I shot professionally with this camera for many years. Above all it is indestructible, colours are pleasing and natural rather than punchy (in my humble opinion). You can comfortably print 24x36 prints with it if you use good technique and sharp lenses. My camera looks like it went through a war but it still works like new):.
Hi Dario. Thank you for sharing this insights. Can you be more specific about the quality of detail at 24x36 inch prints? Its only 12mp but I have seen the original Fuji XT1 which is 16mp to produce way sharper and detailed images that its pixel density would suggest. I would like to stich vertically 3 shots and make a photo with sufficient detail from verry close inspection - as if it was printed at 300ppi. From youe experience printing 24x36 do you see exceptional detail from close distance ?
I notice a lot of dust on the sensor, it must be cleaned well! D700 is my camera too, still now I’m very satisfied… Using good lenses like 24-70 and 70-200 and others the results are excellent!
@@eric2685 mine has more than 160.000 shots, and works perfectly, I’m thinking to buy another one… Incredible to search a digital reflex from 2009 in 2023, almost 2024! 😳🫣😱
Loving all your videos on the d700. I sold mine about 4 months ago and bought a Z 5 with a variety of Z prime lenses. Don’t like it so I have just bought another d700. I take mainly people and animal portraits. The colours in the d700 are so much more natural. The photos I print are 10 x 8 size and are really excellent. So the moral of my post is “ if you are thinking of selling your d700, don’t !
Thank you for sharing Richard! I will never sell my D700 - I have heard so many stories from people regretting selling it. Also, I have seen grown men cry over selling their D7100, so there is something about the classic Nikon DSLRs - FF or APS-C. Golden age.
Nice to see that this is still an active topic. I am doing events, portraits and weddings using the D700 with the 28-300, 50 mm and 85 mm. The D700 is my main camera and highly appreciated by women. Sometimes I get comments about the noise but mostly in a positive way. Other full frames I have tried are the D610 and D810 but they are not quite up to the job because of ergonomics and so on. For travel photography I use the D300s with the 18-70 also an underappreciated camera but better than 7100 and 7200. Also had Z5 and Z7 but there is no romance in these computerized cameras. Comparing images doesnot cover the feeling the true photographer gets when picking up a D700, D300 or D3-4. That's a lesson most manufacturers seem to forget nowadays looking at the cheaply made bodies and lenses.
I have the little brother to the D700, the D300. I can say that there is a difference in images that those cameras produce when I compare them to the D7000 and the D600. The images somehow look better. I can not quantify this but the images just seem better and more pleasing. I did a little research and found out that the D3, D700 and the D300 had sensors made by a company that is now a subsidiary of Panasonic. All Nikon camera models made since these three are made with sensors made by Sony. As you shoot more with the D700 you will start to see the subtleties of the images. I was so impressed with my D300 that I ended up with 5 of them because of the images and the low price on the used market. I only buy used which allows me the opportunity to get a lot of gear cheap and compare gear.
Thank you for sharing Dominic! Yes, the sensors of the D700 and D3 are from Panasonic, and some of the very few Nikon cameras with that sensor. Further, rumors has it that the D700 internal software is a bit different from the D3, so that the images on the D700 are actually even better than the D3! Or in other words, that the D700 in both sensor and software is very unique and not seen since. I guess that is why so many (incl me) hold on to their beloved D700's. flic.kr/p/2mPWMUd
The d700 excels in portraits, particularly for getting natural soft skin tones. Excellent colour rendition, renders black and white tones really well, and preserves micro contrast from the lenses that have 3D pop. It wont make a poor lens pop, but it performs better than new cameras do when paired with softer lenses like vintage glass, because the 12Mp isn’t enough to expose their flaws. The noise has a grain like quality to it that can add a bit of grit and character, particularly in black and white rather than just destroying the image as soon as it becomes visible. It renders beautifully with flash, I can only assume that’s down to the large pixel pitch. It’s built like a tank, ergonomics are fantastic, and it has one of the most satisfying shutter buttons and shutter sounds out of all the DSLRs. Where it’s not so good, it lacks a bit of dynamic range, the autofocus is sufficient in good light, but it shows its age. It’s not a great choice for action/sports/wildlife. it wouldn’t be my first choice for landscape, unless you’re fine with a tripod and bracketing But it’s certainly not bad. Limited amount of crop. This is a great camera to shoot people
I currently shoot with 2 d700’s and a d3s. There is always a learning curve , that being said proper exposure is key to a good clean image. From what I see today people are always saying that they can fix it in post production and they rely on presets to fix the problem. Most people now do not even print so what would you need 12 plus megapixels for? I have no problem printing 16” x 20” prints with 12 megapixel.
Hi George, and thank you for sharing. One of the biggest surprises for me with the D700 was to see how much resolution 12mp gives. I am often taken by the latest hype and the belief that newer must be better, so it has been an eye opener to get to know the D700.
You are right on both counts. I print 60x40 cm images from the D700 and they look great. Even when using a DX lens like the Nikon 55-200 afs VR version two, the prints are just as good, when you view them together. You have of course to do some upsampling, and I use Scott Kelby's trick to do that in several steps of 10% enlarging. You see I photograph for 30 years and in the 35mm film era there was just as much hype and do's and dont's as today. So many people get trapped in the marketing nonsense of the industrie. I do not blame those people, it costed me years to see through it. Much trial and error, much spoilt money. But it was worth it. The sheer joy of photography has never dissapeared. A grand joy and solace in this world gone mad.
I used to have a D700, and I had to sell it during the financial crises of 2008. It was my favorite camera ever. As far as the 'magic' of the D700, it isn't so much that the photos pop, as that the photos look more film like. That is the magic, at least to me.
Hi John, sorry to hear you parted with the D700 during the financial crisis. Yes, there is something abut the D700 - in my experience, when paired with a good vintage prime lens, the pictures sometime looks like paintings. All the best!
i don't care about the cons...I'm not a pro. I just love the images my D700 produces. I often shoot velvia with my F4 and compare the scanned transparencies with the jpeg images from the D700. I love both.
You did an excellent video. I made my humble career as a weddings photographer with two Canon EOS 5D MkI (classic) bodies. Their sensor has a similar resolution like the 700D. To my taste, the color rendition of the 5D is superb, but the 700D has a clear advantage vs the 5D in terms of processing speed, low light AF, and back screen quality. The couple of years of technology progress between the appearance of each of the two cameras is evident. Nowadays I´d buy a Canon eos 6D MkI if I am looking for a low priced camera with an outstanding image quality and a 20 MP sensor that produces really beautiful pictures. Anyway, that is my personal opinion, just to make a contribution to the subject of this excellent video. Greetings.
Thank you for your kind words! And thank you for sharing! I have only recently tried Canon (5d mk iii) but I really like the images it produces. So I guess the lesson learned is that there are many great cameras available and you just have to find one you like and stick with it 🤗
Thanks for an honest and fair judgement on what remains one of Nikon's finest cameras of any period. Superb build quality and great image quality too. It can produce excellent A3 prints from the full frame which have won prizes in international competitions and was used at their favoured camera by many top professionals. Sadly many are deluded into buying the latest cameras for features they will never need but who minds that if it makes cameras such as this affordable?
Ha-ha! Yes, I am afraid that not many camera producers are willing to admit that a 10+ years old camera is better or at par with what they produce today!? I do get it that Nikon makes absolutely no money when I buy a vintage lens or a D700 body on e-bay, and I do want Nikon to survive and thrive. So I want to support Nikon buying some of their new stuff, but it also hast to be justified. It would be nice if they made a Z5-ish camera with the D700 sensor and processing logic. I would be first in line to buy a copy.
