Need Advice - Considering Switching fro Sony to Nikon

[pgowder]

Right now I'm shooting with the A700 from Sony. Grew up on Minolta and then made the transition to Sony.

I shoot all kinds of stuff - vacations, family, etc. But what pays the gadget bill is shooting for my website:

www.powwows.com

I shoot at Native American Pow Wows. Most of the ones I go to are inside arenas. I very rarely have good light. And with the Sony I'm challenged to keep the ISO under 800. Anything over that and the noise is very noticeable.

So my first question is the ISO low noise as great as I hear on the D700, D300, and D3?

I've seen some of Scott Kelby's photos that are at 4000 ISO and are incredible clear and noise free!

Example:
www.scottkelby.com/blog/2009/archives/7777

That's the main reason I'm considering the switch. But there are tons of little annoyances with the Sony system - non standard hot shoe for example!

Next question, what's the differences between D300 and D700. They are about the same price. Are there major differences?

I don't need video, just need stills. When I shoot these Pow Wows I'm also doing live video webcasts. So I have a solution for video already.

What is DX and EX?

How do the Sigmas lenses do on Nikon? When I switch my budget will dictate getting Sigmas to start. Then saving up for Nikon lenses. I shoot mostly with 3 lenses now - 70-200 f2.8, 24-70, and 11-17mm.

Do the Sigmas work with both the D300 and D700?

Thanks for your advice and suggestions!

 

[KmH]

......what's the differences between D300 and D700. They are about the same price. Are there major differences?

What is DX and EX?

How do the Sigmas lenses do on Nikon? When I switch my budget will dictate getting Sigmas to start. Then saving up for Nikon lenses. I shoot mostly with 3 lenses now - 70-200 f2.8, 24-70, and 11-17mm.

Do the Sigmas work with both the D300 and D700?

Thanks for your advice and suggestions!

From your questions it seems you've done only minimal research.

Looking at the prices at B&H Photo Video today, the D700 new is $2400 body only, the D300s new is $1500, making the D700 62.5% more expensive than the D300s. Nikon no longer makes the D300, though there is still new stock available in various places as well as the used gear market.

The D700 has a full frame sensor, the D300s has an smaller APS-C size sensor and the focal length of any lense mounted on a D300s is subject to a 1.5x crop factor.

In addition, the D700 has a more usable ISO range than the D300s, one of your primary concerns. If you visit www.nikonusa.com you can compare the specifications and features of the D700 and D300s in more detail. you may also find it informative to visit www.dxomark,com and compare their testing results for the 2 cameras.

Nikon uses the DX designation to identify it's APS-C size sensor and other gear optimised for that sensor. Nikon uses the FX designation for it's full frame sensors and gear optimized for that sensor.

EX is a Sigma designation they use to denote what they consider to be professional quality glass. All Nikon digital SLRs use the same lens mount. Any lens having an F-mount, regardless of who the lens was made by, will fit on a Nikon camera.

You investigate all of Sigma's current lenses here: Sigma - Lenses

 

[Wolverinepwnes]

As KmH put very nicely, you need to research a little better, the D700 is more than 50% more expensive that the D300s!!! if you can afford the D700 get it, if not go for the D300s, its the best alternative! of you can get the D300s and use the extra money and get a good lens!

 

[pgowder]

Sorry I was looking on another site, and they looked close to the same price.

So is he ISO as good as the hype on the D700?

Anyone use it with Sigma lenses?

 

[chip]

Switch to Nikon and never look back!

 

[pgowder]

Switch to Nikon and never look back!

Thanks!

 

[epp_b]

Nikon full-frames are known for their excellent high-ISO performance.

Sonys ... are not.

 

[pgowder]

Nikon full-frames are known for their excellent high-ISO performance.

Sonys ... are not.

That's what I'm learning.

But is it as good as they hype I hear?

 

[epp_b]

Nikon full-frames are known for their excellent high-ISO performance.

Sonys ... are not.

That's what I'm learning. But is it as good as they hype I hear?

DPreview has good reviews with plenty of samples. Check it out and decide for yourself whether the performance lives up to the hype

EDIT: I should also mention the D3s, which has epic high-ISO performance -- up to ISO 102,400!

 

[pgowder]

Nikon full-frames are known for their excellent high-ISO performance.

Sonys ... are not.

That's what I'm learning. But is it as good as they hype I hear?

DPreview has good reviews with plenty of samples. Check it out and decide for yourself whether the performance lives up to the hype

Yep, read all that.

I'm looking for people that have used the D700 in real world settings. How does it work indoors in large arenas.

 

[Garbz]

Exactly how it should work. The question is what is the quality like. Well simply look at the high ISO examples online.

If you're after a better camera for high-ISO dark conditions, then ... well maybe just check in to a nut-house

 

[djacobox372]

Sorry I was looking on another site, and they looked close to the same price.

So is he ISO as good as the hype on the D700?

Anyone use it with Sigma lenses?

ISO 6400 on the d700 is about the same as iso 1600 on the d300.

When I use my f1.2 lens on my d700 at iso 6400 it can take clear hand-held photos of things I can't even see--like night vision!

 

[pgowder]

......what's the differences between D300 and D700. They are about the same price. Are there major differences?

What is DX and EX?

How do the Sigmas lenses do on Nikon? When I switch my budget will dictate getting Sigmas to start. Then saving up for Nikon lenses. I shoot mostly with 3 lenses now - 70-200 f2.8, 24-70, and 11-17mm.

Do the Sigmas work with both the D300 and D700?

Thanks for your advice and suggestions!

From your questions it seems you've done only minimal research.

Looking at the prices at B&H Photo Video today, the D700 new is $2400 body only, the D300s new is $1500, making the D700 62.5% more expensive than the D300s. Nikon no longer makes the D300, though there is still new stock available in various places as well as the used gear market.

The D700 has a full frame sensor, the D300s has an smaller APS-C size sensor and the focal length of any lense mounted on a D300s is subject to a 1.5x crop factor.

In addition, the D700 has a more usable ISO range than the D300s, one of your primary concerns. If you visit www.nikonusa.com you can compare the specifications and features of the D700 and D300s in more detail. you may also find it informative to visit www.dxomark,com and compare their testing results for the 2 cameras.

Nikon uses the DX designation to identify it's APS-C size sensor and other gear optimised for that sensor. Nikon uses the FX designation for it's full frame sensors and gear optimized for that sensor.

EX is a Sigma designation they use to denote what they consider to be professional quality glass. All Nikon digital SLRs use the same lens mount. Any lens having an F-mount, regardless of who the lens was made by, will fit on a Nikon camera.

You investigate all of Sigma's current lenses here: Sigma - Lenses

Look here:
Amazon.com: Nikon D300 DX 12.3MP Digital SLR Camera (Body Only): Camera & Photo

This is why I was confused. D300 - $2200.

 

[bigtwinky]

Higher end cameras are great for managing high ISO.

However, keep in mind that there is also some great software and plugins out there that help minimize noise in photos. Such as NoiseNinja for Photoshop.

 

[pgowder]

Higher end cameras are great for managing high ISO.

However, keep in mind that there is also some great software and plugins out there that help minimize noise in photos. Such as NoiseNinja for Photoshop.

Thanks

Like I said above, I'm looking for a solution in camera. Not for post processing. I'm trying to reduce steps and time.