วีดีโอ

I shot two or three dozen weddings with a D700 and D600 or D3S. People get used to the current norms. The D700’s shutter is the loudest I’ve ever heard, and since today’s cameras are quieter it certainly draws attention. As wedding videography is also more popular nowadays the D700’s loud shutter can also interfere with the videographer’s work. I adored my D700s and relied on them for years. But there are honestly many sensors in newer Nikon models with superior dynamic range, which isn’t something that upscaling can fix.

The D700 vs the D800, I will take the D800 every day of the week. It is, in terms of the camera body, the same, but the files you get from the D800 are just better. The dynamic range you get from the D800 can still fight with the newer Sonys and Canons of today. Also, 12 MP will in many areas be at the short end when it comes to for example cropping. I agree with you when it comes to buying the latest spec cameras for pure photography is idiotic, but I would say that praising the D700 over the D800 is not the best advice. Just to make it clear, I have my background in photography, and I speak from a purely photographic standpoint. And still use the D800 today, and have since the camera was released.

Makes no sense to me to use a relic of a tool when we have amazing ones today, and most importantly lighter and more probable to have it with you because of that. The iso and shadow recovery also does not even compare. Then pay for a software and waste minutes to upscale an image.

I bought 2xD700s in 2010 to transition from film for weddings (previously I was hiring D2h). I did lots of weddings with them and had lots of requests for 16 x 24 inches (40 x 60 cm) prints with no issues whatsoever. Finally I stopped weddings at later stage and now continued with my engineering work and kept one of the D700s and sold the other. I still don't have any newer cameras because the images I get from my D700 are just great.

I am not sure what the point of this video is. Can you shoot with a D700? Sure, you can shoot with a 50 year old film camera as well. Don't say that it is as good as the new mirrorless Nikons. It is not even close. Every single part of the new generation Z cameras are better than the D700.

A great lesson indeed. Well done, professor!

Shooting Nikon D700 since 2009 (D70 before since 2004 and still functioning) and own 5 now (my last had only 50 clicks ! ) and still enjoying photography and have latest DxO Raw software (with the best raw denoizer, I shoot as high ISO as I want, noise is gone) and Gigapixel for upscaling, all I need to enjoy for many years , I have a D3s also now for action shots (bigger buffer)

I'm an amateur and started being self taught in 2008. I started with a bridge camera and moved to a new D300 in 2009, then a second hand D700 in 2012 and finally a new D500 when it cam out and have always treated all my gear as needed. I'm not especially careful with any of my gear but have never dropped one. They have hit walls etc while running from one venue to another. All of them tough enough to survive sporting or event photography in any weather condition. I do a lot of volunteer photo shoots for charitable trusts and some of my D700 images have been put on 20 foot posters outside museums etc. A0 posters in sports halls at sports meetings for International Pentathlon UK (2010-2011) shot with the D300. I agree, especially with image editors such as DXO's offerings, doing such a great job of editing raw images. Lenses are always more important than the body and often fail more often. Fixation in the UK do an excellent job refurbishing them to look and work like new. Would highly recommend them for any expensive glass you may have. Any lens that cost you less than £500 I probably wouldn't bother with and they probably no longer have parts for, depending on the problem. But try getting an MB10 for a D700 or D300. Glad I got mine some years back with trays for AA batteries. I have never been asked for higher resolution images as long as the subject matter is relevant, clean and interesting. Most end up on social media or local news agency websites anyway. While I do the odd video for my own amusement my main interest is still with photography and accounts for most of my time behind a lens. I'm not sure why this video popped in my viewing suggestions but rest assured somewhere in the great TH-cam sorting engine, this video has at least 'got out there'. Good luck with the channel.

Finally, this is the video for many photographers who think that the latest is the greatest. Thank you for making this video. I own two D700 and love them.

I got rid of my Minolta gear long ago, but I still have second thoughts about parting with the Rokkor PF 58/1.4. It renders like no other. Not sharp, but ideal for portraiture at open aperture. If you like this focal length, may I recommend the Konica Hexanon 57/1.4. It's amazing wide open, sharpens up nicely at intermediate apertures and can be procured for roughly what you'd spend for the Rokkor.

I own 2 with low shutter counts. I have the 24-70 lens but like using the 24-85. I am sticking with DSLRs at least for now. No way I'll part with this camera.

Thank you Nick, I love your video. As an amateur, I recently upgraded from a D7200 to a D700 and a Z6ii. I love them both and use them depending on my mood.

My only mirrorless body is an X-T1. I agree that it's not worth swiching lenses unless you double or halve your focal length. I'm about to receive a Jintu AF 27mm f/2.8. If it can replace my XF 23/2 and XF 35/2, I plan to keep my XF 14/2.8, Jintu 27/2.8, XF 60/2.4, and adapted 100/3.5 and get rid of my three Fujicrons (23/2, 35/2, and 50/2) and adapted 135/3.5.

