D300s or the D700????

Status
Not open for further replies.
Full frame vs crop has nothing to do with rating a camera pro, prosumer, or beginner.

I always believed Nikon's methodology on this was:

DX = Pro (D1, D2, D3)
DXXX = Prosumer (D100, D200, D300)
DXX = Consumer (D70, D80, D90)

Now we have to add:
DXXXX = Entry Level (D3000, D5000)



THIS sums up exactly what I am saying...

The D300/D700 are prosumer camera's, they are not professional... The DX lineup is the professional line up.
 
Darn, it seems I got here too late for the popcorn. I really can't believe this has gone over 3 pages. Please someone insert the guy beating the dead horse gif.
 
I have no idea what you're even getting at honestly. Your post is so useless I fail to see your point. I even stated in the same post your quoting me from that Nikon lumps the D3x, D3, D300, D300s, and D700 in the same category and everything else into the non-pro category.

The D3x, D3 and D300s all have basically the same specs. The D700 is a notch down in basically the same categories as the D90.


Hmm...
 
interesting thread full of a lot of incorrect info. Parkerman's info is right though.

I backup my statements with facts and his posts are incoherent ramblings... god I love the internet.


he uses direct quotes from the links that YOU post and somehow he is incorrect. There is nothing wrong with admitting you may not have had all the information and that you agree with another view.

but then thats what mature professional people do....and we know theres none of those around here cause only you shoot the D300s

Um... yes he's incorrect. Because he is replying to things I clearly stated as opinion as if I had said they were face, replying to things I said were fact and saying they really aren't and replying to things I say Nikon even misrepresents itself and saying I somehow said other wise. When you read the actual thread you see he is completely wrong. So yes. He is incorrect.

interesting thread full of a lot of incorrect info. Parkerman's info is right though.

I backup my statements with facts and his posts are incoherent ramblings... god I love the internet.


You backed up your statements with info and facts that YOU dont understand yourself.

For now on, you are known as the guy who thinks the D300 is above the D700 :lol:

Apparently you're the one that doesn't understand them. And when I made the comment about direct product comparison it was about the D300s, not the D300. Again, try actually reading the post. The D300s's specs are higher than the D700. Period. That's a fact.

Full frame vs crop has nothing to do with rating a camera pro, prosumer, or beginner.

I always believed Nikon's methodology on this was:

DX = Pro (D1, D2, D3)
DXXX = Prosumer (D100, D200, D300)
DXX = Consumer (D70, D80, D90)

Now we have to add:
DXXXX = Entry Level (D3000, D5000)



THIS sums up exactly what I am saying...

The D300/D700 are prosumer camera's, they are not professional... The DX lineup is the professional line up.

Really? Someone elses guess as to what Nikon used as a branding system is your proof? In Nikon's DSLR comparison chart they label the D300, now the D300s, AND the D700 as professional. I would take their information over yours.
 
I have no idea what you're even getting at honestly. Your post is so useless I fail to see your point. I even stated in the same post your quoting me from that Nikon lumps the D3x, D3, D300, D300s, and D700 in the same category and everything else into the non-pro category.

The D3x, D3 and D300s all have basically the same specs. The D700 is a notch down in basically the same categories as the D90.


Hmm...

Congrats. Those posts aren't related. Yes the comparison sheet puts the D700 in the same category as the cameras I listed and yes, if you compare them straight down the D700 is closer to a D90 than a D3.

Try actually reading it before posting. Honestly, why are you guys posting without actually reading what you're referring to?
 
why are you even posting when you dont even bother to read the literature which you are quoting?
 
I love how only 3 posts responded to the OP. One of them being mine. The rest has been bashing my post without basis other than you are somehow personally threatened by the fact that the D700 has lower specs than the D300s.
 
Yes! They made some more since the thread keeps going! Who wants butter?:popcorn:
 
[. . .]
It is a bold statement but in reality the specs from the D700 more align with a D90 than they do a D3.
[. . .]

The D700 is basically a D3 stuffed into a prosumer body. The D700 has the same sensor, AF system, image processing system, monitor (LCD screen), startup and shutter lag speed--among other things--as the D3.

There's a nice review of the D700 over at dpreview.com which outlines all the similarities between it and the D3. I won't bother to repeat them here, but there are only a handful of differences, mostly physical (size, weight, viewfinder coverage, etc.)--none of which affect image quality.

If I were in the market for a new body, and I had the money for the D300s, I'd spend the extra $633 and get the D700. You don't need dual CF slots to shoot a wedding. Pros shot weddings for decades with only one roll of film in the camera at a time. Dual CF slots would be nice, but it's not a necessity.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
[. . .]
It is a bold statement but in reality the specs from the D700 more align with a D90 than they do a D3.
[. . .]

The D700 is basically a D3 stuffed into a prosumer body. The D700 has the same sensor, AF system, image processing system, monitor (LCD screen), startup and shutter lag speed--among other things--as the D3.

There's a nice review of the D700 over at dpreview.com which outlines all the similarities between it and the D3. I won't bother to repeat them here, but there are only a handful of differences, mostly physical (size, weight, viewfinder coverage, etc.)--none of which affect image quality.

If I were in the market for a new body, and I had the money for the D300s, I'd spend the extra $633 and get the D700. You don't need dual CF slots to shoot a wedding. Pros shot weddings for decades with only one roll of film in the camera at a time. Dual CF slots would be nice, but it's not a necessity.

The D700 is NOT a D3 in a different body.
Referring to the bolded statement... dual card slots can prevent you from being sued. A larger sensor cannot.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Thanks for the informative replies guys. Not interested in the pissing match though. Any popcorn left?

Another question. (God forbid! LOL)

The wife is also interested in a new lens. Has anyone any experience with the 85 1.8 and the 85 1.4? Huge difference in price, but is it really worth it? Would these lenses create any differences in the pictures with either camera listed above? (or would one be better than the other?)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Most reactions

Back
Top