Is changing my D7000 to a D700 worth it?

BSM

I am more into travel photography, Landscapes and street photography, I own a D7000 and i got a good offer for a second hand D700 for $1220/Rm4000. Is it still worth getting that now 5 year old model? or should I wait for something else? I plan to go into FX bodies as most of my lens are FX lens, 24-70 F2.8, 14-24 F2.8, 50mm F1.4 and a 85mm F1.8. Sometimes i resort to my trusty X100s for street photography when carrying a Dslr feels tiring. So.....should i go for it? Oh btw, the seller is willing to take in my D7000 for $485/Rm1600.

Elvishefer

D700 is a solid camera and will always be near and dear to my heart. I still use one as my primary body and it's great to work with.

In terms of quality and versatility compared to the latest generation of fx bodies, I would not recommend a D700.

Even a D600 surpasses it in dynamic range and resolution.

With those lenses I would save some more money and get a D600 or D800 as my first FX body.

sevencrossing

Elvishefer sums it all up, very well
The D700 was, and still is, a fine camera but for Landscapes the D800, blows it out of the water

Msmoto

The prices are $700 and $1600 for used D7000 and D700. A $900 difference. So, a difference of $715 sounds OK if the cameras are in good condition. I would like to see the shutter count on the D700 below 100,000 and that all functions are fully working, no loose buttons, controls, mount is tight, no big dents, etc.

The primary issue in moving to full frame is the lenses which will be required. If you have a marginal budget, this may not be the thing to do. You might consider instead going to a D7100.

Decide what you want to shoot, the lenses required, and then decide.

heartyfisher

The main advantage between the D700 vs the D7000 is the Pro body. Other than that the D7000 beats the D700 in terms of DR and MP. High ISO, the D700 has the edge but not by much. I would say stay with your D7000 till you get a good deal for a D600 or D800.

sevencrossing

...The primary issue in moving to full frame is the lenses which will be required. .. .

... I plan to go into FX bodies as most of my lens are FX lens, 24-70 F2.8, 14-24 F2.8, 50mm F1.4 and a 85mm F1.8. ....

Sports

I would ask if you "love" your D7000?
If you do, then the D600 should be your first FX as it's much more like the D7000 in build quality and handling. And its image quality is much better than D700.
But if you're attracted to a more heavy and solid body, then you could end up being more happy with the D700 (or D800 if you have the money).

BSM

Alright, I guess it'll be better to look around for a good D800 deal then. And yea I am attracted to the feel of a pro body, weight and all. Thank's all. And cheers to Sevencrossing haha.

Golf007sd

@BSM: Welcome to the forum. As some have hinted at, the newer Nikon FX bodies (D600 & D800) have some great advantages over the D700. They offer better dynamic range & ISO performance, faster processing; in addition to more MP. With that said, the D700 is and will continue to serve those that own it great results, no questions there; specially given its build quality. As an owner of a D7000, the move to FX was a natural transition. In fact, much like yourself, a vast majority of my lenses were geared specifically to take advantage of the FX sensors.

So what to do? Given your type of photography, save addition funds and get the D800. Take msmoto's suggestion to heart and full inspect the body to insure it is in good condition, should you chose to get the D700. If the owner will allow it, go and shoot with it for a bit, take the images home and see what you think.

Best wishes....

Photobug

From my perspective, the D600 represents a better camera than the D700 unless the size of your hand is "huge", then you would prefer the larger body and then you need to step up and spend the bucks for the D800. Just remember that the Nikon Shop and a few places in the USA are selling refurbished D800s for attractive numbers. Also refurbished D600 are selling for attractive prices.

In the long run, the D700 is not a good buy.

Msmoto

@sevencrossing

OK, OK, but, in a general way, if one wants to purchase more glass it is expensive...

And, for the owner of all those FX lenses, I might suggest going to a D800 instead of a D700. Great for street photography....

kyoshinikon

My prime shooters are a D7000 and D700. The D700 is slightly more pro than the D7000 in physical control set, behind the firmware the D7000 wins... The cameras are almost on a similar playing field because of it. The Iso performance on the D700 is better up to Iso 1000, the D7000 does better from 1250 to 3200 and the D700 does better above that. The Buffer on the D700 is way better. Both cameras are just as durable. I primarily shoot with fx lenses.(While I love the setup I get many rude and "expert advice" remarks about putting a 14-24mm on my D7000) I like the size and buffer on the D700 more but the liveview and 100% viewfinder on the D7000. The D7000 has winning firmware too... What are you missing on your D7000 that the D700 has? Is it just Fx? Do you need Fx? That should answer your question...


On the D600, while it is a fantastic camera and a very good blend of the two it seems to be built at a lower standard than the two. this has nothing to do with paper stats but real world use

spraynpray

@ kyoshinikon said: "On the D600, while it is a fantastic camera and a very good blend of the two it seems to be built at a lower standard than the two. this has nothing to do with paper stats but real world use"

Interesting kyoshi.

sevencrossing

@sevencrossing

OK, OK, but, in a general way, if one wants to purchase more glass it is expensive...

....

when one looks at Nikon's Tops lenses
e.g.
the f 1.4 Primes
the f 2.8 Holy trinity
the new awesome 80 -400
the super telephotos
yes they are expensive and they are all FX

most savings in glass, can only made by going to third party dx lenses

BSM

Thanks a lot guys, you've all been helpful and I've decided I'd go for either a D600 or a D800.

Cheers.

spraynpray

@BSM: D610 surely?