D700 update following D500

alderes

As I see it, the D500 appears to be the true successor of the D300. The D500 has got the latest AF, processing and sensor, which raises hope that a true D700 successor may be derived from the D500. Are there any respective rumors around?

WestEndFoto

It is the D750. What does the D750 lack?

eric727

to me, the D810 is the new D700.

A pro body, D4s AF system, frame rate from 5fps to 7fps (DX mode).

Forget about the successor of D700, go for the D810 instead.

Ironheart

@alderes What do you want a D700 successor to be?

NSXTypeR

What capabilities of a D700 did you like that a current Nikon DSLR doesn't offer?

spraynpray

Brick outhouse build quality?

Pistnbroke

in FX you have choice of D5, 810 750 and 610 ..do you think a 5th FX is likely unless it replaces one of those ...???

WestEndFoto

Pistnbroke said:

in FX you have choice of D5, 810 750 and 610 ..do you think a 5th FX is likely unless it replaces one of those ...???

The DF feels left out.

alderes

Thank you for all your comments. The funny thing is, that I did just ask for any rumor (on the rumors site) and already have to explain myself . Well, here we go: To me, the D5 is far too expensive for an ambitious hobby shooter. As I don't want to paint entire walls with my photos, the D8x0 has too much resolution - even 24 MP is already a huge amaount of data. From my view the D600, D610 and D750 are nearly the same - with the D750 having the better AF and additional gimmicks I don't need and thus not want to pay for. I'm also not attracted by their haptics. The D700 used to be a very robust and weatherproof piece of equipment.

Apart from that, Nikon has now issued the D500 with a brandnew 20 MP sensor and you wonder whether the D7000/7100/7200 actually has ever been a true successor to the D300 or "just" the D90. In those days the D700 was a D3 in a D300 body to make the D3 accessible for amateurs and I wonder if Nikon may do the same nowadays with the D5 and D500.

Thus the simple question: are there any such rumors around?

Pistnbroke

Well the feeling is a new camera autumn or spring to match with the photo exhibitions and to catch up with canon ..but I hope we are looking at a 54MP D850.The earthquake has not helped predictions.
Personally I think you are wrong about 24/36 being too much ..If you want soft fuzzy pictures you can dial the resolution down in the menu. you have a choice of 24/12/6 MP with a D750 for example.
You talk about a huge amount of data....I usually come back from a wedding with 1500 images on a D810 but its horses for courses so I use JPEG . A few dozen portrait shots in RAW is not a problem ..

spraynpray

Hello alderes, welcome to NR. Rumours of a true D700 replacement? The consensus here is that the D750 is what Nikon replaced the D700 with. It is superior in many ways, but not all. Rumours first appear on the main blog where members can see them for themselves.

alderes

Pistnbroke said:

..If you want soft fuzzy pictures you can dial the resolution down in the menu...

You made my day! I wasn't aware of that and will now go for the D810.

Thanx!

Pistnbroke

Alderes..let us know when you give up the lower MP and move up to 36 !!! and welcome we don't bite . You will love the 810 particularly the group area focus.

alderes

spraynpray said:

... The consensus here is that the D750 is what Nikon replaced the D700 with. It is superior in many ways, but not all...

On other places the D800 is deemed as D700 successor, which is reasonable due to the similarities of their haptics and controls. For the D750 I believe that it is an update to the reputation damaging D6x0 and it rather fits into the league of the "thousands", i.e. D3x00/5x00/7x00. Thus, I would put the D7x00 at the top of the consumer class cameras. Not everybody might agree here, but the professional bodies rang from D1 to D5, whereas the D100/200/300/500 always represented semi-professional bodies - isn't? Before you shoot me: by no means am I saying that this is disqualifying them, but when there are categories you need to populate them. You could say that FX is semi-professional, hence the D6x0 and D7x0 are as well. However, all of them are derived from D7x00 bodies and technology - except the D700. I was in doubt myself until the D5 and D500 appeared and made it pretty clear to me: D5 is professional, D500 is semi-professional and D7200 is consumer. For FX I always thought that the D8x0 is a class of its own and if I had to chose I would say it is professional as well, making the D700 semiprofessional and the others, again, consumer (FX entry level bodies).

