D3 or D700

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 12:59 PM

Having switched to Nikon a couple of months ago I now need to get a second body. The obvious choices for me are another D700 or a D3. The D3 is obviously the king but I'm wondering - is it worth the extra money.

My choices (as I see them) are:-

1) Nikon D3 @ £2899

2) Nikon D700 @ £1799+ Grip @ £249 + Nikon 85mm F1.4 @ £849 = £2897.00

(All prices are from Jessops website but I realise I could shop around)

The D3 has the faster shooting rate (not bothered), dual card slots (good) and 100% VF coverage (great) but lacks the sensor cleaner. Have I missed any other key advantages and is the second option the best one?

At the moment my heart is saying D3 but my brain is saying "whoa boy"!!

I'd appreciate any thoughts 'cos I've got a headache

Ryan

dazza74 · 10-02-2009, 1:18 PM

No idea mate, this is one thread that needs one reply IMO .. from "Radiohead"

iGiDK · 10-02-2009, 1:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

2) Nikon D700 @ £1799+ Grip @ £249 + Nikon 85mm F1.4 @ £849 = £2897.00

I'd go with this, a friend uses this combo and the lens is an absolute peach

kBm · 10-02-2009, 1:55 PM

A D3 would be your main camera then (with a D700 as the second body)?

The D3x is hot off the production line so that could open up a few 2nd hand D3's? Tough choice, especially with that amount of money....

SomeVorn · 10-02-2009, 2:37 PM

I'd go for the D700. Its the removable grip that does it for me. With the grip, you have a scaled down D3, without it you have a very portable full frame camera.

Am I right in remembering that you've gone pro (or semi) and shooting weddings and events? I'd rather have two D700 bodies than one D3 if I were you.

I just can't see the D3 being worth it unless you are really going to put it through its paces - by that I mean awful weather, needing the extra frames per second, lightning fast autofocus.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 5:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kBm

A D3 would be your main camera then (with a D700 as the second body)?

The D3x is hot off the production line so that could open up a few 2nd hand D3's? Tough choice, especially with that amount of money....

Yes I guess the D700 wold be relegated to reserve if I got the D3.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 5:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SomeVorn

I'd go for the D700. Its the removable grip that does it for me. With the grip, you have a scaled down D3, without it you have a very portable full frame camera.

Am I right in remembering that you've gone pro (or semi) and shooting weddings and events? I'd rather have two D700 bodies than one D3 if I were you.

I just can't see the D3 being worth it unless you are really going to put it through its paces - by that I mean awful weather, needing the extra frames per second, lightning fast autofocus.

I have a D700 with grip at the mo so it wouldn't be a case of 2 D700 + 1 D3. It would be one of each.

But the more I think about it the more 2 D700's seems like the best move.

The only other consideration is what are Nikon about to release next and would it be worth hanging on? The D400 seems to be hot on the rumour-mill at the mo.

(Oh, and yes you are right (semi))

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 5:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iGiDK

I'd go with this, a friend uses this combo and the lens is an absolute peach

Thanks. I must admit spending less on the camera, allowing me to get the lens too really does excite me (if you know what I mean

)

johnaalex · 10-02-2009, 6:03 PM

The D3 is obvioulsy a great camera, but the D700 combo with the 85mm 1.4 for much the same money is very tempting. I really want that lens!

Paulie-W · 10-02-2009, 6:18 PM

D700 for a backup

Only in my wildest dreams.

Personally I would go the D700 + grip & lens route. If the reliability is good why change. You could always offload one at a later date and move up should you feel the need.

kBm · 10-02-2009, 6:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

The only other consideration is what are Nikon about to release next and would it be worth hanging on? The D400 seems to be hot on the rumour-mill at the mo.

If you went with the D3+ a D700, would you really look at a rumoured D400? Maybe if it was full frame.....

Plus, if your thinking of going semi, a D3 would be the next logical step (after the D700) in producing more professional images.

Echoing what others have said, I'd invest in lenses with the D700.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 6:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kBm

If you went with the D3+ a D700, would you really look at a rumoured D400? Maybe if it was full frame.....

Plus, if your thinking of going semi, a D3 would be the next logical step (after the D700) in producing more professional images.

Echoing what others have said, I'd invest in lenses with the D700.

Thanks for the imput

However, the images from both cameras are the same so the professionalsim element doesn't really apply.

PPPPPP · 10-02-2009, 6:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kBm

If you went with the D3+ a D700, would you really look at a rumoured D400? Maybe if it was full frame.....

Plus, if your thinking of going semi, a D3 would be the next logical step (after the D700) in producing more professional images.

