D700 vs. D300S + 24-70mm « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

D700 vs. D300S + 24-70mm

(51 posts) (19 voices)

Tags:

12 3 Next »

soshigee

senior member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 82
offline

Alright, well, first of all, I'd like to apologize to everyone about posting something like this... But I couldn't really find an answer to this, unless I haven't been digging deep enough...

I'd like to get a new body as well as lens, upgrading from a d80 with 35mm f/1.8. I'm planning to do a lot of concert photography in Korea for the rest of the year before I start school in Seoul National University and it will be low lit. Right now I have a budget of $6000. I've been looking through many sites and what not to see what I should get for the best deal.

I know D700 full frame will be a hand from God helping me take shots at concerts and it was my initial decision. Ofcourse I need a 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII, and was planning to get a prime 50mm f/1.4G.

However, I started thinking I should just get a D90 and looked at prices but now they dont do rebates with 70-200mm for D90s. So I looked into D300S and voila, 70-200mm + 24-70mm f/2.8 for about the same price as the above D700 shopping cart. I calculated and Getting D90 with the above two lenses are almost the same price, which means I should just get the D300S anyways.

So my main question is: Is the D700 Full frame really worth more than getting a 24-700mm f/2.8 with a D300S for a body instead? Or is the full frame a MUST for low lit concert photography?

Also, other than concerts, I'm going to be shooting still life and everyday shots like touring places.

Andlast thing, if the D700 is the decision, is the FX sensor body worth the weait? (Going to miss some concerts)

Thank you!

If this topic seems unacceptable, I apologize and please take this down, mods. :)

Posted 3 years ago #
P7M8

new member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 3
offline

How certain are you that the concerts you will be shooting are low light? Reason I ask, I was able to bring a D300S and 24-70 into a Miley Cirus concert. I went with my D300S over my D700 because of the 1.5x DX crop factor since I was limited to a lens 6" or less. Take the filter and hood off of the 24-70 and I was good to go. I was surprised to be able to shoot at ISO 400 for the entire concert from way back on the floor. Then again, I've shot music in very low light with my D700 and 70-200 VRI where I had to go all the way up to ISO 6400. I would say that if you're shooting high profile concerts (major lighting) you should be okay with a D300S.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

^

-1 rep

for attending a Miley Cyrus concert.

Posted 3 years ago #
heather

new member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 1
offline

Go with the lenses, you will look at upgrading the camera long before you will want to upgrade those two lenses.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

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

This looks like a new member thread. Welcome, everyone. Poster, you are a nut.

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

Haha, Miley Cyrus is not my favorite person either- she's a bad person to look up to in my opinion for young people. But we're way off topic.

How close will you be able to get up to what you're shooting? I think answering that question would be the best way to determine what body to get. If you don't have a press pass to get up close, a DX body would be a good idea.

Posted 3 years ago #
soshigee

senior member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 82
offline

Well, these are big asia tour concerts for a celebrity group inside a big stadium.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_NwtpvVYhcVo/S8Upl8_mHrI/AAAAAAAACyM/F7GdwYkCERU/s320/SNSD+1st+Asia+Tour+Concert+in+Shanghai.jpg

http://pandabutter.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/snsd-encore-concert-performance.jpg

http://pandabutter.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/snsd-shanghai-concert-3.jpg

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zKxVzGo5RGA/0.jpg

http://img200.imageshack.us/f/screenshot20091219atpm0.png/

The lighting will be close to those pictures above except when they are performing something and requires low light.
It depends where I will be, but the closest seat is pretty far away from the girls.
I will have a invitational back stage pass for regular shooting which means I will probably need a lens for portraits.

Where I will most likely be is in the shanghai concert link (3rd one); around there.

Come to think of it, I don't think these high profile concerts will require me to use a full frame camera, but I like the d700 for its low noise and iso capabilities...

So:
1. I wont be that far away so I wont need a cropped sensor for zoom.
2. I dont really exactly need the full frame / iso capabilities of a D700.

So it's in between at the moment...

Thank you jonnyapple for the welcome :) I've been lurking here for a while but this is my first time.

I might also be able to get a hold of a press pass to get up close but that's not for sure.

Posted 3 years ago #
SquamishPhoto

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,076
offline

with a $6000 budget?... keep the d80 and 35mm and buy a af-s 200mm f2 and an 85mm 1.4. Then save your cash for the next while and buy the d90 replacement. Considering that you say that you dont really need FX this shouldn't seem like such a ridiculous suggestion.
:]

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

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

I really like squamish idea, 200/2 will do a great job over here, even with Your old d80 (it's probably one of the sharpest if not the sharpest lens made by Nikon) - if You will have some spare bucks left, get a d90 (even from second hand)

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

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

if You want to stay with getting new body out of d300s/d700, than... get lenses first - they are more important

Posted 3 years ago #
P7M8

new member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 3
offline

poster said:
^

-1 rep

for attending a Miley Cyrus concert.

9 year old daughter. Made the best of it by bringing my camera.

Posted 3 years ago #
warprints

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 769
offline

P7M8 said:
9 year old daughter. Made the best of it by bringing my camera.