Too little? Nonsense. I shot many thousands of images between 2008 and 2016 using my D700 and the D3 which has the same sensor. That included hundreds of weddings, portraits, NYC street photography, professional portfolio model images, a high school reunion and two fashion shows (which i did for charity - zero $). Since retirement, I bought a D800, D750 and a Z7... and was unable to capture the rich colors as I did with the older bodies. If you see a D700, grab it.
The Guest sees more in an hour than the Host sees in a year ... I love this guy! Seriously though, absolutely great vids, man! Some of the very best on the subject. Don't take this the wrong way, but I've spent many an hour listening to your voice (which strangely I love), and learning about Photography (especially n-EYE-con cameras!) Love ya, happy shooting! - USA (come visit! we take pictures here too!) Don't take my Kodachrome away. Mamma don't take my Kodachrome!
Ha-ha! Thank you for your kind words! Good ole Paul Simon - that line was a blast for the bast! Love to visit the US - have been to Chicago, Washington and Manhattan and loved it all! Take care!!
I have purchased a D700 and will buy another one. This way I'll have two camera bags for my digital gear, in each I'll have a D700 and a D300 companion. I'll love both models immensely. Cameras are angels of mercy.
after many years of use, I notice the color difference when shooting portraits between my D810 vs D700, when editing I saw how natural and good skin color D700 has, in many photoshoots I could use the photos straight out of the camera with a minimum editing.
I enjoyed your honest evaluation. 12 Vs 24 Meg Pixels. its interesting how 12mp was considered a big deal. Good news Fredrik, I ordered a D700 on ebay yesterday. It will be here next week. I have a D750 and a museum worthy collection of Lens. I bit the bullet for one reason.....the character of the images. My research has all said the same thing, the image quality is a bit special. Your images proves it even though you didn’t feel that “magic” about thus camera. My X-Pro 1 blows me away for the same reason, its about the character of the image. Thank you sir, I appreciate your video. 👍🏽
Thank you for your kind words Michael! Much appreciated! If you have a D700 on its way, then I hope you will enjoy this playlist: ru-vid.com/group/PLPjooVCTLG910wkb8TMrajbIHmA54MJ-A
@@frederikboving Well Fredrick, my D700 arrived earlier than expected. it works fine. I have started using it and I love the colours, texture and character coming from this camera/sensor. In many wats it reminds me of how my x-pro1 renders files. I using this camera with my 50mm 1.4 - its a perfect and I like it very much. Cheers Mike 👍🏽
I’m an amateur/enthusiast and have been considering buying a full-frame body having shot only with cropped sensor cameras, inc a D300. Your review has been very helpful and thank you for your honest opinion on the D700. No false claims or starry-eyed hype - how refreshing. Great style of presentation with clear descriptions of your real-life experience with the camera. I’m almost certainly going to go for a D700 to compare its ergonomics and it’s output. If you (or anyone) have any experience with a D300 and can comment on it compared with the D700, I’d be very interested.
Hi Sam, thank you for your kind words! I have unfortunately no experience with the D300 but on this channel and in relation to the D700 videos, I have seen a few posts from people that have the D300. Maybe they are able to help if they see this post. All the best!
I bought the D700 shortly after I bought a D300 simply because I never got used to the APS-C sensor crop. The image quality from the D700 blows away the image quality from the D300 at least in the copies that I owned! I recently bought a D850 and straight out of the camera I actually like the images better on the D700 better? After post it is a different story. I still use my 12 year old D700 even though I have a new D850! 12 MP is more than enough for 95% of what I do!
I'm a Nikon shooter, and I never used the D700, I already had the D810, D500, D300, D200 and lately I use the D850, by chance I came up with a D700 and I have to be honest, I really liked the image, I loved the colors and especially the 3D feeling that the images have, I’m going to keep it.
Thanks Vitor, and thank you for being so honest! A friendly piece of advice: if you like the colors of the D700, NEVER try a D4! You'll want one right away! :-D
Thanks for sharing. I get that a lot. I cannot see it on my D700 - the colors seem flat, but it could be my copy that acts funny. However, the colors of my D4 are absolutely astonishing.
@@frederikboving Maybe thats the case. I did a quick shoot of my daughter over the weekend indoors in natural light. Shot the D750 and D700 with the same lens and settings and the D700 images are nicer to the eye.
If you were thinking of getting a D700 as your only camera then I think the points raised in this video are perfectly valid. But if, like me, you already have your "main camera", then any limitations in your "fun camera" no matter what it is, either don't really matter or actually become it's strengths. I haven't yet done any side by side comparisons with my D750 but what I've noticed so far (I've only had my D700 for a couple of weeks) is the out of focus areas seem a little smoother, more like film grain than digital noise. Maybe it's just the power of positive suggestion rather than fact but I definitely like the images I've been getting with it. Plus, remember, you're not just buying a camera, but joining a cult :-)
Yes, when I made the first video and saw the comments, I realized I was joining an exclusive club of D700 owners! I have also only been shooting with the D700 for a few weeks, but I have not been able to find or see the "pop" or magic that so many report, even though I shot with vintage prime lenses that should help the pop along. So the factor that really attracted me to the D700 (magic), I have not been able to find yet. However, the color rendition I have found to be extraordinary, so you can say I searched for one thing and found another. Judging from the feedback I have received from the first few feeds on Instagram, some say that the D700 landscape pictures look more like paintings than pictures - I think it is related to the color rendition. The color rendition is actually so good that I for landscape photography seriously consider to make my D700 the prime camera. Time will tell. I'm getting to know the D700.
If it is a cult it is a cult with all the best doctrinal arguments. Having spent hours and hours looking at 1000s of images on Flickr I now think that this camera has a stunningly accurate and aesthetic colour pallete and it produces skin tones that are way better than almost anything else. The pro photographers who sell theirs to upgrade are probably right when they regret their decisions and believe that they were mistaken. I will get myself one as I think that their reputation as magic cameras is amply warranted.
@@kinglear5952 You won't be disappointed, and if you decide not to keep it, you won't lose any money if you buy well to start with, I think they're actually going up in value.
The importance of aspects of photography in this order The brain The light whether artificial or not, filters etc The lens And lastly the camera Capture the image in camera and expose on the computer. All that said the D700 is awesome! Thanks for the video.
i got my d700 or my first Fx camera last month, big thanks to your preview video earlier. i got myself one of those "holy trinity" 24-70mm f2.8 nano and another 24-120mm f4 nano lens. perfectly happy as im pretty tight on budget. d700 delivering great results even at night, eventhough its 12 years old now! and fun fact : current shutter count is 550k and its still running wild 🙌
I shot many weddings with this camera. Beautiful images without photoshop. Great skin tones and contrast naturally. My z7ii doesn’t come close to the image quality and the digital noise is a mess. I really miss the cameras that focused on the image instead of stupid tricks that are so popular these days. I wish I still had my D700.
@@davejackson1281 yes, many praise the skin tones of the d700. Portrait photography is not my forte so I have not noticed. If you cannot get hold of a D700, give the D4 a try - wonderful camera and images.
one thing that many people forget is that 27 inch 4K monitors have a display resolution of around 3840 x 2160 which is only around 8mp in camera term and clearly less than that of 12Mp cameras. Therefore unless you want to crop your photos massively or print them at a very large scale (and then stand right up close to it after it is printed) then you dont really need many megapixels. If I were a profi photographer and earning my living from it I would have the latest tech but since I only make photos for my own pleasure and only view these on my monitor a lower number of MPs is fine for me. As an additional but very important side note even a camera with 40Mps is limited by the lens you put on the front. Many lenses cannot take advantage of modern hires sensors. Just as an edit in response to your statement that there is nothing special about the d700 images:- there are a lot of people who attribute "special" characteristics of older cameras (and tech in general). The main on being the age old CCD vs CMOS argument or even film vs digital. The truth is that the camera is only really a tool and it is the craftsman who makes the art. Some of my best photos were made on a Pentax P30 which is a mega cheap 80s analog camera. There is something to be said for the enjoyment had when using a real DSLR (or analog SLR) with a real mechanical feeling when taking photos.
