Nikon announces the new D700 Full Frame SLR

dazzajl said:
All true but none of which makes any difference to the focal length of the lens that shot it.

Come on Martin, these are not the sort of questions that should come from a fully professional photographer. ;):lol:

The whole topic is a complete mare but the essence remains that a camera cannot change the focal length of a lens...... that's it.
Click to expand...

Did I say it changed the focal length or the reach i got with it:clap:

Wow
 
digitalmaniac said:
Yeah I agree-for an extra what £700 or so you can have the d3

I want a full frame sensor-but am bothered ill lose the extra distance with lenses and then have to buy even longer.

I get the equiv to 750mm from my bigma.

Also some of the lenses I have would goto dx crop anyway.

Ill wait another year until the d3 is about the same price I think
Click to expand...

Can you see focal length written anywhere.

You wind me up-im a bigger bumwipe than you if you want me to be-nuff said.:bang:
 
Sort yourself out man, you know the type of crowd you get here. You set yourself up for a fall and you took it. You can either take it with grace and good humour, or you can get all uppity and have a strop every time someone takes the (well deserved) micky.
icon_idea.gif
 
dazzajl said:
Sort yourself out man, you know the type of crowd you get here. You set yourself up for a fall and you took it. You can either take it with grace and good humour, or you can get all uppity and have a strop every time someone takes the (well deserved) micky.
icon_idea.gif
Click to expand...

I dont see whats well deserved at all-it was a fair comment I made and you had to do what too many do on here-take the you know what-im not pitching a fit-I dont care what you think really.

I said my piece about the d700 and yes I do get closer shots.

you think what you will and ill keep sticking up for myself if people take the michael.
 
It's true that DX is better than FX in some ways and the above is a good example of that. As for the D700, I think its well priced. The RRP will obviously be higher than street price and HK imports too... furthermore, new stuff costs more, leave it to the rich people and pick it up when you can afford it - there's lots of tech in there, it has a flash (!) its smaller and a bit more modest but if you can afford the D3 and can make good use of it then its worth it. Nikon can't just make it a no brainer price and end up with D300's and D3's sitting on shelves not selling (imho anyway).
 
The US prices are plus sales tax. So you need to add (usually around 13%) to that price. Your all calculating the US price tag minus the tax. Even if you were to import one you will be stung with import duty. So really the prices are proportional. Shelf price in Canada is $3399.

Wish I didnt bother ordering the D3 now. I was in the market for a compact full frame sensor al a the 5D. Think I might rid the D3 in favor of this (makes sense if you have read my post).
 
King_Boru said:
The US prices are plus sales tax. So you need to add (usually around 13%) to that price. Your all calculating the US price tag minus the tax. Even if you were to import one you will be stung with import duty. So really the prices are proportional. Shelf price in Canada is $3399.
Click to expand...

The only way you would save would be to buy one whilst in the USA, otherwise import costs and duty would raise the price paid to the UK equivalent.

My Mother in Law is on holiday in the USA till September, might be worth her bringing a couple back!! If only I had the money... :'(

Allan
 
Quite bitching like a pair of washer women.
 
Frac looks at the thread, sees the bitching, and returns to the calm of the bird section.
 
I have just sold my D80 with a view to getting either a D300 with grip or a friend bringing back a D3 from the US next week [if the price is right].
A D700 would be ideal for me but at £2k plus £160ish for a grip. Now thats only £400 of the cheapest D3 price here .:eek:

But can i go without a camera till the D700 price drops? :thumbsdown:
 
krazy_horse said:
Why doesn't it go down to ISO 100 ?
Click to expand...

It does, but its below its base ISO meaning you get a slight trade off in quality (colours, contrast rather than noise) when you ask the sensor to work this slow. Most people would consider this (a higher base ISO) a good thing I expect.
 
Ant said:
i'm surprised it's only 5fps...
Click to expand...

err, it does 8 fps with the battery grip.

And arn't Nikons slightly less sensitive in general than film and canons?
 
Nikon must have known about the D700 when the D300 was released. Had I been aware 6 months ago that an affordable full frame Nikon was on its way I would have waited. When will Nikon consider the customer first as opposed to 'mind games' with Canon. I know the Canon 5D mark 11 is coming, so I'll sit and wait for that before upgrading to full frame.
 