Good save :-)

Posted 3 years ago #
soshigee

senior member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 82
offline

Problem is, someone stole my D80 and I'm camera-less. I borrowed a d90 for a while but the owner had to take it back because he was moving to the east coast.

So I basically need a new body.

I have concerns that D700 has much better image quality and no noise compared to a d90 and d300s. Is that right?

Posted 3 years ago #
P7M8

new member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 3
offline

soshigee said:

I have concerns that D700 has much better image quality and no noise compared to a d90 and d300s. Is that right?

Sounds like you want to be talked into getting the D700. At higher ISOs it definitely beats the D300s in noise. I don't have a D90 so I cannot comment on that for sure but more than likely much better than the D90 as well.

There are situations when I'm shooting with two bodies and wish I had a second D700 or a D3s with my D700 as my second.

Posted 3 years ago #
soshigee

senior member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 82
offline

Well, I was leaning towards D700 most, and just thought of this D300S combo.

I love image quality over anything else which is why I'm making a big jump from a D80.

It's just, should I get the 24-70mm lens over the better image quality? And does the quality even matter? lol

Posted 3 years ago #
noxin

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 246
offline

P7M8 said:

There are situations when I'm shooting with two bodies and wish I had a second D700 or a D3s with my D700 as my second.

I think we all (or most of us) wish we had a D3s with a D700 as a backup
;-)

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

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

If You know how to capture photos You'll be fine with d90/d300 or any other, if You however doesn't know even d700 will not help You. If You are fixed towards d700, and buying it will make You happier go ahed and do it for Your and our sake. Once again, it doesn't matter what kind of body You have. It's glass that matters. Once You understand this, You are ready to upgrade Your body.

noxin - I wish I had d3s and d3x as a backup :D, just can't justify the cost and weight.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

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

P7M8 said:
I don't have a D90 so I cannot comment on that for sure but more than likely much better than the D90 as well.

I've seen no practical difference between the D90 and the D300 as far as high-ISO image performance goes.

I agree with Heather and Adam. The extra lens will make a bigger long-term difference for you. You're probably not just going to shoot concerts with the thing, anyway.

noxin said:
I think we all (or most of us) wish we had a D3s with a D700 as a backup
;-)

Absolutely.

Posted 3 years ago #
soshigee

senior member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 82
offline

Well, I'm getting a prime 50mm f/1.4 with the D700 anyways, so wouldn't it not matter that much? Basically 24-70mm f/2.8 vs. 50mm f/1.4.

I know glass is more important but since it's the difference between a DX sensor vs. FX sensor bodies I think I need to put more thought into choosing bodies.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

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

I don't think FX is a silver bullet, soshigee. I guess that's what I'm trying to get at. There's no question a D700 would outperform a DX sensor in these low-light situations, but the 24-70 would be so much more versatile than the 50 that I think it's the better way to go (I guess it depends on what else you want to do). Is the loss in versatility balanced by the gains FX offers you? Only you can answer that and probably only after you've tried both FX and DX bodies in similar situations.

Posted 3 years ago #
noxin

preferred member
Joined: Nov '09
Posts: 246
offline

if $6000 is your budget, I would highly consider the 85mm 1.4 over the 50mm 1.4. Both are super, but I think the 85 is super duper, is a little more versitle (my opinion) and will give you a little more reach than the 50mm that you may be use to if you are shooting DX now. It's also a great portrait lens.

Posted 3 years ago #
soshigee

senior member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 82
offline

I heard about the Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 being a very qualified lens, and is cheap too. My friend told me I should get that instead of a Nikon lens since it's much cheaper and performs very well.

Right now, I still don't really know for sure the 24-70 will be of any help to me over a 50mm. I'm planning to just shoot anything I see, random stuff, and for when I go out on a trip or hang out, I'd shoot people or still life.

Well the only gain by FX is the clarity I get even on ISO 6400, as well as the outperformance in low lit conditions. But I'm most likely not going to be using that high ISO since the concerts I'm going to are high profile.

Maybe I should get the D300S. Hmm... Should I just wait for the new FX and rethink this through?

Thanks y'all for helpin btw.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

So you are doing it professionally?
If so, then think of D700 as an investment. Doing half-measures accomplishes nothing.

Posted 3 years ago #
jbl

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 266
offline

Personally, I'd wait for a D700 upgrade.. but that's because I shoot a D300

Seeing your use of the camera.. I'm pretty sure the D300s with more lenses will be more useful because you'll get more reach with that 70-200...

Shows are often well lit enough for you to shoot at iso 1600 or under.. that means the D300s will perform great..

The 24-70 + 70-200 kit sets you up for the future and since the lenses work on both DX and FX, nothing stops you to get a D700 later on when they are cheaper and then have the following kit:

70-200 on D300s and 24-70 on D700.

That kit is about as versatile as it can get.. you have the wide angle and the telephoto..

Posted 3 years ago #
Niz

preferred member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 139
offline

If I had $6,000 to put into new gear this is how I would spend it.

D300s
MB-D10
70-200mm 2.8 VRII
17-35mm 2.8

That all comes out to $5,568.84, with the left over you can get cards, batteries, and maybe a flash. Put your money in the lenses, you could even go and get a D90 body only and save even more money and maybe get another lens in there.

Posted 3 years ago #