Some good points there, thank you! Regarding resolution: IMHO the key to understanding the need for resolution is the viewing distance. In this video I talk about that and why 12MP is more than plenty for most cases: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w566M5Oq_fw.html - I think it is also worth mentioning that a billboard is around 1-2MP and of you walk really close, you can actually see the pixels! However, a billboard is designed to be viewed from far away and hence the reduced need for resolution despite its massive size. Regarding image quality: Maybe "technical image" quality is a better label, i.e. how the camera renders colours and captures micro contrast etc. Many are of the opinion that the D700 is a special camera when it comes to the technical image quality. I cannot see it. That is in essence the point I am trying to get across. The colour rendition of my D4 is a different story, and I have captured sunsets where the colours the D4 produces are nothing short of astonishing. I have not had such a similar experience with the D700. So I do not really understand the D700 hype, other than it is a very good DSLR you can get for a bargain.
Thanks for video. Trying to decide on return to photography hobby from the 1970's-80's and printing B&W. Cannot stand digital camera menus, dials, buttons, screens...
I bought a D700 and hope to receive it by the end of the month. Super excited, my first full frame camera. Meanwhile, I'm just watching a lot of newer videos on the D700 and every single video just reinforces my feeling that I made an excellent choice. I have a D7000 now, so I'm just losing a zero.
Thank you for sharing! I remember the first time I opened a picture shot on a full frame camera - I just sat there and looked at the monitor! Wow! Hope you will enjoy the "transition" from APS-C to FF as much as I did! All the best!
I think you can sum up my motivation in getting the D700 I the last few minutes of your video. I was moving up to full frame from a D40 and it has allowed me to buy older lenses and I’ve been thrilled with the output. I don’t have a frame of reference with newer, higher resolution full frames, it it suits my purposes for now and probably for quite awhile. Thank you for the video and your frank opinions - no rotten tomatoes here!
Thank you Tim! I also have the D750 (24MP) and the Sony A7Rii (42MP) and I can assure you that going up in pixel count does not do the wonders you would / could expect. You get some more headroom when it comes to cropping, but other than that it is just more data and more storage etc.
Great review. I think the thing that makes the D700 a special camera is the way it makes shots look like a watercolour. (color) . I have bodies with 4+ times the resolution of the D700, but I cant find another camera that captures the scene in the way the D700 does. - I know its subjective, but you hit the nail on the head yourself when you said the images look more of a painting or watercolour.. Also at over 300,000 actuation's the camera still performs exactly as it should. I have reservations about my modern Nikon and Sony cameras ever reaching this milestone. You are also correct in saying that when the D700 is used to take a shot, you don't miss the resolution defect. Overall the camera is nothing short of spectacular, especially as it still hold its own against more modern machinery.
Thank you Phil. Yes, there is something with the colours of the D700. I find the colours of my D4 much more to my liking (rich and saturated), but it is of course personal preference and YMMV and all that. The colours of the D700 are more - as you say - watercolour like, and hence the images look more like paintings. I have done 70x100 cm print based on the 12mp files from the D700 and never missed a pixel of resolution. The larger you print, the larger your viewing distance will also be, and hence printing large does not increase the need for resolution, but not many want to hear this. All the best!
Having owned several nikon D700's and a D3s my personal opinion is that it's the culmination of all the little things about these camera's that give them the legendary status. First of all the build quality is like no other nikons - they are built like tanks, and you have such reassurance when you're shooting that you've a solid reliable machine in your hands. Of course a lot depends on the lenses, but the colours are rather special and require a lot less editing in post. File sizes being so small compared to modern cameras are a joy to work with and you don't have to worry so much with your hard drives filling up. The controls on the front of the camera for autofocus, metering keep you from menu diving, although you can't change auto iso, except from a menu. The older nikon glass to me looks better on the D700 but likewise the newer G lenses like the 85 1.8 just have extra pop too. Also the battery life on these old cameras - especially if pared with the now cheap and solid nikon grip goes on forever. The grip has the same top notch build quality as the camera, but I guess some people don't care for that - personally I love grips and wouldn't buy a camera without one. Also I don't know if you've checked out the D3 or 3s, but they raise the bar even higher, autofocus is faster, 9 frames a second, better metering in the viewfinder, lots of things that make this a camera that is still incredible to this day... Nice video..
Agreed. I also recommend the original grip as you can see here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xF5u_VnceO4.html. I am zooming in on a D3. And if you then also add a magnifying glass to the viewfinder: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-PapetqEMu8Q.html then you have an unbeatable package. My understanding is that the processing logic in the camera is only the same as in the D700 when we are talking D3, not D3S or X. So I will go for a D3. I also hope that the D3 has a 100% viewfinder coverage. As much as I love my D700, that is one of the things that bugs me - the lack of 100% coverage (I try to crop my pictures in camera as much as possible).
@@frederikboving Indeed the viewfinder is 100% and has a large metering scale on the right side, dedicated iso button below screen (with it's own screen), viewfinder blackout switch for long exposure, 2 CF card slots, and to my eyes even better high iso performance to the D700. Also the files look a little different than the D700. The overall build and ergonomics, the balance - well you just have to shoot with it for a few weeks to understand why this was such an expensive 'pro' camera when released. Oh it also is rated for twice the shutter actuations than the D700 - mine is on about 675,000 (with one shutter change) and is still shooting like a champ - battery age incredibly still at 0, although I have the charger that can optimize and reconfigure the batteries internal clock. You just need to get one, you won't be disappointed I promise. By the by - I just bought a used nikon D4 for like €950 from japan with 28,000 clicks on it - clean as a whistle, it looks brand new. Including customs charges it comes altogether to under €1250 with fast shipping. The best stuff is in Japan, and having used the D3s I'm so excited to shoot with the D4, the price from Japan is insane, practically a new camera that's rated for 400,000 clicks, with hundreds of stories of D4's going well over a million... Great times for photographers who know what a good camera really is - Megapixel wars be damned - of zero importance to me ... keep up the great videos !
@@hazybrain7 Thank you! Just ordered a D4, 18t clicks. Around 1100 USD excl. import taxes. And from Japan, as you recommended! When the camera was brand new 8 years ago, it was 6000 USD! From the images, it looks to be in good conditions. Not that I need the speed the D4 can offer, but I do look forward to a 100% viewfinder coverage, dedicated live view buttons, back-lit buttons, 2 card slots, "built in" battery grip, large metering scale, better dynamic range, etc. Uh, I have some material for a new video now :-D
@@frederikboving Hi Frederik ! That's super awesome - you got a better deal than me haha ! But I'm so happy with my purchase, I have bought used cameras from many vendors in Japan and I can vouch for how professional (most anyway)- they are - and those lenses and cameras are still going strong years later. My D4 is due to arrive this week, so we shall start our journey together and discover the quirks and delights of this iconic camera. I too have lots of old ais and D series nikkor glass, and I find I like certain lenses better on certain cameras, so perhaps we can compare notes with different lenses as time goes by... Once again congrats on your purchase and looking forward to your series on the D4 for sure ! My name is Kevin by the way from Ireland - very pleased to meet you ! My flickr page is: www.flickr.com/photos/161467940@N02/
Just ordered a D700 for $200 , it's probably the best value full frame available today in terms of cost, I wanted a D750 but im not sure its twice the camera at double the price. Thinking about getting a D7200 also my D90 just died.
