Nikon D3 & D700
FX Logo
So one thing is of course, both bear the FX badge and are full frame cameras. They're very similar as most people would have noted. But somehow, the grip of the D700 doesn't quite match the D3. People may go "of course, if they make it exactly like the D3, its one reason more to get the D3" but I'm saying, its off. I held the D300 and it felt a lot better than the D700. I'm still waiting for my grip to arrive though.
Front D3
Front D700
So yea... The front of both the D3 and D700 are pretty much the same. I don't see much differences other than the port covers for the remote and sync port.
Top D3
Top D700
The LCD on the top of the D3 is noticeably longer, but other than that, I still don't see much differences.
Back (both cameras)
Back D3
Back D700
Other than the obvious difference of the 3rd LCD panel on the D3. Its quite similar between the 2, and having used a D200 for a while some time back, the D700 was no stranger to me. Though getting used to zooming in on preview took a little bit of adjusting.
The one thing that I missed on a camera is in the picture below
Yup, I miss a pop up flash on my camera. Though I guess the good thing about not having a pop up flash is that its probably more durable? Less parts exposed, less mechanics to break? Only thing I hate about the flash is that with the 24-70 and hood, there's a shadow, no surprise there. But if I were to use the pop up for last resort fill flash, I guess I'll zoom in anyway.
So yea, another thing about the pop up flash, commander mode. True I don't get the flexibility of a speedlight rotating head, but it lightens the load, especially when I know I'm not shooting in open areas.
The reason why I chose a D700 as my backup rather than the D600 or D800 as I probably said in previous posts is because of workflow. The D800 having a 36 megapixel sensor and the D600 having a 24megapixel sensor means huge files to work with, which I don't think I want to stress on my computer at the moment. Also, bigger files means I'll need a bigger hard drive, which I try not to spend money on yet cause it'll mean I'll have to upgrade my computer earlier which I'll do a few years later with the technology then. Also, the future technology would mean my computer would be faster in processing bigger image files rather than current computer technology. They do a fair job, but I'd rather not spend time waiting.
Also, higher resolution doesn't really mean better images. I'd rather have my main and backup as close as possible. So probably in the future, if like, the D5 is similar to D800 or D900 (whatever the model is at that time), I'd probably get those 2 to replace the D3 and D700 together and by then, computers should be processing their images about the same time as my computer processes the D3 and D700 images now.
But seriously, the megapixel war is getting more and more ridiculous. I'm good with 12 megapixels, even the D4's 16 megapixel is good. But the resolution of D600 isn't too bad, its the fact that the body isn't a robust one which I would require with the world I shoot now (unfortunately). I'm hoping that the megapixel war will end soon because I dont' want to work on a 70 megapixel FX format camera with huge file size and many hard drives at home. I have a lot of hard drives at home as it is. I don't want to add more. So yea, an entry on my choice for a backup camera. Have a good day everyone!
No comments:
Post a Comment