I'm starting to wonder if the D80 replacement will be/is the D300!

Think about it... the D700 is now the like for like rival to the 5D. Otherwise we'll end up with two skimmed cameras in the form of D90(?) and D300, the semi-skimmed D700, then the full fat D3.
 
Ant said:
i'm surprised it's only 5fps...
Click to expand...

Yes i thought this considering the D300 is 6fps, ok i know you can get 8fps with the other battery but it's still a bit odd to me, i only got my D300 in feb and paid £1060, it,s now £960 4 months later, i'd be surprised if it dropped below £900 now but i guess it will when the D700 hits the shops, i'm in no hurry to upgrade now and even if i was i could'ent, i will be quite happy to wait for the full reviews within the next few months, and think about getting one early next year, sell my D80 have my D300 as a second camera and D700 as my main camera, all sounds good on paper, now i just have to get the money :lol:
 
Had Nikon announced the existence of the D700 at the time the D300 was released 6 months ago (it must have been on the product line) I would have waited and bought this affordable full frame version instead. When will Nikon put the customer first instead of its 'mind games' with Canon. I will now wait for the 5D mark 11 before upgrading to full frame.
 
Steve, I know it might have been nice but its understandable that Nikon don't want to dampen sales by announcing something they have in the pipeline which may halt sales for the new (at the time) flagship models... Just as if they were to announce the D700 with an RRP £1500, who would bother buying a D3? Or a D300 for that matter. To put the customer first is respectable but not if it's at the cost of their own business as that'll leave said customer with a canon monopoly (and even staunch canon fans wouldn't want that).
 
Steep said:
No you don't. You get 500mm from it wether you have a full sensor or a cropped one. What you will get from a full sensor is a wider field of view with the image being magnified exactly the same on either type of sensor.
Click to expand...

Actually you do. FOV might be one consideration, but the key for distance photography is the number of pixels you put on the target. With greater pixel density (same number on a smaller sensor), the D300 will give the equivalent to a 750mm lens on a full-frame of the same pixel count.
 
Moadib said:
Actually you do. FOV might be one consideration, but the key for distance photography is the number of pixels you put on the target. With greater pixel density (same number on a smaller sensor), the D300 will give the equivalent to a 750mm lens on a full-frame of the same pixel count.
Click to expand...

Thankyou-:clap:
 
People can accuse me of whatever they like here but the simple fact is that you can have any size pixels or any size sensor you like but a 500mm lens will always be a 500mm lens.

A crop sensor camera with dense pixels does make better use of each and every one of those 500mm's when shooting small and far away objects but that's something different entirely.

Focal length defines a number of a lenses optical characteristics and FoV, or magnification are just one.
 
Moadib said:
Actually you do. FOV might be one consideration, but the key for distance photography is the number of pixels you put on the target. With greater pixel density (same number on a smaller sensor), the D300 will give the equivalent to a 750mm lens on a full-frame of the same pixel count.
Click to expand...

That's absolute rubbish, never in the history of film photography did anyone ever claim that their lens got longer equivallent focal length because they used a finer grain film. The issue here is sensor size not pixel density, I could have a full 35mm sensor with 5 billion pixels and get a longer focal length than a 1.6 that has only 5 million by your way thinking (oh sorry I forgot to use effective).
 
What a ridiculous and pedantic argument you lot are having :)
 
Would you think it ridiculous and pedantic if a salesman in a camera shop told you "the lens is a 500mm on this camera but if you buy it with this other camera it's really a 750mm"?
 
I think that everyone either understands exactly what you're on about and that effective focal length is an easy way to describe the effect of a cropped sensor, or no-one has a clue and this thread is unhelpful for other readers. It looks like point scoring to everyone else.

The difference with film is that a finer grain is more similar to an increase in resolution (printed dpi rather than on screen) rather than smaller smaple area of the lens itself. Aside from the depth of field difference and change in compression, a 750mm lens on 35mm sensor is going to look the same as a 500mm on a (nikon) cropped sensor and that's helpful to know for a lot of people - if someone wants to fill their shot with a small bird, then a cropped sensor will help them do that on a cheaper and lighter lens.

That's what digitalmaniac looked like he was trying to say to me in my eyes. Moadib clarified that pretty well I thought, his statement doesn't look incorrect to me and lens manufucturers use the term 'effective focal length' all the time, so its an accepted descriptive term and even if it can mislead in some senses its works for feild of view.