Love my D700 and the other two cameras from that era - started with a D300s five years ago and added the two FF beasts within the last two years. Definitely have gotten my money's worth from the D300s - $425 U.S. used w/35mm DX 1.8 g. All three are rugged, with great colors and excellent ergonomics. Time and technology made these golden oldies a steal; and lenses are interchangeable. From my first D100, and with a path up to 45 MP, I don't see myself leaving Nikon F.
Thanks for sharing Randy. And I would add that although the Z-series lacks the built in AF motor, the value proposition continues with their mirrorless lineup. The Z5 is a crazy value for money option should you want to go mirrorless. So I really hope Nikon make it out of their current financially stormy waters, so they can stay with us years to come.
I’ve owned a D700 for two years now. It’s been with me as one of my street photography cameras on the streets of NYC on a bi weekly basis. Is it conspicuous for street photography? Oh yeah, I get noticed a lot with it but it creates a genre of street photography because of that. I have a D3 coming this week to go along with my D700. I’ll never sell my D700, it’s an extraordinary camera with something that keeps me and others that own it coming back to it time after time after time. I’ll never sell it, I love it madly!
I own d700 from several years. I'm shooting bif and make many landscape and travel photography. d700 is the only camera that has the largest number of photos that do not require much processing compared to other cameras I have . In some situations d700 can produce amazing colour reproduction than I can not to achive on my neewer cameras. Maybe its lack of my editing technicue but ist hard proof oh how good images from d700 are.
Thanks for sharing...I love your comments for both cameras ...I have not used either cameras but I do own & use a D7100 & recently purchased a D500 and love them both for different reasons...I am only a hobbyist so I don't have any professional experience so even though I am 78 yrs I am still learning photography... again thanks for sharing... cheers..😀
Great view on the camera and thank you for producing this. I am not a professional but very keen amateur photographer for many years. I still use my D700 and have no intention of buying any new cameras unless it dies on me. I am very happy with my photographs, I have prints on my wall 24x16 (here in Australia) and they are perfectly fine. Cheers
Thank you! If you want more confirmation that 12MP is sufficient, there is this one: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w566M5Oq_fw.html - All the best!
Your seascape is beautiful. Frederik. I don't know if my D7100 (24 MP) could match that? Mind you it's all in that wonderful directional lighting, too, I guess.
I've never shot with a d7100 but I know it has a huge and dedicated fan base. Judging from some of the images I've seen made with the d7100 and d7200, I think you can make superb quality images with the d7100.
I have a D700 with 17699 shutter counts. I purchased it new in 2012 from BH Photo. I love it, and will never part with it. My collection has newer Nikons including an 850, 800, 750, 500, and I still love my D700. I have seen a price increase on EBay after all of the videos saying the D700 is a Legend and produces great colors, and it does. BUT, I think the price is being driven by ytube videos. eBay is a gamble of trust, and prices are over the place on the D700. Great camera, heavy, durable, and easy to use if you are familiar with Nikons. I love mine, it is STILL in my main bag.
Thanks for sharing Terry! Your words: "will never part with it" is what I read over and over again in blog comments to the D700. The D700 to many is special, and the ruggedness and build quality is often mentioned as one of the big reasons for holding on to the D700, if not as the main camera, then as the trusty backup.
@@frederikboving Is that why I'm still shooting with my D3 (same sensor) since 2008? I thought it was because I could not afford to buy any new cameras. 😊 However, I decided to buy a Canon 5D Mk II as my backup instead of a D700 for the higher 21 MP, back then.
Hi BFS - good to hear from you - It has been a while! Yes, the D3 is also a great camera, but I understand that the picture processing software (and maybe some of the HW?) is not the same as the D3, and that should give the D700 an edge the D3 does not have, even though they have the same type Panasonic sensor. But it is a rumor and I do not know if it is true. How do you find Canon versus Nikon? I have an idea that the color rendition on Canon is a tad warmer, but it is of course not backed by any evidence - just an idea that has grown on me studying various pictures also taken with the Canon.
@@frederikboving Hi! True, the D700 has more refined processing, but I cannot keep chasing the newest after purchasing the D3 (& D300 + 5D Mk II). Other things I don't like the D700 are the build, viewfinder & battery that were similar to my D300. The robustness of the D3 (or any D? DSLR) is obvious and the viewfinder is just a clear rectangle that help to compose for a long period of time, without distraction from the etched AF sensors. The AF zones are small, unobtrusive red or invisible. Of course, it is just personal preferences. The battery offers slightly faster AF with AF Nikkor lenses, faster FPS and hackable with two unprotected, common 18650 cells (useful when battery is no longer widely available in the future). Plus the battery charger has two slots with conditioning feature. Also, there are more dedicated buttons, such as one for voice memo. While a lot of people began their photography journeys with Canon DSLR and loved the color science (warmer), I don't and preferred the one from the D3 instead. Hence, the D3 was my primary and backup by D300 (also if I needed extra reach or a light/compact body; plus the MD is D3 battery compatible) or 5D Mk II (if I needed to use some specific Canon lenses such as the 85 f/1.2 L II or higher MP).
At 11:00 the comparison is very interesting however it would have been great if you could have made a comparison by pushing the shadows and pulling the highlights. I have the D700 (bought it for about 250$ only) and it’s the same sensor generation of the D300 so in daylight shooting around 100-400 iso the files are extremely similar. The files out of the camera are pretty muddy and WB is very often off in comparison with modern cmos sensor cameras such as the D750-D780 or D500-D7500-D850. So the jpeg files are pretty much unusable and all the raw files need PP to me. The first 50MP Fuji GFX shares a similar sensor (maybe the same generation as the D4) and needs also PP on the raw files. But it’s a huge sensor so the files are more malleable. I gave a second hand D7500 to my wife and she is very pleased with the jpeg output straight out of the camera. Older CCD cameras also offer great jpegs but lack of dynamic range in contrasty situations
Thank you for your comprehensive post! Yes, I also loved the D7500 until I broke it in a salt water accident, but loved that camera while I had it! The D700 sensor was the last time Nikon went with a Panasonic sensor and ever since they have stayed with Sony. That is at least the word on the street. That, and then the firmware software, should be something special in the D700. I have never been able to find evidence for "the hype" IRL. I will say though that the best B&W images I have ever seen come out of any camera was exactly the D700. But for colours I prefer the D4 and the wonderful way the colours are both dusty and saturated at the same time. A sunset simply looks amazing! I always shoot RAW - not that I am a snob with RAW; I just like the extra headroom that you get in post.
Owning two D750s and a D700 (which I still use professionally), I agree that the single card slot is a disadvantage for the D700. However, if I was forced to drop one of each type on to concrete, I know which one would survive the experience and it's not the D750. The D700 also has a much faster frame burst rate than the D750 when used with the battery grip. I use a D500 and a Z7ii as well, which are great, but somehow it's the D700 that makes me feel most comfortable in use. It's probably something that can't be quantified.
Thank you for sharing Roger! When it comes to flash photography and product shoots, I always grab the D750. Personal preference I guess. I just find that the D750 is SO easy to work with - it does exactly what I ask it to and it does not talk back. I can tell the D700 is a much more solid built camera, but I just really like the D750 and the results it gives me. Like the video I capture with the Z50 - it is so small and light and plastic flimsy, but there is nothing wrong with the results it produces. I think we tend to like the cameras that we work with the first time we start to be a bit successful.
