In my opinion the D7000 video does make it a better field camera than the D700. I have both and based on several things (regardless of what some may think video on board DSLRs is here to stay) I use the D7000 and even the D90 over the D300 and D700. Most times when I want real control.....I use the D300. Every photographer has their own style and requirements.

Maybe your clients or customers don't want or need video. Or maybe they don't even think it cannot be achieved. Maybe you don't want video. I have used them both and everytime I see a good video I think of Ansel Adams time sequence photos. There is a HUGE place for motion pictures. I want a camera that does both! The D7000 is a very awesome camera. The REASON I visit Nikon Rumors is that I THINK the D400 will add features I love on the D300 and D700. And who knows.....maybe the D800 will not come in with a staggering price tag.

I do pick up and try Canons. The cost of me switching though is way too high. It is a switch you'd better make before you own thousands in Nikkor glass. I think iasm has a very valid point. I also think burying this topic in a older thread may be the worst way to handle one of the most significant Nikon versus Canon differences.

For me getting full frame video was not one little thing. The real point i was trying to get out was that i was more then happy to wait if i had a clue as to what i was waiting for. Both Nikon and Canon keep there future products so top secret that the consumer canot make any plans. I wonder if there would be a benifit to letting consumers know whats coming?

It seems bizarre to me that we have better quality and features today than we would have dreamed of ten years ago, but we get impatient because our current camera lacks one little feature another has.

For me, I feel the next model always arrives before I get the best from the old one!

Its interesting reading the reponses. I would like to say i only have a couple of post since there are so many topics that interest me i just read a couple of times a day. I will say my obsevation is there are a lot of angry people here. I am not i a nikon hater in fact i may make the switch back. I was going to go with the ds3 but since my wife also uses the gear she wouldnt take the weight and would go less then full frame. I will say we have some incredible pictures now that we would have and it wasnt totaly the camera but my wife, the right light and the moment that wouldnt have if we were still waiting for next year. Who knows i may sell the gear and go d800. I will still have the pictures.
Rod

NO, I have not switched to Canon. I've been shooting Nikon for the last 40 yrs. The only other systems I have used are Leica and Blads.
Besides it would be impossible to replace my lenses and other Nikon related gear with Canon. I haven't counted all my lenses for a long time, but they range from a 14-24mm to 600mm VR. I also still use some of my old AI lenses thanks to Nikon's backward compatibility.

It's got to be because of all these canon threads, TTJ. ;-)

I have searched for "Nikon" and the search bar never pulled anything up. ;)

I think it should stay open unless it's abusive. Who cares how the conversation starts? If people care enough to add to a thread then why stop it?

Niko always talks about avoiding clutter, but the search bar has never given me great results.

SquamishPhoto said:
Maybe its time for a new moderation style? To be honest, the old way kind a sucks and I bet you that everyone involved in this thread probably doesn't care to see it close or be forced into a convoluted and archaic thread from 2 1/2 years ago with an entirely different title. Just sayin...

Honestly Squamish, maybe you could have stated it in a nicer way especially since Niko is MIA. Niko's moderation (as with any moderator) had both its positives and negatives. Some did not agree or like the way he ran things but I don't think anyone can deny that it kept the forum sane.

TTJ is right. The OP has only ever made two posts in this forum and he hadn't even bothered to reply to this thread. The OP might as well have thrown a bone out and watched us all fight over it.

I'm with Kanuck on this one. I was sold on the D700 until I got my mitts on the D7000. I have since then anxiously waited for the D800 as I know it will be at least a D7000 in a D700's body. The image quality and handling (dynamic range) were such a jump from the D90 to the D7000, I know that the D800 will be a winner.

kanuck said:
As great as the D700 is right now imagine a new Nikon D4 with no anti aliasing filter with a D3s ISO range and over print film in terms of resolution power.

Im trying every second of every day to will this idea into reality. :]

Maybe its time for a new moderation style? To be honest, the old way kind a sucks and I bet you that everyone involved in this thread probably doesn't care to see it close or be forced into a convoluted and archaic thread from 2 1/2 years ago with an entirely different title. Just sayin...

Ditto... Johnny wield those mod powers Adamz bestowed upon thee :P

So can we just dump this thread? The OP has a grand total of two posts on NR and has never been back.

Most of this thread is echoed on about 70 different threads.

Just throwing out an idea.

kanuck said:
So I don't altogether believe that better gear does not equal better images. To an extent it does and a lot is the shooter themself as Adamz stated earlier.

I agree that there are times when gross differences in gear do show up in the images and get remarked on (seems a lot of the time for those who have never used FX or medium format before), but that just goes to show that the generalization of "larger format devices allow for higher quality results" has a degree of truth to it.