Why not just add to and simplify what is being said? :)
 
Steep said:
Would you think it ridiculous and pedantic if a salesman in a camera shop told you "the lens is a 500mm on this camera but if you buy it with this other camera it's really a 750mm"?
Click to expand...

But they do, and everyone else understands what it means and accepts it. This is in an ad for a Sony DSLR Lens 500mm F8 Reflex
"Mounted on the Sony α (alpha) DSLR-A100 camera this lens provides a 750mm focal length (35mm equivalent 500mm)"

Allan
 
Steep said:
No you don't. You get 500mm from it wether you have a full sensor or a cropped one. What you will get from a full sensor is a wider field of view with the image being magnified exactly the same on either type of sensor.
Click to expand...

I wish some people would read posts as they are written..... I don't recall any person saying they got a different focal length.

What I do recall is the continuous use of the word equivalent which is exactly to what the last post quoting the Sony advert alludes.

I saw this ridiculous side of the debate the other day and wish I had said something but time wasn't on my side.

Sorry if my bluntness offends but the whole 'crop factor' pedantry is annoying , unnecessary and not at all helpful. :thumbsdown:

Moving on...... what did Canon achieve in introducing the 1000D?
 
chuckles said:
I wish some people would read posts as they are written..... I don't recall any person saying they got a different focal length.

What I do recall is the continuous use of the word equivalent
Click to expand...


At last someone has put it in perspective, maybe this silly debate will stop now and we can get back on topic as to what the original thread was about.

"NIKON ANNOUNCES THE NEW D700 FULL FRAME SLR"
 
chuckles said:
Moving on...... what did Canon achieve in introducing the 1000D?
Click to expand...

I think Canons strategy is "the more models you have, the better chance you have of keeping the largest slice of the market", which seems to have worked.

However, I don't consider there to be enough differences in the 1000 & 450 to really warrant another model. If the price for the 1000D was £299, then maybe.

As a Canon owner, the real interesting thing for me is that when a replacement for the 5D does arrive, will it have all the functionality of the 40D, but still keep those lovely rich colours that the 5D seems to produce.

And if Canon don't do something quickly, they could see a number of people jump ship to Nikon as the D700 is what many hope the 5D replacement would be.

Steve
 
Sorry if my bluntness offends but the whole 'crop factor' pedantry is annoying , unnecessary and not at all helpful.
Click to expand...

Well I for one will never be offended by some words floating over my monitor but I always thought that the truth was pretty helpful in all instances. The wrong attitude can be very unhelpful though, I certainly agree with that.

I have no intention of trying to cause any trouble or to get people into a state of unrest. I did take the mick out of someone for something from a past thread but I'd have thought it was fairly clearly just tongue in cheek humour.

.....and of course the word equivalent is great but it needs to be in front of "field of view" and not "focal length".

now, can I have a full frame Nikon please. :)
 
dazzajl said:
.....and of course the word equivalent is great but it needs to be in front of "field of view" and not "focal length".

now, can I have a full frame Nikon please. :)
Click to expand...

Agreed ...... perhaps something like an EXIF field which is stated (in OPANDA headers) Equivalent F/L in 135 format..... that should dispel any confusion! :clap:

And - no you can't ..... not before me at least :lol:
 
chuckles said:
..... that should dispel any confusion! :clap:
Click to expand...

I dont really think there was any confusion was there?

And I`ll have the third one, they are being given away free now to anyone who takes part in this thread arent they?
Allan
 
I'm pretty sure the exif reader that's integrated into zenfolio.com has the equivalent focal fov written into it. Quite cool I thought. Dibs on the 4th d700 (although I wouldn't want to have to give up my cropped sensor to get one, so I'll need it as well as my d300 - I like the advantages of my sensor size too much to go completely without... luckily (er?) being skint means I'll probably get no choice but to keep it and not have the choice of swapping it out anyway). :)
 
I think you get FX on type G or D lenses and DX on DX lenses, so, you get the best of both worlds!
Not sure how DX works out in reality, I think you can also switch between FX and DX anyway, or did I just make that up?
Allan
 
No, you're right about that, it's just that it'll be at 5mp (or something like that anyway)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top