What site would be helpful to me in comparing the Nikon D90 with the Nikon D700?
I thought I had decided I was certain I wanted to save up to purchase the Nikon D700, but the Nikon D90 comes in a much lower priced package deal right now at Costco. I would like to know if there is a site I could visit where I could run down the differences between these two cameras to see if I’d ever even use, or understand how to use, the extras on the D700. Thank you.
Silly question. I don’t know what “noise” refers to in terms of photography. Can someone explain why that matters?
Answer by fhotoace
Here is a direct link:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=nikon_d90,nikon_d700&show=all
While they are both excellent cameras, the D700 has a lot of the features of the $ 5,000 Nikon D3, so in many ways, it is the better choice, however the two major difference are the D700 has a full frame sensor with very, very low noise at ISO’s as high as 6400 ISO. The other is that the D90 can produce high quality video.
Your choice …. and of course the D90 costs $ 2,000 less than the D700.
Answer by empenage2003
dpreview.com
Answer by Andre M
You may be taking a few classes, but consider this. The Nikon D90 was proven to have amazing noise control almost equal to that of the D700 and D3. And if you got the D90 you would have an extra $ 2000 to spend on lenses. Considering you would need at least $ 1500 for lenses with the D700, thats $ 3500 you have to spend now for glass which could get you a really nice setup with the D90. So ask yourself if you really need or want the D700. Yeah its an amazing camera, but unless you have amazing glass to go with it ($ 1000-5000 per lens) then its not going to make much of a difference. I would go with the D90 get a few really good lenses and when you figure out that you want to stick with photography get a good camera. You can always sell good glass for almost its original price if you decide to quit, but camera bodies drop quickly once a new model comes out.
Answer by George Y
Lisa, the D700 is a fantastic camera, but one with a very steep learning curve for a beginner.
There are major differences, but IMHO you’ll be better served by the excellent D90. The big advantage for a camera novice is the Mode dial, that the higher model Nikons (D200, D300, D700, D3, & D3x) don’t have. On the higher models, you have a selector dial for S (shutter priority), A (aperture priority), P (programmed mode), & M (manual settings). With experience and training, one can work wonders within these ranges.
However, on the “prosumer” level camera such as the D40, D60, D80, and the wonderful D90, you have more presets to help. The D90 had Modes for action, portrait, landscape, closeups, no flash, & nighttime portrait. These settings will allow you to capture the pictures you want as soon as you turn on the camera, and are still flexible enough to grow with you.
Just compare the controls and dials here.
D90:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/page7.asp
D700:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond700/page6.asp
Personally, I shoot with a D200 and would be very comfortable with the controls of a D700. But, looking at the price/performance scale, the D90 is likely to be my next Nikon.
Read this review:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d90.htm
By the way, the price difference between a $ 2300 D700 (body only price) and a $ 900 D90 (body only price) would allow you to assemble a $ 1,400 camera bag filled with lenses and accessories for the same price!
Hope this helps.
Answer by Lou G
you can not compare technological “apples” and “oranges”.
If you look on the picture it delivers, there is no need to spend 1500 extra bucks for a D700. The D90 half sized sensor camera offers in some way much more for money value and on the end, you get the same good shot out of it.
If you intend to spend 3000$ for a FF body, get a Sony A900. The thing has all one awaits from a camera and is not a computer hanging around your neck. It’s build like a tank and Minolta excellentb glass can be bought on E-Bay used for peanuts. You can buy a 70-400/4 Beercan Zoom for 150$ and that one can compete with a 70-300 VR without any shame since it outperforms any Nikon lens right away. Also, the body has build in stabilizer, a featur Nikon sells separate in some lenses.
D700 FX framed camera has a better build weather sealed body, better AF system and a better noise response dur to the larger single pixel size. You have same pixel amount, thus same sized shot. On the D90 you benefit of a much higher per pixel resolution which in certain conditions is an advantage. A smaller pixel is less sensitive to highlight burning but is more sensitive to low iso noise.
