Interim backup camera

HCK

HCK

Messages
784
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I do wedding and portrait photography and have a D700 main and D90 backup....the D90 really needs to go! I am waiting for the D700 repacement which seems to be taking an age to be released! I really dont want to spend another £1700 only for Nikon to release the new D700 shortly after.

What I was considering was a D7000 as a backup to make do until the D700 replacement comes out....what are people thoughts on the D7000 as a backup ? My main worry is low light which from what i've seen the D7000 can handle quite well.

Thoughts ? Over to you guys :-)

Cheers,

HCK.
 
HCK said:
Hi,

I do wedding and portrait photography and have a D700 main and D90 backup....the D90 really needs to go! I am waiting for the D700 repacement which seems to be taking an age to be released! I really dont want to spend another £1700 only for Nikon to release the new D700 shortly after.

What I was considering was a D7000 as a backup to make do until the D700 replacement comes out....what are people thoughts on the D7000 as a backup ? My main worry is low light which from what i've seen the D7000 can handle quite well.

Thoughts ? Over to you guys :-)

Cheers,

HCK.
Click to expand...

Is your main issue with the D90 just the low light stuff? I have the same two cameras for the same reason and the D90 seems pretty adequate.

The D7000 is better at high ISO by about 1/2 -1 stop. Its controls are pretty much the same as the D90 but its has a metal body and more AF points. More importantly though it has about a stop more DR at the highlight end, so for weddings this is probably a useful plus.

I always find the image comparitor at imaging-resource.com quite useful. I don't think the difference is all that huge but may be enough.

I would personally wait for the D700 replacement unless your D90 is actually broken. I have used mine at a few events and it held up pretty well with a bit of bounce flash. Or wait for the D300 replacement which will have the D7000 sensor but the extra performance.

Very impressive portfolio by the way. Love the wedding shots.
 
Last edited:
Apologies for coming in on this thread, with an indirect concern. But, since you mention the D7000 is 1/2 to 1 stop better than the D90, what is the low-light advantage in stops on the D700, compared to the D90? I know there are many other advantages, but I'd like to get a measure of the low-light performance. For that matter, any idea of the difference between the D300/s and the D700 - purely in terms of low light performance?
 
Critical I said:
Is your main issue with the D90 just the low light stuff? I have the same two cameras for the same reason and the D90 seems pretty adequate.

The D7000 is better at high ISO by about 1/2 -1 stop. Its controls are pretty much the same as the D90 but its has a metal body and more AF points. More importantly though it has about a stop more DR at the highlight end, so for weddings this is probably a useful plus.

I always find the image comparitor at imaging-resource.com quite useful. I don't think the difference is all that huge but may be enough.

I would personally wait for the D700 replacement unless your D90 is actually broken. I have used mine at a few events and it held up pretty well with a bit of bounce flash. Or wait for the D300 replacement which will have the D7000 sensor but the extra performance.

Very impressive portfolio by the way. Love the wedding shots.
Click to expand...

Thanks Steve. My concern is low light, as having used the D700 and D90 in low light, the D90 is lacking considerably imo. The D90 is a good camera but I would only use it up to 1600 ISO after that I lose confidence.

kartracer said:
Apologies for coming in on this thread, with an indirect concern. But, since you mention the D7000 is 1/2 to 1 stop better than the D90, what is the low-light advantage in stops on the D700, compared to the D90? I know there are many other advantages, but I'd like to get a measure of the low-light performance. For that matter, any idea of the difference between the D300/s and the D700 - purely in terms of low light performance?
Click to expand...

For me its image quality I have happily used 3200 ISO in weddings, you can't do that with a D90 imo. I also have used a D300 and run a few tests with the same 50mm lens on both and I couldnt really tell the difference on image quality between both...the D300s maybe a different story.
 
I shoot a lot of indoor events (ballet, theatre, judo, etc.), as an amateur. I've found the D90 OK up to 1600 - with a 2.8 lens (70-200mm VR). Sometimes an extra stop, or two would be nice, especially to be able to use a faster shutter speed.
 
don't the d300(s) and the d90 share a sensor anyway?. I'd be inclined to hang on for the d700 replacement, or if needs really must buy another d700 second hand. That way you wouldn't drop quite so much when you came to sell
 
HCK said:
Thanks Steve. My concern is low light, as having used the D700 and D90 in low light, the D90 is lacking considerably imo. The D90 is a good camera but I would only use it up to 1600 ISO after that I lose confidence.

For me its image quality I have happily used 3200 ISO in weddings, you can't do that with a D90 imo. I also have used a D300 and run a few tests with the same 50mm lens on both and I couldnt really tell the difference on image quality between both...the D300s maybe a different story.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand. I think the D7000 has good DR but the ISO performance is still a stop or so behind the D700 at all ISOs up to ISO6400 where is seems to do NR in the RAW file.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...441|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon

Once all factors are considered (colour depth, tonal range) the D700 opens up quite a lead. In fact its the high ISO colour depth that impresses most on the D700.

I fear you may have to wait till late spring for a D700 replacement at the earliest, and the D3s replacement will probably come at the same time or before it.

However, if you buy a second D700 now you can keep going for a year. Then, when the price of the replacement has settled down a bit after its initial launch price, you can trade in one D700. The £300-£400 you will lose on trade in will be partly compensated by the price drop. Plus, of course, you will have traded in a D90 as well.

Then for the next 12 months you can operate with 2 identical bodies with lenses attached - a convenience when shooting under pressure.

One alternative is to breathe in and get a D3s? It can do at ISO 6400 what the D700 can do at 3200. I know it is expensive, but the high ISO performance is really remarkable and since its for business purposes at least you can write off the tax :). You could always find a light use SH one. I dont think Nikon will ever make a camera with better high ISO performance, though they may retain most of the performance with more MP when the replacement comes out.
 
Critical I said:
Yes I understand. I think the D7000 has good DR but the ISO performance is still a stop or so behind the D700 at all ISOs up to ISO6400 where is seems to do NR in the RAW file.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...441|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon

Once all factors are considered (colour depth, tonal range) the D700 opens up quite a lead. In fact its the high ISO colour depth that impresses most on the D700.

I fear you may have to wait till late spring for a D700 replacement at the earliest, and the D3s replacement will probably come at the same time or before it.

However, if you buy a second D700 now you can keep going for a year. Then, when the price of the replacement has settled down a bit after its initial launch price, you can trade in one D700. The £300-£400 you will lose on trade in will be partly compensated by the price drop. Plus, of course, you will have traded in a D90 as well.

Then for the next 12 months you can operate with 2 identical bodies with lenses attached - a convenience when shooting under pressure.

One alternative is to breathe in and get a D3s? It can do at ISO 6400 what the D700 can do at 3200. I know it is expensive, but the high ISO performance is really remarkable and since its for business purposes at least you can write off the tax :). You could always find a light use SH one. I dont think Nikon will ever make a camera with better high ISO performance, though they may retain most of the performance with more MP when the replacement comes out.
Click to expand...
thanks for the great reply Steve...I would love to get a D3s...but funds won't allow it at the moment. I think I will have to hunt around for a good D700 deal....here's hoping :-)
 
HCK said:
thanks for the great reply Steve...I would love to get a D3s...but funds won't allow it at the moment. I think I will have to hunt around for a good D700 deal....here's hoping :-)
Click to expand...

Good luck - if I see a nice SH D700 I will let you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top