Why so many D700 Bodies?

S

snappychick

Messages
1
Edit My Images
No
Hi all, I'm new to the forums as a poster but I've been reading for a while. I am currently trying to move my photography in a professional direction - weddings in particular.

One thing that I've noticed on TP is that more and more of the weddings photographers seem to be shooting with the D700 and i was wondering why?

I haven't used the D700 or the 5D Mark II but I figured there has to be a good reason so many lean towards Nikon?

I don't want this to turn into a thread about which is better Canon or Nikon (I have no time for that as each company produce great equipment) I just want an honest opinion as to why wedding photographers seem to prefer the D700.

It's always eye opening to see why the actual people on the ground make a choice as opposed to the reviewers.

C.
 
for me - I love the full frame sensor, the Low light capabilities and the AF. Weddings aren't particularly harsh on a camera so the d3 extras make no financial sense to me, plus having slightly lighter bodies to carry round is a bonus

Not sure there are more that shoot the d700 then the 5d though
 
it's a great sensor, if i could choose between the 5d mk2 and the d3/d700 i'd go for the d3. Its a 12mp sensor as opposed to the canons 21mp which means bigger pixels and better iso handling, which makes it perfect for low light where you need to crank the iso
 
Full frame sensors have naturally better ISO as more light falls on the area with it being bigger and the number of pixels are spread over a wider area meaning that adjacent pixels are not quite as close. All this adds up to a camera that can get away without a flash in situations that would require a flash normally and that can take images in a dark hall or church.

The D700 for example can be used at multi thousand ISO levels without major issues and the D3s is even better.

You buy into a system with photography and this system works around the body. You therefore buy the body that works with your system with it being very expensive to switch. People do though and they still go both ways.
 
I made the switch in Feb, changing the whole system and I did it for the low light capabilities. Yes the 5DII will still shoot well in low light but I wanted to keep the 51 point AF and the 5DII could not offer me that. The file sizes on the D700 were a concern to me until I tried it in the real world and a few test shots soon confirmed that I had nothing to worry about. The lower resolution simply means less storage space but the files are crisp, clean and so easy to work with. It really does do the business.
 
Ali are the file sizes bigger on the d700? i would've thought they were bigger on the canon
 
What i mean is that the smaller MP on the D700 was initially a concern as I came from a 1DsII so I dropped resolution but I'm not missing those pixels. :)

I'm not shooting advertising and the D700 is about the perfect resolution for good album images. (I can always upsize using genuine fractals but I've not needed to touch a file yet!)
 
I have shot with both for weddings and events. The D700 high iso noise in low light performance is much cleaner than the 5D mkII, the D700 is 12mp and the 5D mkII is 21mp at maximum RAW/jpeg. medium RAW/jpeg on 5D mkII is around 11mp.

Check my gallery, "Waiting" and the asian wedding shots were with the D700 and all shot ambient light with no flash. "Waiting" was actually shot at about 1/50 at iso 6400 f/2.8 in ambient light in a restaurant. No noise reduction applied, only levels and B&W conversion with a little sharpening at the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top