I own a very heavily used d700. I loved the colours. I bought the z6 to reduce the weight. I love the z6 but I am notngetting the wow factor like in d700. Its really something I cannot pinpoint. The z6 is excellent, dynamic range, the colour gradient.... But something is missing. Using the same 85mm 1.8g on both.
If you ever find out, please do share! I found the D700 magic to be mostly in B&W images. But as you say, it is very difficult to pinpoint. And in my case it was also very sporadic - no seemingly system in the differences.
I have had a D700 for many years and recently got a Z5 to "upgrade". I mainly shoot landscapes and my kids running around the backyard. For landscapes the Z5 is a definite upgrade, in terms of IQ and features. But for shooting portraits of people running around at wide open aperture, the D700 actually produces better photos with a higher hit rate. I was very disappointed with eye/face detect autofocusing on the Z5 even with the new firmware. The single point phase detect on the D700 gets at least 3-4 times better hit rate. For stationary subjects eye detect is awesome, but on a moving subject, especially when moving towards you it's simply too slow. The D700 is also a much more visceral experience when shooting, I don't think I'll ever get rid of it.
@@TB-ni4ur To make a long story short: Agreed! The focus systems on the mirrorless Nikon (my experience is from the Z6ii) is a big disappointment. The software does get better and better for each new release, but there is still a long way to go before the focus systems come close to the performance of DSLRs. That said, reports are that the Z9 is outstanding, so hopefully some of the goodies from the Z9 will trickle down to us more (financially) humble photographers.
Thank you for your videos on the D700. I really enjoyed them. I just received a used one off Ebay yesterday. It came with the Nikon mbd10 grip and had racked up 40k of shots from it's previous owner. It looks and feels great in the hands and has some serious weight and great build quality to it. I own a D800 and D7000 and am happy with them. So far I am enjoying taking photos with the D700 and learning the finer details of the camera. This is the first secondhand Nikon camera I purchased so comparing it to the other two that I originally bought new when they debuted years ago, $320 for the D700 is a real bargain in my book.
I like the honesty in this video. I have seen many good reviews from professionals, but, like this guy, I am still at the enthusiast level and more than happy with my D7000. I am however considering moving up from APSC to full frame as now all my lenses are FX format, and the D700 would be my first choice.
You don't say what lens you use and surely this can make a huge difference as to the final image quality...no good putting a kit lens on a full frame sensor. Good review!
Ah, many of the images are shot with the 50mm f/1.2 that I show in the beginning of the video. Agreed, the precondition for assessing the sensor performance is of course that you put some decent glass in front of it!
Frederik it’s all about the skin tones with this camera. To me this is the ultimate portraiture camera. Shoot some portraits, especially with flash like in a studio environment and to me personally that’s where the magic lies. That’s where the “3D pop” is expressed to its fullest. Happy shooting!
Thanks for sharing TFF! I am not big in the portraiture photography genre, but duly noted. I think I will try to do flash shooting with the D700 based on your post - it could be that there is a bit of magic hiding there for me :-D All the best!
@@frederikboving Also one minor detail I forgot to mention is that it’s much more preferable to edit the NEF file which the D700 produces in Nikon’s native Capture NX software. It beautifully preserves skin tones incredibly naturally versus Lightroom which doesn’t do the NEF files much justice. At least in my opinion. Mileages may vary of course.
@@TheFilmFellow Thanks again TFF. I have dropped NX software as it made my PC crash in the most ugly way where the computer re-started every 10 seconds. I can assure you that was not fun to fix! So I stay with LR despite all the stories about how wonderful NX and Capture One and whatnot is. Operational stability is king! Thanks for sharing!
Hi Frederik I salute you on your hardworking and above all, one of the most sincere and unbiased approach in testing photo-equipment. I agree totally with you and also from my personal experience. There is no camera (and I will not participate in possible further discussion) producing so called WOW! pictures by itself. It is and always was the MAN BEHIND it😊. You have answered and covered many things. However I would like to suggest some topic(s) for the next video. All your pictures were shot more or less in satisfactory light conditions. It will be good idea for the next video to test the camera in low light and high ISO conditions, better than to test handling and weight. Because handling and commands will be flawless. No boring crowded menus just dedicated commands. Weight is substantial and we already know that. Your combo is already 1.5kg heavy and is not for people with spine column problems. In short: is Nikon D700 good camera? Yes. Is it competetive today? Not entirely. Do you need it or you need something more modern? I guess it falls under GAS and sincerity toward ourselves. It is more hard to fight GAS and i think you are doing almost good🙂. At the end: Does any camera deserves HYPE? NO unless we are willing to feed thousands of Ebay sellers or we are finding excuses for our failures. Cheers. Good job🙂!
Thank you! Sorry that I did not see your post previously, but posts seem to come in swarms and when it does I have a hard time keeping up. I have made a note that low light performance is on the to-do list for my D700 videos! All the best!
I bought this camera in 2009 after looking the print out of a professional wedding photographer showing his work in a wedding photographer conference in Las Vegas. I was impressed by the result ( in terms of the quality of the print out, not the composition etc). If this camera could produce such a great picture 14 years ago, it must be still good now.
been a photographer for 30 years.. you need to shoot more with it.. I've shot with medium format.. Canon.. Nikon.. Pentax.. Olympus.. etc.. it takes a little while to really understand how it is different. I bought the D700 from advice from a trusted source.. found a beat up example for 300 dollars.. At first I was disappointed. .however.. you find its magic in how MUCH there is in the files. I shoot with a pentax K5 (for pentax colors and versatility) or the Sony Alpha (24mp).. however when I go out in the bright daylight.. or difficult lighting situations.. I take the Nikon system.. It's not the full frame vs. APSC.. I've shot with many other full frames.. they are not a D700. It's a subtle magic.. but it's real. :P One thing the D700 can do that nothing I've shot with (not evidence).. over exposing by 2 stops to super saturate the sensor getting as much light as the sensor can handle.. just check out how it compares when it comes to 'protecting highlights'.. when I shoot with any other gear.. I have to shoot completely differently. Even though the K5 and the D700 have relatively similar dynamic range I simply can't over expose and get highlights back on any other camera as effectively and consistently as the D700. I'd be interested to see you doing an exposure stress test on the D700 vs another Nikon full frame example.. methink it might be the unique custom designed Panasonic sensor.. much like people go after older gear with the notoriously filmic Kodak sensors. I ramble.. thanks for your work and your honest.. can't ask for more than that. :)
Thank you for an enthusiastic and comprehensive post! I have fallen in love with my Nikon D4 so much that I eventually decided to sell the D700 and D750 and only keep the D4. It was the one I shot with 99% of the time anyway! But thank you for sharing your experience and the wonders of the D700!
Have the 700, 300s, 200, and 3 Sony Alphas. Each has a general usage purpose and their own special uniquenesses. Love them all. Love your video. Keep shooting, live of a camera comes from knowing it and that comes through use.
Thanks for sharing David! Agreed, getting to know you camera and spending time with it is key! Love the D700, also the D4 and do I dare to say the Z6ii? All the best!
Sir, thank you very much for your excellent series about the D700. Told in a quiet voice, and somehow there is that decency and integrity. And of course a lot of useful tips and explaining. It is a heaven compared to other photo gear sites. The D700 has its flaws (it is heavy, and the menu system is complicated), but it is so sturdy and gives film like neutral images. Though the images of my D90 have - except for the high iso's - the same quality, as far as I can see. Anyway, the D700 was the best entry for me in the full frame world, some 4 years ago.