The point at which the ability of the person using that higher quality gear comes into play much earlier on going up the quality curve than many think... Mind you, the truly great photographers can coax good results out of average gear, whatever the brand.

Yes agreed but the arguement simply states that its the photographer not the technology right? We should all ignore these new releases and focus more on our technique and improve as photographers. While this is true, you cannot ignore how technology allows you to do things that were once not possible and thus improving your craft. As great as the D700 is right now imagine a new Nikon D4 with no anti aliasing filter with a D3s ISO range and over print film in terms of resolution power. While this might not happen, I'm sure the next line of Nikon bodies will be impressive and I'll be right in there. In the meantime, I'll continue polishing up my photography skills and keep tabs on rumors and information :)

@Kanuck, there is a big jump there from a crop (d200) to a FF that 2 generations ahead of its time. Same can be said that someone will blown away moving up from a 30-40d to nikon d700 with similar range of lenses.

Actually bjrichus my brother's bread and butter are the Canon 17-40 and 70-200mm L lenses for his 5D Mark II and they are both excellent despite what many say about the lenses for use on high performance bodies. He uses a Zeiss 35 and a 100 as well, but not nearly as much. His photography has really taken off and his images are significantly better than when he was shooting on his D200 with a 17-35mm and 80-200mm lenses. So I don't altogether believe that better gear does not equal better images. To an extent it does and a lot is the shooter themself as Adamz stated earlier.

iasm said:
I couldnt way any longer so went with the 5d. I really wanted the new nikon with video but had been watching the rumor site for over a year. Love reading the rumors but i wasnt sure if a full frame with video was even in the works.I was wondering how many folks have made the switch.
Rod

Just because Nikon have not competed/kept up with Canon in one area does not mean that the next generation of gear won't knock the rest out of the ball park.

Wasn't the "F" range groundbreaking? Wasn't the "D" range was groundbreaking? Now we look towards the next round of releases as being just as groundbreaking.

Go buy a Canon if you NEED the combination of what a model they offer has today, it's fine. It's what YOU need NOW.

I just wonder if you may be regretting that switch in a couple of months time is all...

sevencrossing said:
I can operate my Nikon quickly and in total darkness

The thought of learning were a new set of button and dials, let alone understand the menus, terrifies me

My first Nion was an F My last will accompany me the grave

Couldn't say it better. I also frequently have to use my equipment in the dark, most things come intuitively, but if the new line of bodies came with illuminated buttons, I would be pleased. Shooting simultaneously with a 700 and 3s, does tax my grey matter.

I can operate my Nikon quickly and in total darkness

The thought of learning were a new set of button and dials, let alone understand the menus, terrifies me

My first Nion was an F My last will accompany me the grave

Just to clear things up, I really don't have a problem when someone says they're buying/switching to Canon instead of/from Nikon. Like I said in other posts before, I think both camera companies are excellent and both produce great photographic equipments. In fact some of my best shots were made with a Canon Rebel.

What I don't understand is when somebody says they're switching brands because of video. Again don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to downplay video here but if video was more important than photo then why would you invest in a DSLR in the first place? After all video DSLR's are still photographic equipment first and videographic equipment second.

kanuck said:
Adamz is right the photographer is the most important thing here. However, that being noted, my brother switched over to Canon after 20 years shooting Nikon and his career has really taken off and I can see the improvement in his photography as well. He loves using the Zeiss ZE lenses especially.

Kanuck... I think the key is in the last few words you use. It's the GLASS not the body that did it for your brother.

My bet would be that by using Zeiss glass he was moved to do better work than before.

As the saying goes: "A change is as good as a rest" and a change from one type of lens to another introduced enough differences for him to move his work on "to the next level" (a pun, but you get the idea).

Adamz is right the photographer is the most important thing here. However, that being noted, my brother switched over to Canon after 20 years shooting Nikon and his career has really taken off and I can see the improvement in his photography as well. He loves using the Zeiss ZE lenses especially. Personally though I love Nikkor too much and our family grew up with Nikon so I'll never change. My grandpa, dad and then my older brother all shot with Nikon.

Technology changes so much now that its hard to argue against the benefits certain cameras offer to make you a better shooter. The D3s allows for shooting situations never dreamed possiblem before. Nothing has come out since its release that offers the same experimentation with photography either. I'm sure my craft would improve if I traded in my D700 for one...

guys, it took me some time (couple years) to realize that it's not the camera that's important but actually all the other things including me. so instead of discussing either You, Your friend or some other fello made or made not the switch let's take a snap or two, regardless of the equipment, after all thebest camera is the one You have with You, when thing happen