 (IR), which were mentioned earlier in this thread. I also have (and regularly use) D2x and D1x. But let me begin a little bit further back.
The only DSLR cameras I have ever sold are D100 and D200. Instead I kept (and still use) D1x and D2x. There's a pattern, bear with me.
I have realized that for me the camera is at least as important as the digital in a digital camera. Most published reviews are concentrating too much on the digital part, noise this and ISO that and DR everywhere, but mention only in passing the camera abilities.
Let's get back to the topic. For example, a D700 is 95% the same thing as a D3, but to get the vertical controls and frame speed up one needs the grip, EN-EL4a battery and a charger which makes the D700 cost the same. Furthermore the end result is both bigger and heavier than a D3. I prefer the smaller D3 body which still has better controls and more functionality. As a sidenote, I didn't want to sell the D700 in the declining market and instead had it converted to infrared.
The image quality of both D1x and D2x above base ISO is easily surpassed by D200 and D300, but the handling of the full-size bodies is better. I actually shot at a wedding today with D1x, D3s and D3x. Yes, D1x, no typo there (my D2x is in the shop for hot shoe replacement). Using those cameras side by side was easy, I could switch from one to the other with my eyes closed and let my hands do the work.
The point in this rant is that one needs to assess the whole package. I shoot a lot of verticals and really need the vertical grip and controls, but not the size and weight of removable grips. D800 beats my old D3x in image quality by a comfortable margin and I think the new(ish) D600 delivers images very close to D3x, maybe even better?
If one is after the D3 image quality alone, then a D700 can do it and D600 does better. Heck, I believe D7100 does better. If on the other hand one needs certain camera functions and controls and the vertical grip, even a D1x can be a very capable camera.
I am happy with my gear, really, and use all of them. If either of my D2x or D3x fails, I will have them repaired regardless of cost. My next camera will be a D4x or a D5 or whatever there will be. D4 does not offer enough between my D3s and D3x, so I'll pass.
Are pics allowed in this thread? I will remove it if I broke the rules.
This is a recent candid of my daughter in the playground, while she was waiting for her turn looking frustrated. I shot this backlit grab with a D1x and had to push process her face about two stops. I am still happy with the end result of a jurassic high-noise low-dynamic-range slow obsolete klunker.
For example a light and compact D3000 would deliver much higher image quality, but wouldn't offer the controls I needed. I could change the focusing mode from single-servo to continuous-servo and AF-pattern from single-area to dynamic-area without ever taking my eye off the viewfinder. That's what makes all the difference to me. Being able to shoot higher IQ but missing the shot just doesn't cut it.
So, remember to carefully review the camera too.
I am a bit late to this thread. All that I write hitherto is my opinion only and if you don't like it, just skip to the next post. And sorry for this long post.
I have D3x, D3s and D700 (IR), which were mentioned earlier in this thread. I also have (and regularly use) D2x and D1x. But let me begin a little bit further back.
The only DSLR cameras I have ever sold are D100 and D200. Instead I kept (and still use) D1x and D2x. There's a pattern, bear with me.
I have realized that for me the camera is at least as important as the digital in a digital camera. Most published reviews are concentrating too much on the digital part, noise this and ISO that and DR everywhere, but mention only in passing the camera abilities.
Let's get back to the topic. For example, a D700 is 95% the same thing as a D3, but to get the vertical controls and frame speed up one needs the grip, EN-EL4a battery and a charger which makes the D700 cost the same. Furthermore the end result is both bigger and heavier than a D3. I prefer the smaller D3 body which still has better controls and more functionality. As a sidenote, I didn't want to sell the D700 in the declining market and instead had it converted to infrared.
The image quality of both D1x and D2x above base ISO is easily surpassed by D200 and D300, but the handling of the full-size bodies is better. I actually shot at a wedding today with D1x, D3s and D3x. Yes, D1x, no typo there (my D2x is in the shop for hot shoe replacement). Using those cameras side by side was easy, I could switch from one to the other with my eyes closed and let my hands do the work.
The point in this rant is that one needs to assess the whole package. I shoot a lot of verticals and really need the vertical grip and controls, but not the size and weight of removable grips. D800 beats my old D3x in image quality by a comfortable margin and I think the new(ish) D600 delivers images very close to D3x, maybe even better?
