One more question... nikon d7000 or d700?

[KmH]

The larger pixels can gather more light and are therefore more sensitive to light.

Close, but no cigar.

The larger pixels are not more sensitive to light.
Because the pixels are larger, they have more area to capture more light (ISO 200 is ISO 200 regardless the sensor size), generating a larger signal, and the larger signal doesn't require as much amplification which reduces both shot and amp noise.

 

[mjhoward]

The larger pixels can gather more light and are therefore more sensitive to light.

Close, but no cigar.

The larger pixels are not more sensitive to light.
Because the pixels are larger, they have more area to capture more light (ISO 200 is ISO 200 regardless the sensor size), generating a larger signal, and the larger signal doesn't require as much amplification which reduces both shot and amp noise.

I'm not really into semantics. If an element produces a relatively larger signal with the same amount of exposure OR it produces the same signal with less exposure, then I would say it is more sensitive. You're explanation is really from an engineering perspective, which is fine and believe me I understand exactly what you are saying as I'm an EE myself. Since we are on a photography forum, my statement of sensitivity was really more relative to photography and exposure times and I believe that relative to the amount of exposure time, a larger element is more 'sensitive' since as you said, it will produce a larger signal with the same exposure time. Sorry for any confusion.

 

[mjhoward]

I see that you are using alot of tokina lens.

is the tokina 16-50 and the 100 macro worth it? after buying the 12-24, i think the lens is totally worth the money. I was wondering about the other lens they have.

My first Tokina was the 11-16 and I loved it. It is built like a tank and has excellent IQ. So I figured... why not, I'll give the other Tokina 'Pro' lenses a try. They are all built just as tough and have great IQ. I've only noticed CA very slightly in a shot of a white/silvery butterfly wing against a black background with really strong sunlight on it. Other than that, I can't complain at all.

 

[dxqcanada5]

The Nikon D7000 uses a very good Sony IMX071 sensor: Teardown of the Nikon D7000 DSLR » Recent Teardowns » Chipworks

Yes, Nikon does not always use their own sensors


The comparison is not bad: http://94.23.242.64/index.php/Camera-Sensor/Compare/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/680|0/%28appareil2%29/441|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Nikon/%28brand2%29/Nikon

 

[kundalini]

ginu, $2100! that is a lot cheaper than anywhere i can find one!

thank you all for your help!

I bought my D700 from these guys. They have a refurb for $2090.

Nikon D700 SLR Digital Camera Body | Digital SLR Cameras | Nikon 25444 @ Photo 4 Less

 

[manaheim]

This is almost a ridiculous question.

The D700 is a FAR superior model camera. Unless you wind up camera poor and not able to buy any lenses, you buy the D700 and never look back.

 

[inaka]

This is almost a ridiculous question.

The D700 is a FAR superior model camera. Unless you wind up camera poor and not able to buy any lenses, you buy the D700 and never look back.

Not ridiculous at all when you factor in costs. And you have to assume costs are a factor otherwise the OP would just get a D3X instead of the D700.

A few things that make the D700 potentially less appealing will be that it will be replaced with a more advanced model later this year and costs WAY more than the D700. Also, I believe the auto bracketing on the D7000 is far superior, allowing for +/- two stops in auto bracketing and the D700 only allows for one, right? This would be a big deal for me since I take may pics for HDR. Have a feeling this will be "corrected" in the D700's replacement model.

 

[djacobox372]

The D7000 is the better deal.

D700 is about one stop better in iso performance, that's about it. And that is coming from a D700 owner.

 

[manaheim]

This is almost a ridiculous question.

The D700 is a FAR superior model camera. Unless you wind up camera poor and not able to buy any lenses, you buy the D700 and never look back.

Not ridiculous at all when you factor in costs. And you have to assume costs are a factor otherwise the OP would just get a D3X instead of the D700.

A few things that make the D700 potentially less appealing will be that it will be replaced with a more advanced model later this year and costs WAY more than the D700. Also, I believe the auto bracketing on the D7000 is far superior, allowing for +/- two stops in auto bracketing and the D700 only allows for one, right? This would be a big deal for me since I take may pics for HDR. Have a feeling this will be "corrected" in the D700's replacement model.

Um, yeah, but the cost issue is about as obvious as it can be, thus making the point kinda like "well, durrr".

And very few people are going to wait (and likely spend more money) on the next model of camera for an additional stop in bracketing. (you shouldn't be using auto-bracketing in your HDRs, anyway)

So yeah... kinda a ridiculous question.

 

[Sharfy]

I am very satisfied with my d7000 and i am loving it every time i do some practice shoots. When you buy a camera just make sure to bring it everyday and do some practice to maximize its features.

 

[ghache]

This is almost a ridiculous question.

The D700 is a FAR superior model camera. Unless you wind up camera poor and not able to buy any lenses, you buy the D700 and never look back.

Not ridiculous at all when you factor in costs. And you have to assume costs are a factor otherwise the OP would just get a D3X instead of the D700.

A few things that make the D700 potentially less appealing will be that it will be replaced with a more advanced model later this year and costs WAY more than the D700. Also, I believe the auto bracketing on the D7000 is far superior, allowing for +/- two stops in auto bracketing and the D700 only allows for one, right? This would be a big deal for me since I take may pics for HDR. Have a feeling this will be "corrected" in the D700's replacement model.

Um, yeah, but the cost issue is about as obvious as it can be, thus making the point kinda like "well, durrr".

And very few people are going to wait (and likely spend more money) on the next model of camera for an additional stop in bracketing. (you shouldn't be using auto-bracketing in your HDRs, anyway)

So yeah... kinda a ridiculous question.

D700 is deffinetly a better built camera but when i comes down to image quality and overall performance , MMMEEHHHHH not so sure.

 

[KmH]

The Nikon D7000 uses a very good Sony IMX071 sensor: Teardown of the Nikon D7000 DSLR » Recent Teardowns » Chipworks

Yes, Nikon does not always use their own sensors

Sony has been making image sensors for Nikon for a long time. Nikon designs the sensors. Sony just does the fabrication. Guess who Sony buys their photolithographic steppers from. Stepper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nikon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Reyna]

thank you all. after stressing about it all night and talking to my hubby, i've decided to go with the d7000. i would be totally be camera broke if i got the d700 and i only have 1 lens that would go with it. i truly don't think my hubby will let me get any other photography equipment for a long time if i decided on the d700. for what i am looking to do, i think it will be a great camera.

 

[djacobox372]

Close, but no cigar.

The larger pixels are not more sensitive to light.
Because the pixels are larger, they have more area to capture more light (ISO 200 is ISO 200 regardless the sensor size), generating a larger signal, and the larger signal doesn't require as much amplification which reduces both shot and amp noise.

I had to LOL at this one. That's a fantastic example of circular logic. Bravo!

Kinda like saying that a 1lb hamburger doesn't have more calories then a 1/2lb hamburger; the calories are the same it just has more hamburger.

 

[manaheim]

D700 is deffinetly a better built camera but when i comes down to image quality and overall performance , MMMEEHHHHH not so sure.

Right. The low-end pro body of the Nikon line is clearly a total piece of crap.

*rolls eyes*