D3s or D700? « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

D3s or D700?

(23 posts) (13 voices)

Tags:

No tags yet.

rhodium

member
Joined: Oct '09
Posts: 46
offline

I'm on the verge of getting a new camera, and I'm having a hard time making a choice. I've pretty much already decided on getting the 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 24-70mm f/2.8, which adds S$5000 (that's about US$3600). However, I'm torn between getting the D700, which is somewhat older, less capable, has "lesser" low-light performance, but is obviously cheaper (at S$3500, or US$2500) or the D3s, which is newer, more feature-packed, boasts top-of-the-line low-light performance, but is expensive as hell (S$7,000, or US$5000).

My budget is somewhat flexible, as I've been saving up for a while now and I've recently gotten a sizeable amount of money from my grandparents. However, much of the money is still going to come from my dad (I'm a student), and I'm not sure if I want to spend so much on a camera rig now, seeing as the economy is rather... bad. However, the way I see it is like this: if I get the D3s now, I'll be much more satisfied with it, and I won't see the need to upgrade any time soon (probably 5 or more years). However, if I get the D700, I might find myself wanting more in the future.

I do mostly landscapes and nature photography. I also cover events and stuff for my school (though not for money).

Any suggestions?

Posted 3 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

what other cameras do you have now? if you get the D3S, the d3s will be with you for many years ... You will be itching to upgrade but you already spent too much.. for your Conscience.

The D700 is here now .. but will probably be upgraded to the D3s sensor in about 5-8 months time. you dont need the super fast FPS of the D3s I say get the d700 and upgrade to the D700 successor when it comes out.

Posted 3 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

Thats a tough call rhodium. I want to upgrade my D300 to a full frame model soon as well. I have all the glass ready. A 14-24mm, 28mm Ais, 35mm ZF Zeiss, 50mm 1.4D, 70-200mm VR with 1.7 teleconverter and Sb 600. Took me 17 months! $$ Ouch..Even got the battery grip that fits the D300 or D700. The D3s will be great for years but I believe the D700 will be refreshed very soon. Any chance you could hold out for a little while longer? Maybe just purchase a D90 for now then trade it in the springtime or after the 2010 PMA.

For myself, I can feel myself slipping and trading my D300 for a used D700 in the next 4-6 weeks. I have looked at multiple used D700s for $2100 with 5,000 actuations. I purchased my D300 last year from the same dealer. The D3S is far out of my price range though I always invest in glass not bodies.

Posted 3 years ago #
ddg

member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 12
offline

I personally got a D300 to tie me over until the newer models are released. I think 2010 will be a big year for Nikon to update their higher end cameras. If you are like me, I just really hate buying the tail end of a technology run. I know the D3s looks really nice, but I think Nikon is gearing up to release a big upgrade in the D4 in 2010. It sounds like that they will update features like focusing, sensors, pixil count and HD video. And the D800 will get a huge boost as well. For me, I am going to be patient and wait a few months before I invest in a new body. I may buy a lense during that time, but I am keeping my powder dry until they update their product line.

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

From my investigations the D700 has two big advantages over the D3s - price and size/weight. If you plan on hiking-in for your landscape work, the additional size and weight could be important. The D3s has 100% viewfinder accuracy, plus those other attributes you mention.

I'm waiting for the D3s sensor to migrate and hope the next FX small-body (D800?) will have better finder accuracy. I also want an FX lens to rival my 16-85. For now I'll keep my D90 and wait.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

if You do landscapes photography than go for d700, as:
- you gonna carry it with You, and it's lighter
- if You really shoot landscapes than You don't use high iso anyway
- for the price difference get zeiss optics (would be great for Your landscapes) and a nice sturdy tripod with good ballhead
- as for the viewfinder difference, the only difference is that d3/d3s covers 100% and d700 covers 95%, are You sure You gonna see the difference?
however, if You need the speed, and You plan to use d700 with battery grip than it's gonna be better for You to get d3/d3s as it's gonna be smaller than the d700+MB-D10 combination

there's also a 3rd option for You, get a used d3, there are some nice prices on ebay.com

