Own a D200...thinking of going to D700

[JLEphoto]

So,
How big of a difference in quality is there from a D200 to a D700?

I will be keeping my D200 as a back up but wanted to hear from the community. The current price is 2300.00... Is it worth the price?

 

[themedicine]

I feel like it is every bit worth the price.
I have a d200 as well and have played with a d700. If you are looking for something that will be MUCH MUCH better in low light and has a full frame sensor do it. You will notice a big difference performance wise.
I want one so badly, but alas, I need a new computer first and my tax return was literally half this year what it was last year.

 

[Derrel]

Compare cameras

The above compares only the sensor performance differences. The D700 also has a better battery, better viewfinder, and a much more capable and a newer autofocus system that was not available even in the pro-level Nikons when the D200 was current.

The D700 has a sensor that's roughly 864 square mm in area, while the D200 is 370 square mm--so the D700 is significantly better at low-light and high-ISO shooting. The D700 is one of the top d-slr's on the market. Just so you know, Nikon is expected to announce a new camera or camera within days of today's date.

 

[sauce839]

I was considering the same, but depending on what lenses you have, you might be shooting yourself in the foot. If you have any dx lenses, the D700 will essentially be a mid quality 5mp camera. Two of the three lenses that I have are fx (24-70 and 70-200) but the 12-24mm lens is a dx... So any wide angle shots would be a bit limited, and I didn't feel like trying to sell it and buy a 14-24mm wide angle. Plus I like the extra bit of reach that you get with a dx sensor. I ended up upgrading to a D300s... huge difference compared to the D200. All of a sudden iso 3200 is usable, compared to the max usasble iso of 800 on the D200.

Still, the D700 is pretty tempting, but if I end up going full frame, I'll pick up a pro body.

 

[DScience]

Just wait. New d700 is coming.

 

[themedicine]

which puts a better price on the d700! thats my plan haha.

 

[Dominantly]

Boy do I want a D700............

 

[KmH]

If you have any dx lenses, the D700 will essentially be a mid quality 5mp camera.

Quality is more than MP. You would be able use those honking big pixels, 5 MP, at ISO levels uncommon to most 5 MP cameras.

 

[JLEphoto]

The only DX lens I have is the 18-70mm. I have a 24-85 from my film days. See my signature for details. So, really it is between the D300s and the D700.

 

[themedicine]

No comparison. D700.

 

[Derrel]

The OP has only one DX lens, an 18-70 that was the kit lens for many D70 buyers. Generally speaking, there are no DX zoom lenses worth worrying about when deciding to move from a DX format to an FX format Nikon body. DX zoom lenses by their very nature are lower-priced lenses; the OP already has an excellent 24-85 f/2.8~4 zoom lens that's better than the 18-70 DX, so right there there's absolutely no incentive to remain at the DX level using a kit zoom.

 

[Dominantly]

There should be ZERO question of which to choose from between those cameras. Well, unless it's the money that's the issue.

 

[themedicine]

DAMNED MONEY!!

 

[JLEphoto]

I will have enough for a d700 with battery grip....

 

[themedicine]

well here's the deal. Since I was first poster, give me the money you saved for the battery grip so I can start saving too. PLEASE??!! haha Im just joshin with you.