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter - its academic anyway. A few days ado I read on another, german forum that with the D700 - which was actually a D3 in a D300 body - Nikon made a marketing mistake, because instead of buying the D3 professional photographers went for a much cheaper D700 and added the battery grip to it, which made it essentially a D3. Therefore my hopes to have a D5 in the body of a D500 are fading away.

safyre

As someone that own's both the D700 and D750, I agree with the fact that there is no true successor to the D700 yet.

To say the D750 is the successor to the D700 is like saying the D7200 is the successor to the D300s.

The D810 is in a different category, it is like the follow up to the D3X in a more portable body. Not everyone needs 36 megapixels, and I would much rather prefer less megapixels and more fps and high iso performance.

The Nikon DF would've been a great sucessor to the D700 if it weren't for it's second rate AF system and gimmicky appearance.

IMO, a true D700 successor would be a D5 sensor with high fps and iso performance in a D700 type of body. Unfortunately it looks unlikely Nikon would do something like this again for fear of cannibalizing sales, which is really a shame.

alderes

Pistnbroke said:

welcome we don't bite .

Thank you for welcoming me! I have introduced myself on the respective page here.

Pistnbroke said:

let us know when you give up the lower MP and move up to 36 !!!

I already have before I have even started. I had some further readings and now understand that sRAW was failed engineering from NIKON and in particular it is no real RAW. Also so it does not reduce file size as expected: you select 9 MP but still have 28 MB of data. However, when looking at modern technology and the "inflationany breathtaking shoots" (refer to my introduction), I have to make my decisions on other playgrounds, i.e. JPEG and Picture Controls. I assume that it is very easy on a D810 to toggle between RAW and JPEG. So when I deem myself in a breath taking situation I will shoot in RAW, in all other shootings I may well use JPEG with appropriate sizes and controls - which puts the D750 out of consideration. In addition I keep reading that the D750 is still having bugs and teething troubles.

WestEndFoto

It is very easy to toggle between JPEG and Raw on the D810 I assume, because my D800 has a dedicated button for it.

BVS

The 1.2 and DX crop modes also result in smaller file sizes (and increased FPS).

KnockKnock

I think Thom Hogan pointed out that splitting the D8xx into high and low resolution models would do the trick. D850, as a 20MP, slow version of the D4. And a D850s, a 54MP slower version. Would be good tactic to satisfy D700 users and Pro's alike.

If I had to have a D700 replacement right now, I'd get the D810 and shoot it in Medium size.

manhattanboy

The 810 files are not as bad as everyone is making them out to be. Just shoot lossless compressed. I actually have more problems with smaller faster sensors like the D500. Do the math: 10fps at 21mp versus 5fps at 36mp. It's harder on processing raws for the smaller sensor because there is more data for my poor CPU to go through.

Pistnbroke

Alders.....you must be a one off on here to admit you will be using JPEG...I now have a friend .....don't be afraid to go to Sharp +9 but the clarity control is to be forgotten and left at 0 .Any + setting ruins the picture but a - setting may give a softer image for portraits .(I don't do soft)
Your biggest benefit with a D810 is that it is quiet and when you attach a flash the iso goes up 4x meaning I can use a small gun.

DaveyJ

safyre said:

As someone that own's both the D700 and D750, I agree with the fact that there is no true successor to the D700 yet.

To say the D750 is the successor to the D700 is like saying the D7200 is the successor to the D300s

I have the D300, owned and sold a D700, have the D7000, D7100, D7200, D500 and see the D7200 as the evolution of the D300, as certainly is the D500. I would way rather have a D750 than any FX camera I know of and that is hugely price influenced! I no longer have the income I used to have and keeping the wheels on our farm is my objective! It is a tough business that I very much believe in, my PhD in environmental science shows I have tried to work with government but that became unbelievably political in the last 20 years of that career. Now my funds for cameras and lenses is greatly reduced! I do not feel sorry for that at all.....it is just reality at work! The D750 I would very much like to own. It does shoot video which I also need and want.

PB_PM

Having owned a D700 for 5 years (finally sold it earlier this year) I completely agree that there is no true D700 replacement yet. I've owned and used the D800 and D750, but neither really hits that sweet spot that the D700 did. The D750 just feels a little off the mark, and the D800/D810 are overkill.