Posted 3 years ago #
shivaswrath

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 841
offline

ddg said:
I personally got a D300 to tie me over until the newer models are released. I think 2010 will be a big year for Nikon to update their higher end cameras. If you are like me, I just really hate buying the tail end of a technology run. I know the D3s looks really nice, but I think Nikon is gearing up to release a big upgrade in the D4 in 2010. It sounds like that they will update features like focusing, sensors, pixil count and HD video. And the D800 will get a huge boost as well. For me, I am going to be patient and wait a few months before I invest in a new body. I may buy a lense during that time, but I am keeping my powder dry until they update their product line.

slightly off actually, 2011 is where Nikon is slated to release the D4/D400 combo. . they cycle religously every 4 years, and D3/D300 were released in 2007, so. . . .the D300s/D3s release a year before is normal for them. . .

Next year, we'll be lucky to get anything "new" sensor wise, just more tweaks. . .I'd be happy but cautiously surprised with a D800 or D700x. . .but it might happen given the D3x has been out for a year or so. . .

Posted 3 years ago #
Meinrad

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 137
offline

As a proud owner of a D700, I cannot say enough good about it. At the time, the D3s didn't exist yet, and the few advantages of the D3 were not worth it to me: I don't need the higher fps, the two memory cards or the other few things that distinguished the D3. I ruled out Canon on account of the lesser quality at high ISO (as well as built-quality and the non-existence of a 14-24 equivalent), and high ISO capability was really important to me.
Your conundrum: the D3s can do with still less light. If I were to make the decision now, I would probably select the D3s over the D700, only (and really ONLY) because of the low-light capabilities.
You know best what is important to you. If you think that ISO 12800 is just for crazies, then don't bother with the D3s . . .

Posted 3 years ago #
ddg

member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 12
offline

shivaswrath said:
slightly off actually, 2011 is where Nikon is slated to release the D4/D400 combo. . they cycle religously every 4 years, and D3/D300 were released in 2007, so. . . .the D300s/D3s release a year before is normal for them. . .

Next year, we'll be lucky to get anything "new" sensor wise, just more tweaks. . .I'd be happy but cautiously surprised with a D800 or D700x. . .but it might happen given the D3x has been out for a year or so. . .

I am not so sure that Nikon will wait until 2011 to enhance its upper line of products. We have the Olympics in 2010 and they are having issues integrating 1080p in the current body style. It has to be heavy on the minds of folks who engineer these products. We have cell phones that can produce 720p, and the top end of Nikon’s camera line can only match cell phone video? I know this statement makes many Nikon fans uncomfortable, but waiting another year and a half to release up-to date technology is pushing the envelope for base line customer satisfaction. I know a portion of the market will stay with Nikon no matter what, but it is going to make a difference in sales if they go a year and a half without reacting to changes in technology. It is like the TV manufactures updating when new thresh-holds are reached. I feel certain that they will announce updates to their top end lines some time in 2010. It may be as late as the 3Q, but it is coming.

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

I agree with ddg, Nikon might like a more leisurely product update schedule, but the market seems to require they do more. I think we all would prefer a D3s over a Pentax K7, but there are those who would argue (I'm not one of them, so don't beat me up) that with built-in image stabilization and more MPs, the Pentax might be a better choice for some applications, particularly given the price differential. I wouldn't be surprised to see the D3s sensor in a D700 body before year-end. If that sensor can be built in quantity, Nikon's costs go down with volume, so they would have an additional incentive.

Posted 3 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

I couldn't agree more with you ddg about buying cameras at the end of their technology run. However, I find that when they first come out its very difficult to justify paying $5000+ for a body that drops in value so sharply. Just look at the price of the D3 now compared to when it was first released. I understand that this is digital, but its still had to swallow when you consider the fact that the best F body digital (F4 or F5) would hold its value for at least 10 years and its features useful for an equal amount of time.

I guess I am really hoping that the next FX body with the D3X or D3S censor in a smaller body is priced reasonably like the D700 was by comparison to the D3 back in 2008.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Kanuck, I think we should hope for a simultaneous D700s/D700x release with the sensors you mention. 73 days to go until the olympics. I think the D3s was the release for the olympics, but I hope I'm wrong.

