adamz said:
IMHO, wait for d900, it may be better...

..or not.. The D900 may be a 100 Megapixel monster with 2.5FPS and 4K video.. requiring specialized $6k apiece lenses or something equally retarded to work as intended.

Buy a D7000 and get 6fps, you also get 50% more reach and it's nice and light for sport events. Then you can use the D800 for everything else. The D7000 is only a little more than the grip for the D800. If you're happy with 5fps get the D5200.

sevencrossing said:
Plenty of choice on non professional Video I use my P7100

I still want the shallow depth of field when I'm doing video though. I don't think the point of shoot has that.

conandoyle said:

Plenty of choice on non professional Video I use my P7100

sevencrossing said:
conandoyle

The Camera Nikon have developed specially for Sports photographer is the D4
But why not keep your D700 for sports and get at D800 for Video etc

that is what I am doing

In the days of Film you had to have 2 Nikons, one for B/W one for Colour

Nikon clearly want professionals to go back to buying two cameras
a D4 AND a D800

Yeah,that's a pretty smart marketing strategy,better than D3S/D700 era,but the case is I am not a professional...

Gareth is right, although most would like to have two of the same camera, so that if one goes down they can get identical results with the backup. This applies to more than just cameras. Example, at my sisters wedding last year the pro shooter had her flash go down, so she got out a spare, which was saved for just such an event.

Professionals always have AT LEAST two bodies. If a client calls you can't tell them your not shooting atm as your camera is getting fixed. If your shooting a wedding you can't say half way through "my camera isn't working, so I guess I can't take any more photos. oh well"

conandoyle

The Camera Nikon have developed specially for Sports photographer is the D4
But why not keep your D700 for sports and get at D800 for Video etc

that is what I am doing

In the days of Film you had to have 2 Nikons, one for B/W one for Colour

Nikon clearly want professionals to go back to buying two cameras
a D4 AND a D800

Tao, the D700 was 8FPS with the grip and AA batteries or EN-EL4a. If you look on the Nikon site, with D800 the MB-D12 adds 1 extra fps, but only in DX crop mode, bumping it to 6fps. In 35mm frame mode it remains 4fps. The camera just cannot buffer, process and transfer images to the CF/SD card fast enough for any more. BTW it still beats the 5D MKII which is only 3.8FPS.

The D700 was 5fps and up to 9fps. We have yet to see what the grip will add to the D800 but the D4 battery can be used in it so it may boost it to 8-9 as well.

Kicker- right now the grip is suggested to be priced at $616! Ouch!

NSXType-R said:
Buy a MB-D10 and use it when you need it?

yeah,that's what i'm thinking,and it may be the most economical way.I have to forgo video if it's the case though.

Buy a MB-D10 and use it when you need it?

JForhan said:

If you need FPS get a D4, D3s.

Let us know how that complaining to Nikon works out. Until then I will be out taking pics with D700 and then D800 when it gets here. :-)

Later,
Jeff

Thank you all.:p
Yes, I know D800 is pretty fast considering its 36mp.
I probably wont go to D4 or anything significantly heavier than D700.
I just love the speed in the D700-size body.

a D700 can be going D3s too, no?

I felt the sports photography and low light situations ended up being more important then that amazing high resolution for how I use my camera

So, this D700 user is going D4 (and grinding his jaw)

You do realize that the D800 is writing 36MP images vs. 12MP for the D700? So it is writing data at the equivalent of 3 frames on a D700 for every image on the D800. So the 4fps is data wise the same as 12fps on a D700. The D700 is only rated at 4-5 (CL/CH) anyway. I think that being able to do nearly the same rate at 3X the MP is pretty good.

They would need an EXPEED XLV chip to process data fast enough to do more than 4-5 fps. :-)

In DX mode it could be a little better as the D7000 can do 5-6 fps while the D800 is a flat 5fps in CL & CH.

If you need FPS get a D4, D3s.

Let us know how that complaining to Nikon works out. Until then I will be out taking pics with D700 and then D800 when it gets here. :-)

Later,
Jeff

Or get a used D3s.

I usually use my D300s as apposed to my D700 when shooting sports. the bit of extra reach is great.

maybe wait for a new DX bosy?

IMHO, wait for d900, it may be better. d800 sucks a lot in terms of speed, only 4fps... video, You end up better with dedicated cam. moreover, You gonna save some money on hardware upgrade.

If you plan on filming sporting events more than shooting them at high speed, buy the 800, if not stay put.

Keep the D700 and loudly complain at nikon like I plan to do...

conandoyle said: I dont shoot sports all the time, but I do occasionally.

Buy the D800 if you think you need the the video and resolution, keep the D700 for the occasional sporting event. Then you have 2 full frame bodies that compliment each other (and provide backup)

I'm a D700 user.I just want a D700 with video function.The D800 is excitement in terms of pixels, but it only has the half burst rate of D700 with the battery grip. I dont shoot sports all the time, but I do occasionally. So what do you guys think? Is it worth to upgrade to D800 and forgo fps for video and pixels？