If one is after the D3 image quality alone, then a D700 can do it and D600 does better. Heck, I believe D7100 does better. If on the other hand one needs certain camera functions and controls and the vertical grip, even a D1x can be a very capable camera.
I am happy with my gear, really, and use all of them. If either of my D2x or D3x fails, I will have them repaired regardless of cost. My next camera will be a D4x or a D5 or whatever there will be. D4 does not offer enough between my D3s and D3x, so I'll pass.
Are pics allowed in this thread? I will remove it if I broke the rules.
This is a recent candid of my daughter in the playground, while she was waiting for her turn looking frustrated. I shot this backlit grab with a D1x and had to push process her face about two stops. I am still happy with the end result of a jurassic high-noise low-dynamic-range slow obsolete klunker.
For example a light and compact D3000 would deliver much higher image quality, but wouldn't offer the controls I needed. I could change the focusing mode from single-servo to continuous-servo and AF-pattern from single-area to dynamic-area without ever taking my eye off the viewfinder. That's what makes all the difference to me. Being able to shoot higher IQ but missing the shot just doesn't cut it.
So, remember to carefully review the camera too.
Attachments
Last edited:
I am late on this forum as well, but here are my thoughts:
- apart from the sensor NOTHING is the same on the D700 and D3. Even if the sensor it is the same, the whole chain of acquiring. processing the photo signal is different. This is why the D3 has a better DR, no clipping highlights like the D700 and high ISO is better. (have a look at DPR reviews)
- AF is faster since it is powered differently, tracking is better and more reliable. (See T. Hogan's review)
- FPS make 11 whereas D700 makes 7 with the grip. Once grip attached, the D700 gets heavier.
- no DX camera trumps it at High ISO.
However:
- the D700 was the best price/performance camera put ever on the market by Nikon. It was, and I would dare to say it still is, the workhorse of many professional photogs nowadays, a jack of all trades, something like today the 5Dmk3 is.
The D700 gave everything you needed but still it is not the professional camera the D3 is, but back then one could have bought it at half price.
I have 2 D3's and love them, definitely would not trade them for a D600.
I would not trade a D700 for a D600.
But these are only my thoughts, other people may have a different opinion.
D3 at ISO 6400
Funky P by Skytalker777, on Flickr
- apart from the sensor NOTHING is the same on the D700 and D3. Even if the sensor it is the same, the whole chain of acquiring. processing the photo signal is different. This is why the D3 has a better DR, no clipping highlights like the D700 and high ISO is better. (have a look at DPR reviews)
- AF is faster since it is powered differently, tracking is better and more reliable. (See T. Hogan's review)
- FPS make 11 whereas D700 makes 7 with the grip. Once grip attached, the D700 gets heavier.
- no DX camera trumps it at High ISO.
However:
- the D700 was the best price/performance camera put ever on the market by Nikon. It was, and I would dare to say it still is, the workhorse of many professional photogs nowadays, a jack of all trades, something like today the 5Dmk3 is.
The D700 gave everything you needed but still it is not the professional camera the D3 is, but back then one could have bought it at half price.
I have 2 D3's and love them, definitely would not trade them for a D600.
I would not trade a D700 for a D600.
But these are only my thoughts, other people may have a different opinion.
D3 at ISO 6400
Funky P by Skytalker777, on Flickr
Last edited:
Better late than never. All of your great cameras are still good. The D3 and D700 will not become a mediocre camera just because Nikon updated their DSLR line up.
I am also waiting for a more significant update which will be the D4s or D5 should it becomes reality in the near future.
Stangman98
Senior Member
I would love to pick up a D3S. But I am quite happen with my D3
I tried to find out how old this post is but did'nt really feal like looking into it that much. Anyway. The D4 and D3x are used for differant photography needs. The D4 is a low light fast shooting camera primarly used for sports and weddings. The D3x is used for landscapes or studio work. Not saying you didn't know but I see this all the time on this forum. Someone is trying to decide on two cameras with two differant purposes. Are some people wanting to spend that much money really that unfamiliar about the camera gear they want?
The thread was started 02-02-2013, 04:53 AM based on the date time mark.
I am one of those people who just wanted to upgrade from D700 and wanted something with video. D800 was a little too much and didn't really give a lot of thought into it but you can say that I am one of those people. I just wanted 24mp but 36mp works just fine with portraits and studio photography. Anyway, that has nothing to do with the topic.