I have many cameras and I always feel the images from this camera have a magic that I cannot explain. It’s something soulful that is impossible to put into words. The only other camera I ever get that feeling from is the xPro1. I wish I could explain.
I bought a D700 about 2 years ago, I have a D7100, a Sony A7 & Samsungs as well as a Nikon F100 film camera. All have great picture quality but I enjoy using the D700 the most. I think it's the ergonomics mostly
I am sure you will too! If you get a good copy, then it is a wonderful camera! Robust, easy to use, great IQ, lots of dedicated buttons, etc. The only thing to worry about now is good glass! :-D
@@frederikboving I had used before the D300 and was amazed, how well it works with older manual focus lenses - and bought some older stuff, but hope with good quality. 2 Nikon Serie E Zooms, a Nikon 1,4/50mm, a small Sigma 2,8/28mm and 2 macros, one 50 and one 100mm ... I will prefer to use prime lens ... I hope it will be good enough for good quality small an middle ranged posters ...
The magic of the d700 that you missed? The d7 has that "ring photo quality" reminding me so much as my Canon 5d mk1. It's the way the sensor is made and more particularly in combination with the glass I use reminiscent producing photos more reminiscent of film
Thanks for sharing. Yep, I get that a lot. But my problem is that I cannot see it. The D700 magic to me I have only experienced when working in B&W. And I feel that I cannot convey a message about a special image quality that I have not seen. But great that you have. No matter what, the D700 is a great camera! Take care!
@@user-zv6qu4ks1p Took some shots with both camera's (with the same lens of course) and there is indeed a distinct difference between them. D700 looks more natural I guess.
Great video! I have the D700 for professional work and it produces excellent results. It could still compete with some of my new gear. I’ve printed large prints with the files, so no worries. I love my D700. Still relevant in 2020.
@@user-zv6qu4ks1p Happy to! Just have a video published on the subject. I know nothing about printers or printing technology, as I have my prints done by others. Hope that is OK.
I just bought a used mint D700 because of all the hoopla surrounding this camera. I also own a D810 and D850. People say the colors are nicer. I am anxious to use it with my Voightlander lenses. Your videos are excellent and very helpful!
@@PunjabiGymBeats Hi Singh! A really good question! To answer you properly, please have a look at this blog post: frederikboving.com/nikon-d700-versus-d750/
I would agree with Fred about that. I have a D750 also and I really don't see much difference except for the higher MP count. I guess it also depends on how much money you have to spend.
Hi Dominic, thanks for a great honest review. I purchased a D700 having heard all the raves about how magical it is. When I first used it I had to agree. The colors to me seems unique to what I was used to. Prior to this camera I shot with a D300. Perhaps the comparison between these two cameras was such that the D700 looked so fabulous? Perhaps others experienced the same thing. They compared an older “lesser” camera with a D700 and the “legend “ is born.
Hi Lincoln, Frederik here. I think the D700 enthusiasts argue that the D700 is special because of the size of the "eyes" on the sensor (low res) in combination with the image processing software in the D700. I find the color rendering of the D4 to be mind blowing but have not had the same experience with the D700. I have seen the D700 produce extraordinary b&w images and I think it relates to very good micro contrast capabilities of the sensor.
I have got 2 D700's fantastic camera 12MP is fine and you can print A3,size. A second card slot wasn't a problem back then. Only the flag ship cameras had a second card slot All the time I have been shooting with Digital , I never have had a problem with CF and sd cards, Some people just buy cheap cards , you get what you pay for. I also have a D3s too
Thanks for sharing Chris! Sorry to bother with a bit of statistics, but no matter how good quality cards you buy, some of them will fail some day. I have never had a card fail on me either, but as they say, hope for the best and plan for the worst! All the best!
I have recently purchased a D700 and enjoying get to know the camera. I will check out your other videos to see how you get on with it, thanks for the information.
If you are new to the D700, this is a good place to start: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aXGvI9wHkb4.html And if you want the full coverage of the D700 here is a playlist that gives you a lot of info about the D700: ru-vid.com/group/PLPjooVCTLG910wkb8TMrajbIHmA54MJ-A - hope you will enjoy all of it! Take care and stay safe!
Mange tak! I really appreciate your great review, especially your honesty! It has really helped me in my decision about whether or not to buy one. I am mostly into Fujifilm these days, but I did like my Nikons when I had them. (I lived in Copenhagen for about a year, about 40 years ago. By now, though, I have forgotten the little Danish that I knew}.
Thank you Michael! Much appreciated! And than you for sharing! Yes, I bet Copenhagen has changed a lot since you were here the last time - but when you live in it day in and day out like me, it is difficult to take a step back and see the bigger picture of what the changes are like! Take care!
Your revue of the D700 is very sernsible. I am thinking of buying a Nikon fx camera to upgrade from my dx ones. I currently have a D7000, D7100 and a D3200 and have not landed in my desicion yet. Your revues are very helpful, thank you.
Thank you Håkan! First of all, I have seen grown men cry because they regret selling their D7100 or D7200, so consider it carefully before you let them go. Also, I just visited the exhibition for winners from the wildlife photographer of the year here in Copenhagen a few days ago, and many of the shots were done with Nikon D7200/100, and the images were astonishing! So based on that observation, I think there is no need to upgrade. Should you want to give it a try still, the D700, D750 and D4 are all in my stable currently and I can recommend them all. The D700 is a bit quirky as its age starts to show, but delivers wonderful images. The D750 is so easy to work with and also delivers on a very high level, and then the D4 blows me away every time with astonishing colors. So there are lots of good options from Nikon IMHO.
Hello Frederick, I just got my d700 this weekend. I found a guy who sold his for $450 for less than $7,000 clicks. It's beautiful! I've been taking pictures of my kids at a local park and it's amazing. Still have a ways to go so I can get the astrophotography part of it down, but I'm really enjoying this camera.
I believet he D300 and the D3 have a familia relationzhip with the D700. I used a D300 for years then looked for something with a higher pxel count. My opiion of the three cameras with each other and aginzt evesl 24 pixel camers was significantly driven by the beautiful colors and definiion of p;ictures om the D700. I am about to buy nother D700 after looking at the mirrorless cameras. Thanks for your frank evaluation, bob
Hi there. I think you did fine with your video on the D700. But the one thing that you may have missed the point on a bit is that the D700 was remarkable in terms of color and depth when compared to other cameras of its day. There was virtually nothing back then that looked as good. I remember the first time I looked at a shot made with a D700, after shooting with my D300, and the D700 shot looked as if you could walk into it. It had a truly 3D look that I'd only seen before on film cameras with Zeiss lenses. This probably had to do with the size of the sensor. Certainly there are cameras today that can do as well, but they can't do it for $300, and the D700 was doing it in 2008! That is why so many of us old guys hang on to our D700's. I think one thing you are very right about is that for the typical photographer, the resolution differences between the D700 and the D750 really don't mean much. I have a wall full of 13X19 framed prints (that is as large as my printer will handle) from my D700. Not once has a visitor to my home, while admiring my pictures, ever said, "Gee, its too bad you didn't shoot that with a higher resolution camera." Color, composition, and subject matter trump gear every time. I will say that the tilt screen of the D750 comes in handy at times, especially for product photography. If you are a professional photographer who for some reason can't get close to your subject, like wildlife shooters, you want all the resolution you can get and probably a DX sensor because heavy cropping is routinely necessary. But for someone who has the ability to frame and compose properly in the camera, 12 megapixels is more than enough. If you are a wedding photographer in this day and age, you'd be nuts to choose a single card camera as your primary tool. But for the rest of us, there is still the mighty D700. And if you really must have dual cards on the cheap, there is always a clean, used D3. Cheers!
