just picked up a D700...

[IgsEMT]

billy,
great purchase. Enjoy it and use it in good health

 

[lenejetva]

nice advice i love it keep it up man...

 

[Patrice]

..... I would have AT LEAST waited 3 days before ordering it. But excitement took grasp and i bet by Thursday you'll feel like you jumped the gun.

Had he waited 3 more days then he would have been 3 more days without a great camera. No significant nikon dslr announcements were made that day or the next one either. No matter when and with what nikon makes its next dslr announcement the d700 will still be a great photographic tool and will continue to be so for the life of the camera.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Ah wow, some gear envy here! I'm just thinking of how my portraits would look with that D700 FX look.

Enjoy it!

If you're using a telephoto, surprisingly similar to APS-C. Color would be indistinguishable, noise would be slightly lower, if you're using a really fast wide angle like a 35 or 24mm at f/1.4, than sure things would look different. But if you're shooting at 200mm, you'd be hard pressed to tell a difference without them being side by side.

Thanks for the info! I know FX makes a big difference in terms of DOF, so this was an area I was curious for using FX for. Good question to ask you though, do you know why Pros usually suggest using FX for portraits? I have never discovered the reason why.

 

[Patrice]

I know FX makes a big difference in terms of DOF, so this was an area I was curious for using FX for. Good question to ask you though, do you know why Pros usually suggest using FX for portraits? I have never discovered the reason why.

Your remark about DOF points to one argument for the larger format. With any particular focal length the field of view is wider on FX than on DX. This wider FOV requires the photographer be closer to his subject so as to get the image framing he is seeking. A shorter distance between the object being photographed and the imaging surface means a shallower depth of field. This hold true for any lens of any focal length - the closer you are, the shallower the DOF. The larger the format - the wider the field of view, an 80 mm lens is a telephoto on DX, a short telephoto/portrait on FX, normal on MF, wide angle on 8X10 view.

 

[Kerbouchard]

I picked up a D700 about a month ago, too. I had wanted to wait for the D800, but heck, the D700 replacement has been 'about to come out' for two years now. I couldn't be happier with my D700. Congrats on the new body.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I know FX makes a big difference in terms of DOF, so this was an area I was curious for using FX for. Good question to ask you though, do you know why Pros usually suggest using FX for portraits? I have never discovered the reason why.

Your remark about DOF points to one argument for the larger format. With any particular focal length the field of view is wider on FX than on DX. This wider FOV requires the photographer be closer to his subject so as to get the image framing he is seeking. A shorter distance between the object being photographed and the imaging surface means a shallower depth of field. This hold true for any lens of any focal length - the closer you are, the shallower the DOF. The larger the format - the wider the field of view, an 80 mm lens is a telephoto on DX, a short telephoto/portrait on FX, normal on MF, wide angle on 8X10 view.

Thanks for this! I think i am getting it now more. The 50mm acting like a 75mm on DX does not produce same results though as the 80mm on FX because the lens is still working as a 50mm just it is is cropped to 75mm? Am I right here? This is where the difference occurs?