I bought it used, with very few shots, 2 lenses, I am very happy. I have other canons but this one has something magical, I love the photos it is capable of producing :) very happy

You can easily upscale any D700 file to 50 mpx and look like a 850 or Z7 shot (resolution wise) Mpb expert did a test using the Z7ii and D700. The results were really impressive!!

It is interesting to note that some of the highly marketed features of the Z bodies actually started life in the Nikon 1

Lovely video. I still use the D700 and D300s quite a lot. The optical viewfinders combined with the build quality makes them the tool to use. I do a lot of congress work with the D700 and the 28-300. Get lot of compliments about the sharpness. One point you forgot to mention: it's loud which means I also have a silent mirrorless camera which I only use for that occasions. A tip: buy a 18-55 vr as a light wide angle lens between 24-55.

Używam D700 zawodowo, kocham ten aparat za cudowny "obrazek" którego nie mają inne puszki. Jest to pancerny aparat i sprawdził się w różnych warunkach, nigdy nie zawiódł. Cieszę się, że nie tylko ja szanuję i cenię tę puszkę. Dziękuję za pana recenzję. Pozdrawiam z Polski

I shot lots of weddings with the D700, it never missed a beat and I cant recall ever having an out-of-focus problem either. Good files, especially with newer raw converters today

Thank you a lot

Hallow kawan saya ingin tanya kan kalau hasil foto di kamera Nikon D7100 dan 7200 manakah yg lebih bagus, mohon penjelasanya🙏🙏

I absolutely agree with everything you said and I also have and use my xt1 whenever I feel like having fun. I like the feel and look of this little classic camera and the image quality is so unique and beautiful. Great video. Cheers

Perhaps slightly exaggerated, your rant, but very humorous - I'm currently lying in the bathtub with Corona & the video amused me a lot - thanks for that!

Your information is solid. The lack of audio quality is not 😬

My friend, my view is: Phones: Just gotta work with it. We're there to capture the wide scene as it is. I try to work around it by capturing some images in portrait where its just the bride. I also look for the folks who do the phone videos and ask them if they can share with me so i can make a little video. Its a nice touch. I went to one wedding ehere the couple encouraged phones and asked for pocs yo be sent to the photographer. You can slso discuss eith couple beforehand about phones. Some wont mind. Some will ask at the start for all phones to be put away. Uncle fred: I do as little posing as possible. I also actively remind the subjects which camera to look at. Lastly, after I've taken my pics i will tell the subjects to look at uncle freds camera so he can have a pic as well. Uncle fred is always grateful and hopefully they will remember that nice touch and recommend me to someone else. Bridezilla: Shes the customer and I'm there to capture the day. Like any customer service job, not every day is smooth sailing and the pressure of the day can get to some brides. As long as I'm not the cause of the stress. Being the photog gives me a chance to interact with the couple regularly and sometimes drop a joke or some encouragement. If you get into weddings, remember to capture the moments, not the best images from a photographic point of view. One of my 'worst' images from a wedding is the brides phone screensaver and she won't stop gushing about how amazing it is nearly a year later. It was noisy, not that sharp but she has noticed none of that. You're correct there are modern challenges to deal with but we just gotta adapt and overcome. Some will enjoy it and some won't. It's good that you choose to avoid it instead of just doing it for the money and getting your blood pressure up 😊

The viltrox lenses are my favorite for the Sony.

Well done starting a new photography channel. Still, I think that you do need to sort some of your ideas out before claiming to be a 'professor'. There are some things here that are not correct. For instance, the idea that when pixels get to smaller that 3.9 microns DR 'goes to pot'. A proper professor would cite their evidence, reasoning and sources when making a statement like that, and I know of no reputable source that would support that notion. If you look at the performance of the sub-micron pixels used on phones, if used on large camera sensors they would yield a DR superior to the sensors we have now. Likewise many cameras actually have smaller pixels than the advertised size. All of `Canon's sensors use 'dual pixel AF', which means that they have two pixels for each advertised pixel. The R5 sensor actually has 90 million pixels on it - yet the DR does not suffer. The OM System OM-1 has quad pixel AF, which means that it has 80 million pixels on a four thirds sensor, 1.6 micron size, and it does OK so far as DR is concerned. Your ideas about large pixels operating 'much better in low light' are also wrong. Low light performance is mainly about QE and read noise. There is no demonstrable advantage in QE. There is a slight advantage in read noise, if the pixels are designed around same design of the active components, but if they are appropriately scaled the smaller pixels gain the advantage, due to a higher conversion gain. The 'native focal length' argument is also a bit spurious, because we are rarely nowadays using old 35mm lenses, and the lenses that we use are 'native' to the cameras that we use them on. Sure, Nikon and Canon provide two sensor size options, but both of them provide APS-C lens choices.

I’m trying to choose the best first camera I can for videography. And I’m on a budget. Same time, I’m a slave to beautiful cinematography. So I don’t mind spending extra few hundred dollars for a full frame if I had to. But that being said, do I actually need a full frame or can I expect great cinematic wide shots from a APSC camera? I know there are tons of good lenses out there, but will it work? Night shots etc. What does the science and tech say abt it? Thanks man. By the way, very interesting video