Thank you Tom! Thanks for sharing! Yes, the D700 is a great camera. I think it was the last time Nikon used Panasonic sensors and in combination with the internal firmware for processing the image, that gives some amazing images. I have heard many praise the images that comes out of the D700, but unfortunately I have only been amazed when shooting in B&W with it. So I cannot see what others see, unfortunately. On the note of resolution, did you see this one? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w566M5Oq_fw.html All the best!
@@frederikboving The sensor a company uses matters a lot in a digital camera. I own a Nikon D7000 crop sensor camera that I use for work even now. I owned a D7200 and bought the D7000 as a backup body originally. But I found that I preferred the look of images from the 16mp Toshiba sensor in the D7000 to the Sony sensor in the D7200. I don't know why, but I just do. I think that it might have something to do with the fact that I use a lot of older lenses, and perhaps that lower resolution sensor just doesn't show their flaws as much. The D7200 has less noise if you look closely, but I think noise concerns are often overblown in real picture taking. I shoot for fun now with Olympus Micro 4/3 gear from 2013 if I'm traveling and want to bring a camera because its small and handy. If I am going to go out specifically to take pictures, its the D700 for me. And if I'm working, like taking pictures of products for sale or illustrating a book, its the old D7000 I reach for. And if I want to re-live my youth, I still shoot with a Nikon F2 film camera made in 1975. Cheers and enjoy that D700 for what it is.
I have a D700 i bought it for less than $400 with a 3400 shutter count. I was shooting with a D7100 and still do and can see a noticeable difference between them but as you said other cameras can do the same but not at this price or build quality.
Agreed, the value for money ratio for the D700 is unparalleled - and if you add vintage lenses, you got a low cost package that yields at pro level. I wish I had known that years ago when I started photographing 🤔
Thank you for a very enjoyable assessment of this camera of the lovely camera. It is a lovely camera and it really loves my older film lenses. The files give me a happy film feel. Plus, I get a decent arm workout carting it around. 🙂 It is a you say, an excellent and price pleasing way to get into Nikon FX.
Hello, Can you tell me what do think about the 50 mm f1.4 AIS and the 200 mm f4 AI. I have theses two lenses (and the 24 mm f2.8 ais). I bought the D700 when it came out and love it very much. Now I have the D850 and others but I still use this good heavy camera, sometime with the 35 mm f2D, 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200 mm F2.8 VRII. It's a pleasure to use. Your channel is very useful. Thank you for all.
Uh, I have never owned any of said lenses. I have had the 180mm in several variants, but never the 200mm. I guess I got lazy and went for the 70-200mm zoom. With regards to the 50mm f1.4 AIS, I have never had the AIS version, but I understand so much from other reviews, that it is an excellent lens and a keeper. Many of the AIS lenses from Nikon I think are known to yield excellent image quality!
Great video and great pictures you have shown. You have been busy. I also like that 50mm AIS 1.2 on your camera. I particularly liked your conclusion about the 12 megapixel and still being a good landscape camera. That is special indeed.
On a closer watch the landscape pictures from the D700 have a far more natural look than those from the Sony. Where all pitctures shot with the Nikon 50 mm prime? The lens also provides 3 d pop according to the angry photographer. So it would also be nice to know what lenses you used for all pictures. Camera X Lens X Light X Photographer= Image quality I assume no zoomlenses?The comparison of the d 700 and d 750 is somewhat doubtful. The bird on the D700 picture appears to be somewhat out of focus or some motion blur? Still, if it were correctly in focus etc. this would lead to the conclusion that having twice as many megapixels only matters in low light conditions. Finally, a somewhat strange request. You have made the exceptional picture of the landscape painter. How would that look printed on poster format? I assume perfectly. You would not notice any difference with a poster print from the d 700 and d 750 compared under good light.
Hi Je Bo, thank you for your sharp observations and let me start out by saying that I am guilty as charged! Let me elaborate: - Yes, I should have included the lens information on each shot; that was sloppy of me: Most of the pictures are short with the Nikkor 50 mm 1.2, the wide shots are with the Nikkor 24mm 2.8. I think the Sony one was shot with the 14 mm Samyang, f/2.8. - Yes, no zoom lenses. Only (older) primes. The reason being that more modern lenses have complicated constructions where the light has to travel through a lot of different glass and that makes the pictures more flat, and I wanted to take that factor out of the equation when looking for "pop". I am not a prime snob, I happily use a zoom, but for this video I felt primes were the best option. - It is VERY likely that the D750 vs D700 pictures are slightly out of focus (one or both). The 50mm 1.2 has manual focus as you know. And the comparison would probably have been better if I had set WB manually and switched active D-lighting off (auto on both cameras). However, based on other shots and comparisons, I am still amazed how well a 12MP sensor keeps up with a 24MP sensor, so I think the conclusion is right, although the evidence is not the strongest. - Yes, I think you are right about the landscape painter, it will look great also in a large poster. The reason being, as James Popsys notices in one of his videos, that a large poster you do not see close up! If you did, your head would be moving left and right like watching a tennis match, in order to take it all in! You naturally step back to enjoy the full view of the poster, and thereby the pixels visible close up will melt together when you look at it from a proper viewing distance. - Yes, the D700 has a very natural look. I think I do mention it (looks like a painting), but I should have made this a bigger point. I have after the video was made noticed that D700 based posts to my instagram account gets (a bit) more positive remarks related to colors than other cameras, so others have notices. I think for this reason the D700 could be my primary landscape camera going forward. Hope all this clarified and answered. Again, thank you for your feedback, much appreciated! All the best.
@@frederikboving It certainly does. Recently there was a furious debate on dpreview why the D700 would be unsuitable as a landscape camera but my experiences also show the contrary using the e series lenses. The old lenses also give a more natural photo.So indeed getting more positive feedback with this old dslr and some old lenses, is quite exceptional. I would love to see a comparison between the 50mm f1.2 and the f 1.8. The f 1.8 should be better but I feel you have other experiences. Your landscape pictures are far better than those in dpreview contest. All the best!
No tomatoes from me. I bought mine new when it was new. I have made iso 1600 to 11x14 and they look great with proper noise reduction. PS and Capture One have methods to enlarge up to double that work very well. They do not add detail they do allow printing bigger. Also have two D3 with VERY few clicks and they are superb and side by side can not see difference with D700.
Thanks for sharing Ronald! I have read somewhere that the software that processes the images is slightly different in the D700 from the D3, which should influence skin tones and the like. But if that is only when we are talking JPG or if there is some truth to it, I don't know.
I went from D700 to D750. On a minority of photos, the D700 did seem to be doing something extraordinary. One was of a flyer tacked to a pole with blue sky background and decades of old tacks on the pole.
Yep, I also in some seldom cases saw an extraordinary coming out of the D700 (B&W’s mostly) but I was not able to find a consistent pattern in the extraordinary images. Thanks for sharing!
I use two D700 cameras, plus one D810 . I have no issues with the older cameras , having had up to 24 by 16 enlargements ( as big as I've so far gone ) .
Hi Frederik, thank you for this video. I was thinking of buying one becaurse of all the fantastic revieuws of this camera. Your sober approach sobered me up also. Just like you i am an amateur. I own a nikon Z6 and a couple of Z-lenses and F-lenses. The z-lenses are razor sharp and you can make fantastic pictures, but i mis something: atmosphere, the undefined extra. i have an old d70s and i loved it. it gave a warm and old look That is the reason that i bought a Fujifilm XS-10 becaurse of the different film modus. Some of them give a fantantastic old feeling. But, while the D700 is cheap, it is still an investment. So i will think about it again. Keep on making video's! Henk from the Netherlands.