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

You'll never see the same value retention in digital you had in film. With more technology comes quicker improvements and obsolescence. The biggest technical advance I experienced when shooting film was when Fuji made Velvia - faster than Kodachrome, easier to get processed and just as good. Now I don't buy film, but I expect to replace my D90 (or equivalent) every 2 or 3 years. Still cheaper than film was.

Posted 3 years ago #
ddg

member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 12
offline

Please know I am not beating up on Nikon. This is going to be a big year for sports enthusiast, but I just do not think Nikon will make winter Olympics with a D4 because they just announced the D3s. I think a more realistic time frame on the D4 will be the summer Olympics. They may announce a D800 for the winter Olympics with full 1080p, and work the bugs out before they implement the technology into the D4 line. Just waiting another year and a half would be too rigid in policy if you ask me.

We have several rumors floating around about the D4, and it would make sense given what the competition has released or announced. They have the IQ in the D3s even at higher ISO’s, if they updated the autofocus, and video, they could launch a successful follow up to the D3 line. It is defiantly not out of reach for Nikon.

Posted 3 years ago #
PacificEagle

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 105
offline

OK my two cents worth. In my opinion you pay for what you get, I agree that Glass is the first thing I invest in, no matter what. But I want the highest quality pictures and versatility when it comes to my camera/lens kit. I have the D300s and the D700, and all pro glass, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, and a few primes. I love the combination, it lets me do everything I want to do, but the D700 isn't even a close comparison to the D3s. I have the New D3s and 70-200 VR II on the way, can't wait to get them.

Now its a no brainer to me that I would choose the D3s over the D700 in a minute. First your buying a new camera, not one thats going to be discontinued in the next few months when they announce the new D800(or some version of that) in a smaller body, with 18mp, and better video, but I wouldn't count on it coming out before next summer or fall, so don't hold your breath. I can't see it being much better than the D3s execpt maybe video wise. And if I were to bet, I wouild guess it will be in the $4000/4500 dollar range, and before you all ask, A little birdie that works for nikon told me some stuff.
I would go the D3s route Rhodium, its all the camera you'll need for years.

Jonny...and your right one of the reasons the D3s is being released is for the olympics, Some of my buddies that work for the media here had to go through the wringer just to be able to get one in time. They all had to provide all their credentials to nikon before they would even put them on the list to get one. Even after all that they were told that nothing was guaranteed, and these guys live in the HOST City!!!!

Posted 3 years ago #
gd

member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 28
offline

I think this thread has somewhat lost the original question - the original poster is a student who will not be using the camera to make money. No one can dispute the fact that the D3s is "better" than the D700 but is it £2200 better (£1760 for D700 v £3900 for D3s in the UK) for a student with limited funds?

I'd suggest investing in the best glass you can afford. I guess we all agree on that.

But as to other questions \ comments:
1) "However, if I get the D700, I might find myself wanting more in the future." - you'll always want more in the future. We all do. Even when we don't need it ;-) I keep looking at a D700 to replace my D200 ...

2) "I do mostly landscapes and nature photography. I also cover events and stuff for my school (though not for money)." - not sure what you mean by nature e.g. wildlife where reach is important? In general, Landscapes = D700 and wildlide = D300(s).

I'd personally look for a second hand camera - either D300 or D700 - that comes with a 12 months warranty or even a new D90. Use that to play with \ to learn what works for you \ what sort of photography is most important \ of interest to you. Learn techniques rather than expecting the camera to do everything for you.

This way you get more experience with a "cheaper" camera (cheap does not equal bad) and are in a better position to exploit the capabilities of the next generation cameras. And you'll still have the money to actually buy one.

Just a thought ;-) Good Luck with your final choice.

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

gd makes perfect sense. While there are two features the D300s has that would be very useful for me ("A" meter of AIS lenses and 100% viewfinder), my D90 is a spectacular camera in virtually all ways. The dual card slots of the D300s would also be nice, but not necessary for anything I do. Have I ever missed a shot because I was shooting a D90? No. Would any of my shots be any better? No. Will I buy a D300s? Only when I can also afford the 85/2.8 PC-E and really want the metering capability. Do I prefer the size and weight of the D90? Yes.