Echoing what others have said, I'd invest in lenses with the D700.

Makes sense to get another D700 + lens, and then sell one of the D700's when the D700x (or D800!) with more MP's (& other features) appears later this year. Two similar handling cameras then.

marchand · 10-02-2009, 7:12 PM

Nikon D700 Thrashes Competition, Wins Best Camera of the Year Award | Gadget Lab from Wired.com

Bristol Pete · 10-02-2009, 7:13 PM

Both an option but as you say, picture quality is identical with the same metering and sensor. However, note that the weight of the D3 is colossal and that the camera is a big old unit.

Speaking from experience and the customers I deal with on a pro level, the fact that you have a D3 for example means you can up your rates as perception plays a big part of the industry, but I would be inclined to go for a D700 based on what you shoot and perhaps intend to shoot.

The only thing to think about is that the D3 has been on the shelf since Autumn 07 and some are now calling it old hat despite the fact it is uber camera. Naturally, being the eternal bad decision maker I am, I wish I still had mine, but that is another story.

If you are looking for a D3, PM me, may be able to source you a new one at the 'old' price if you are interested.

Cheers.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 7:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marchand

Nikon D700 Thrashes Competition, Wins Best Camera of the Year Award | Gadget Lab from Wired.com

Cheers Marchand - I was reading the article in AP earlier.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 7:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bristol Pete

Both an option but as you say, picture quality is identical with the same metering and sensor. However, note that the weight of the D3 is colossal and that the camera is a big old unit.

Speaking from experience and the customers I deal with on a pro level, the fact that you have a D3 for example means you can up your rates as perception plays a big part of the industry, but I would be inclined to go for a D700 based on what you shoot and perhaps intend to shoot.

The only thing to think about is that the D3 has been on the shelf since Autumn 07 and some are now calling it old hat despite the fact it is uber camera. Naturally, being the eternal bad decision maker I am, I wish I still had mine, but that is another story.

If you are looking for a D3, PM me, may be able to source you a new one at the 'old' price if you are interested.

Cheers.

Cheers chief. I remember you saying before that the D3 is a heavy fella. Any idea how it compares to the 1D mk III?

I can see what you mean about the perception thing. I don't think it'll affect me though as most potential customers haven't a clue what I shoot with and probably wouldn't find out until I turn up. (In fact my website still has a big Canon 1D in the corner

).

Ta for the offer - it's really good of you (Arkwright

). I'll PM you asap.

I won't try to say anything about your Canon/Nikon thing because I really don't know what to say

dazza74 · 10-02-2009, 7:51 PM

Must admit I half expected to see more in favour of the D3, I think I can see why so many people are getting a D700 now

Looks a good way forward Ryan the D700, you know the lens will hold it's money. I've just dug up an old April 2007 Digital Photo magazine and warehouse express back then were selling a D2x for £2400, you'd get about £700 on ebay for one of those now. I think what I'm trying to say is I'd be concerned spending £2800 on a D3 with regards what it will be worth once a D4 hits the shelves. Obviously the D3 might keep it's money if Nikon still insist on charging such a premium to have 24 megapixels.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 7:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dazza74

Must admit I half expected to see more in favour of the D3, I think I can see why so many people are getting a D700 now

Looks a good way forward Ryan the D700, you know the lens will hold it's money. I've just dug up an old April 2007 Digital Photo magazine and warehouse express back then were selling a D2x for £2400, you'd get about £700 on ebay for one of those now. I think what I'm trying to say is I'd be concerned spending £2800 on a D3 with regards what it will be worth once a D4 hits the shelves. Obviously the D3 might keep it's money if Nikon still insist on charging such a premium to have 24 megapixels.

Good point Dazza. Now that Nikon have released a mega mega-pixel camera (good one eh?) I'm keen to see what they do next. And, as you say, the D3 does seem overpriced at the moment when compared to the 700.

I think it was you who mentioned the D700x or D800 - any news?

dazza74 · 10-02-2009, 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

Good point Dazza. Now that Nikon have released a mega mega-pixel camera (good one eh?) I'm keen to see what they do next. And, as you say, the D3 does seem overpriced at the moment when compared to the 700.

I think it was you who mentioned the D700x or D800 - any news?

I'm completely in the dark with regards any new cameras from Nikon sadly. Not needing any high iso performance for what I take I must admit it's going to take an affordable 24 megapixel camera from Nikon to tempt me to trade in the D300. I could see me buying a Canon or Sony if this didn't happen within a couple of years, I like Nikon but I've no qualms about switching if they can't offer me the camera I want.