Thank you for your kind words Henk! Yes, the D700 is still here in 2023 a great camera for stills and IMHO the B&W images it produces are some of the best I have ever seen. But it is an investment, and after getting a D700 you will be tempted to buy some of the wonderful vintage glass that is out there as well and then the investment just grows! Decisions, decisions 🙂
I chose this camera when I started shooting weddings and portraits as a business. Of course back then it was a bit under $3k US. It was a BEAST of a camera back then and there wasn't much that would compare to it, especially at high ISO's (Canon's 5D maybe). Nikon's flash system also was ahead of its time which is important for wedding photography. The one memory card slot was a huge concern though and I couldn't go to sleep until I did a successful card dump to storage. Anyway when I noticed I could get one now for $250 US it was a no brainer as I still have a lot of Nikon lenses and flashes. The one I got came with a bit more dust on the sensor than I'd like lol (doing the Lightroom trick taking a pic of a white background and going into the spot tool). It does take beautiful pictures still today though and I'd even still do professional work with it if I had to for some reason. There's a lot more cameras today that can keep up or surpass it but not for the money though. This is the best camera in regards to pure image quality for $300 or less today hands down.
@@frederikboving thanks for the kind words. However I've never put much stock in pro vs amateur. I've seen some pro's that were mediocre at best and some of the best photographers I've encountered shot for the love of the hobby. I was kind of forced into it because I lost my day job lol and had to do something for income. One thing I noticed is that doing it for a living made me not want to shoot just to enjoy it as often. Anyway I enjoy the videos - keep it up!
I’m no beginner, not new to photography, so I should not shoot with the d700? I have 2 d700’s and they are my main cameras. I had 2 d800’s. Sold them both! Also, don’t underestimate the evolution of post production software. And the 12k sensor is very gentle for the PC.
Jos, you should shoot with whatever is your preference and liking. If I in any way shape or form have left you with the impression that I should decide on your camera choice, you hereby have my sincere apologies.
No, of course not. Your video’s are interesting and much appreciated. But the d700 is no more or less a camera for beginners than any other camera. It’s a camera for photographers.
Cant even make those pictures with my XT2. Have to make HDR to come close to it, on high dynamics and low lights. It is more of a vacation camera, it needs lots of light or a tripod. As soon you push it with low light, it goes down hill fast. Shoot 50k already with that camera, so I know.
Thank you your series of videos has proven informative and objective and in my view and convinced me to invest in the camera can't wait to to see the results.
Hi I found one with less than 50k actuations and original Nikon grip I collect it tomorrow from one careful owner with a lens nikkor 28-85 f2.8 4D 1F for 350 Euro
Hi Frederik, one of the reasons that led me to buy a D700 was your videos, so thank you. I'm not very young so I come from the world of film and the D700 seems very familiar to me. Very honest that you mention that you don't see anything "magical" in the D700 but in other videos you have commented that in the D4 you do find the range of colors very pleasant. Luckily the photo which shows in 5:24 it's from a Sony because never saw that blue gradient in the sky in the photos I take with the D700. I wonder if a pollizer or a filter was used but whatever, it's an unbelievable color. I left Sony because the skies appeared angry blue. Maybe Sony improved it in later models but instead, if there is something I love about the D700, besides the skin tones, it is how well it represents the skies. In addition, the D700 files are easy to edit, framing accordingly there is sufficient resolution. Allen Blasdell has several videos where he makes comparisons and draws interesting conclusions. I need a second body and I'm at a crossroads whether to go for another D700 or D3, or go towards the D4 or try a D800 which are very cheap at least here in Japan where I'm living.
Hi, yes, I can confirm that the D4 renders colours beautifully. The colours are both rich and has a slightly "dusted" quality that I absolutely love. I am however no expert when it comes to color. I once had a Samsung television and switched to LG. The colours on the LG were much more pale and we were almost about to return the TV because it relative to the Samsung was absolutely pale and uninteresting. A few weeks later we got used to the LG. Today, when I see a Samsung, my reaction is: wow! Turn down the colours - it is not a circus! So my lesson learned is that your preference for colours very much depend on what you are used to. In terms of your second body: I do not know the D800 - have never tried shooting with it. I know and love the D4. Would probably go with a D4S if possible (service window still open if you get a young copy). But you have to accept a heavy and bulky camera with a built in vertical grip. But love the pro level feel - for example the buttons are backlit which is a great feature in low light.
@@frederikboving I finally went for a D3S, I love its ergonomics and that you don't have to go to the menu to configure what you want. It is true that they are very heavy cameras, like the D4, but in the future I may have a DF that uses the same sensor as the D4 in a lightweight body. What you say about TV is not a minor issue, there are still few people who use monitors specifically for photography or with a color space as close as possible to 100 percent Adobe RGB. The difference between a generic type of monitor and another specific for photography is enormous and it is the only way to approximate the color that a printed copy would have.
Great video again fabulous you should do a video on the Nikon d3s it looks still a great camera iam thinking of going back to dslr from mirrorless and thinking of getting the d4s especially after watching your videos
Thanks for the video, probably the pros like it as it speeds up the workflow (imagine processing a wedding shoot with the D700 or the D850 at 45MP!)... as for the 'pop' effect, a lot has to do with the lens. If you try shooting with Zeiss optics, being that the Milvus range or even better the Otus I can assure you that you will be reaching out with your finger trying to 'touch the photograph' as the 3D effect is so pronounced! Regardless of the camera that is.
I'm currently trying to contemplate buying this camera or a D600, Plenty of people say the D600 has a lot of problems with Dust and Oil.. This camera gives me a impression that it is a invincible bit of kit. It just depends if the D700 can keep up with Ice Hockey.
Hi Jake, I have never had or tried a D600, but despite reported issues those who get a good copy really seem to like it a lot and some even say it is better than the D750 (I find that hard to believe, but they seem very committed to this point of view). Not sure this was very helpful, but it is what I got! Take care!
@@user-zv6qu4ks1p Thank you! I took a look at the prices and that certainly was a bit out of my appetite considering it is a far-from-perfect dated camera body. Your comments made me more convinced that the DF is a beautiful dream, but perhaps should stay a dream!
@@frederikboving Df has that old conventional steel body feel, that's what is attracting everyone to the Df. But, believe me, D700 is cheaper & better in all other departments !
@@thatspiritualhumane Thank you TPM, I am fascinated by the Df, but not the price tag! So thank you for giving me some comfort that the D700 is all I need :-D
I also expected alot more from my d700, considering all the huge, but I don't see it either, I'm sorry to say. But I am very impressed with the low light performance compared to my d750, which also does equally well. Hopefully, I will also see the magic in this camera. That is not to say that I regretted buying it.
@@frederikboving Hi Frederik, thanks for all your videos (long time to your channel). I have read a lot about the capabilities of the D700 producing B&W photos. Could you share with us with some examples or may be considering a new video about this special topic. I have a D4s and honestly with an AI-S 50 F1.2 it produce marvelous B&W pictures. Have a good day. JM
@@jean-michelbourdoux2780 I Jean, you can find my best D700 shots in this portfolio: www.flickr.com/gp/frederikboving/d4pSADK7X1 - there are also som B&W. Regarding a video, I do not have the D700 anymore, so it will be difficult. I am not shooting with the D4!
Dear Frederik is the lack of video recording not a big issue? I know: the FM and Nikkormats didnt have either but the coolpix series do! Thanks for your videos