I tend to shoot a lot of landscapes, macro and street and am not certain I ever want to change to FX from DX (not an upgrade). Yes, a D3s, D3x or D700 would probably allow bigger enlargements, more cropping and lower light shooting, but to what effect? I doubt I'll ever have use of a print larger than my D90 can produce. I shot slide film for years and crop in the camera (my personal habit). Yes, shooting in lower light is great, but I tended to shoot Kodachrome 25 and Velvia with film and any ASA faster than 1600 is already sensational.

If I compare my bag with D90, 10-24 and 16-85 to your bag with D700, 14-24 and 24-70 mine would weigh 1,565 grams and yours would weigh 2,895 (plus batteries, etc.). Oh, and I use filters all the time with the 10-24 for landscapes, can't do that with the 14-24.

Have you spent any time with the cameras you mention? I have a good friend who prefers the D40 to any other Nikon DSLR for its fast sync speed, very small size and terrific handling.

Posted 3 years ago #
rhodium

member
Joined: Oct '09
Posts: 46
offline

Thanks for all your input, guys. Really appreciate it.

I currently have a D60, although I have, on occasion, used a D90, a D300, a D700, and a D3. While I do enjoy my D60 very much (it produces pictures that I am very happy with, if used correctly), I can't help but feel that getting something higher end will open up new possibilities (most importantly in the realm of low-light photography). I would like to add that the kind of nature photography I do involves mostly plants and bugs, not much wildlife, if at all. However, I seem to have recently taken an interest in people photography, strangely enough.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

rhodium - even the best equipment will not make Your picture look better, as for low-light performance, any of the cameras You tried out will give You new possibilities in low-light performance; as from this what You wrote in Your last post I think You should be satisfied with d700, it's a better camera to photograph people (as it's smaller than d3 and doesn't scare off Your subjects so much) and for the price difference between d700 and d3 You can get a nice macro lens for Your bugs.

Posted 3 years ago #
tiongsonf

junior member
Joined: Jun '09
Posts: 8
offline

If I have a lot of money to burn for gear
I would choose D3S and D3X for studio and event and will add the 14-24N

And would upgrade only once that I will not satisfied but you will not remove the D3S/D3x its a perfect combination.

Posted 3 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

The logical choice depends on many factors.(lol dont we all know that!) If you think that by getting the D3S you will be using that camera for the next 5-10 years and still be "very satisfied" with it then you are probably wrong. In 5 years time, we will have D3S+2 ie 2 generations of camera technology. we will also have a D300S+2. I am expecting the D300S+1 (D400) to have similar or better performance to the D700, and the D300s+2 to have better performance than the D3S.
The D700+1 will be be as good as the D3S for most amateurs. If you want to be at the leading edge all the time, you have to be a pro and spend the big bucks every 2-3 years. For most amateurs waiting 1 year will get you the gear of equal performance if you get the second tier camera body. I am probably a third or 4th tier buyer myself. I find that to be the best value for money for the performance I want for my level of photography. I would consider the D300S to be third tier and soon the D700 (once its superseded). I think the overall money spent is probably double between tiers. so top tier is from 10-20K, 2nd Tier 5-10K, 3rd tier 3-5k. So if you consider yourself a Top Tier guy do you think you are able to support that spend every 2 years?

Posted 3 years ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

Thats a reasonable thought process Jonnyapple. The D700s and D700x could be released at the same time. I think Nikon will let the D700 be and release something else like a D500 or D800 with a different censor something with higher ISO performance like the new D3s and more mega pixels like the D3x. Maybe a D800 15-18MP ISO 100-80,000? Tweaked Auto focus, dedicated Info button, dual CF slots? DX cropping to 8mp or 10mp.

I'm going to stick my neck out on the line and say that I'm not that impressed with the D3s high iso performance when comparing shots to the D700 ALL THE WAY TO ISO 6400. I can't differentiate between the bodies! Obviously the fact the D3s goes all the way up to 100,000 is amazing but for me ISO 6400 shooting with just a candle flame is more than enough for me. I'd like slightly more MP for a little more resolution thats all.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

I doubt Nikon will announce a D700S and D700X at the same time. It would actually be kinda dumb thing to do. Something like that would have made sense earlier in the D700 life span but not now. I really do hope and suspect Nikon will be announcing something kind of unexpected soon. D500 full frame at D300S price point? Fingers crossed.

Posted 3 years ago #