Bristol Pete · 10-02-2009, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

Good point Dazza. Now that Nikon have released a mega mega-pixel camera (good one eh?) I'm keen to see what they do next. And, as you say, the D3 does seem overpriced at the moment when compared to the 700.

I think it was you who mentioned the D700x or D800 - any news?

I think the extra is worth it however.

ryanyboy · 10-02-2009, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bristol Pete

I think the extra is worth it however.

Good to hear someone favours the D3 but what makes it worth £1k more to you Pete?

Bristol Pete · 10-02-2009, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

Good to hear someone favours the D3 but what makes it worth £1k more to you Pete?

Quicker, dual card slots, mega battery life that goes on for weeks), dual buttons- top and rear. I stress that the D700 is wonderful however and if I were to go back to Nikon, the 700 would now be my machine of choice based on cost and what I am shooting. If Nikon could compete with the range of Canon glass then its a no brainer, but just today I was listing Canon 70-200 options for a pro and the range is massive, catering for all budgets....nikons 70-200 is class however and no mistakin' and anyone who says that it is dark in the corners needs a bop on the nose...

kBm · 11-02-2009, 8:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

Thanks for the imput

However, the images from both cameras are the same so the professionalsim element doesn't really apply.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bristol Pete

Speaking from experience and the customers I deal with on a pro level, the fact that you have a D3 for example means you can up your rates as perception plays a big part of the industry.

Thats what i was getting at - perception, and dare i say camera snobbery in that D700 is marketed as a prosumer for serious enthusiasts, where as the D3 is full on professional camera.

Of course this is more Nikon marketing than anything else, but im sure the message gets through and people will expect a certain standard.

....of course this is all irrelevant when a customer expects nothing less than a Hasselblad....

Radiohead · 11-02-2009, 12:00 PM

2 angles to consider:

1) I can't stress enough how much easier your life is using 2 identical bodies in the middle of a pressure situation. Muscle memory will become important and having something like the ISO button in a different place can cost you a shot. For that reason alone I'd have 2 D700's over 1 D3 and 1 D700.

but

2) As soon as you put a grip on a D700 I'd rather have a D3. IME most people who buy a grip tend to leave it on because the handling improves so much. Then you're looking at the dual cards, 100% VF, the fact that it's just a faster and, IMHO, better handling camera....

I use a pair of D3's and the D700 tends to stay in the bag. If I'm out and about using the camera for fun the D3's tend to stay at home.

ryanyboy · 11-02-2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radiohead

2 angles to consider:

1) I can't stress enough how much easier your life is using 2 identical bodies in the middle of a pressure situation. Muscle memory will become important and having something like the ISO button in a different place can cost you a shot. For that reason alone I'd have 2 D700's over 1 D3 and 1 D700.

That was one of my big concerns - I like to know where my buttons are and if I'm faffing about between bodies a) I might miss something and b) I'll look like a muppet!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radiohead

2) As soon as you put a grip on a D700 I'd rather have a D3. IME most people who buy a grip tend to leave it on because the handling improves so much. Then you're looking at the dual cards, 100% VF, the fact that it's just a faster and, IMHO, better handling camera....

Fair enough (although I find using the D700 in portrait mode with grip good as you have a second knob for selecting AF points - I dont think the D3 has that - does it?)

Anyway, if we all agree that the D3 is better and that I want two identical bodies for ease then I need to sell my D700 and buy two D3's

Anyone got £6K free?

I think I'll just go get another D700.

dazza74 · 11-02-2009, 1:26 PM

Count me out on the 6K front

, looks a good decision all round end of the day the sooner the equipment's paid up the sooner you make a profit. With two D700's and top end glass you'll be ahead of most wedding togs I reckon gear wise, I don't know of any where I live that use anything better FWIW.

Radiohead · 11-02-2009, 1:31 PM

Yep, if it was me in that position I'd have 2 D700's

14-24 or 17-35, 24-70, 70-200, 35/50/85 primes, 2 speedlights

Job done.

johnaalex · 11-02-2009, 2:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanyboy

I think I'll just go get another D700.

While you're there, can you get me one too...

ryanyboy · 11-02-2009, 8:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radiohead

Yep, if it was me in that position I'd have 2 D700's

14-24 or 17-35, 24-70, 70-200, 35/50/85 primes, 2 speedlights

Job done.

Well I went for it and got the D700. Financially it was definately the best decision (vs a D3) and in terms of what I wanted a second body for, this makes the most sense.

From your list all I'm missing now is a 35 prime (which I can live without I reckon) and a second SB-900 (but I'm on the case).

Job done.