Here the D700 is the master of darkness due to low noise ratings at all iso settings. Without flattening software active inside the camera the D700 starts noising at 1600 iso only while the D90 has it’s limits at iso600. Beyond those ISO rates, the noise flattening software does the job and a D700 does this in quiet a good way and mostly invisible until 6500 ISO what is quiet amazing. On the other side, the average resolution is the one of a D40 with a double sized picture compared to it.
D700 is, like D3, targeting allround users that want to be able to shoot ok in all conditions and mainly in action and sports.
A D90 is able to do the same as well.
Now, it’s your money, the result in picture size ans quality si the same. Both cameras have many useless gadgets like live view and even video on the D90. Nikon’s cameras start becoming walk-around computers rather then cameras and all the junk in technology is something you pay for and do not need or quiet seldom.
If I had the choice here I would consider the D90. An apsc sensor has quiet a few advantages compared to a full frame and the few advantages a full frame has, mainly some little more color dynamic and just a bit better in depth detail sharpness is not worth spending that much more money.
Note that I use Nikon D200, Fuji S5Pro, Nikon D40 and Sony A900 and my beloved tool is still the D40. A prove that you don’t need a high end gear to shoot like a pro. Go cheep, go D90, go simple and good, go D40, go high end for best picture dynamic, go Fuji S5, go high end at correct price, go A900.
What more to say about the subject.
Just a question about noise. A pixel is something like a window in a room. It is an opening where light comes in. The larger the window, the more light, the smaller the less light. A pixel is a small lens, a square tube with a lens on end and on the other ens a photosensitive receptor that translates light in electronic signals. Like in all lenses, the more you close the hole, the sharper it gets until the hole gets too small and then you get under exposure or un-sharpness on a film.
If you open a lens wide, towards 1.4, you get much more light in. This is an advantage in the darkness but a disadvantage in high sunshine since too much light translates with white areas burned without any other information then white or 256 in digital. (1 to 256 where one is black and 256 is white)
So, the trick is to find a mid range that does good on all sides, in dark and in bright and the smaller a pixel, thus the more you have, the lower your problems with high light details, the bigger it is and the less pixels you have, the more problems you get with burning the high light. On the other side, the smaller the lower the sensivity, thus the lower your iso rate handling. With a bigger pixel more light gets in thus the higher your iso rates can go.
What happens when in dark there is no information coming through because not enough light coming in. The sensor read this as a 0 information and instead of black only thus putting 1 there he leaves it open and puts red, green and blue sport there. This multicolor dust on a shot is called noise. Now, cameras contain flattening software the replace this missing information with same information as the pixel beside has seen. This has limits and if noise gets too big in amount, flattening occurs what means that the soft just smears it to hide it. If you magnify such a shot you see lamb patterned scrolled spots in three colors just like water colored smear, what look awful anyway. This is why, when considering a camera, know what you want to do. king of studio, king of sports, king of action, king of the night and so on.
All cameras serve to different purposes and all use same Bayer patterned sensor design. To see what a camera is worth, shut off noise reduction and see the limits of the sensor without noise. On a D200 that is 600 ISO, ON a D90/D300 it is a round 500 ISO, on a D40 it is 700 ISO, on a D700 it is 1250 ISO and a Sony A900 it’s around 650 ISO. The fuji S5 handles 1250 ISO clean.
BUt, the only exception to the rule is Fuji’s S5 Pro. The sensor has octogonal 6.14 mpix very small pixels and 6.14 mpix quiet large ones. This will inside the soft be interpolated to a 12.4 mpix shot where highlights and low lights have a rendering and a color dynamic range no other cameras can offer. This design is unique and one of Fuji’s patents, a reason why other do not do the same, even if they would like to.
Those informations are rough but hope it will help you to understand what’s about.
What do you think? Answer below!
Nikon D90 with GP-1
Image by mcwetboy
The GP-1 attached to my Nikon D90. It’s very small compared to an external flash.
Are the Canon’s lack of focus points THAT important for landscape/female model shots I want to start taking? And is Nikon’s extra AF points a little overrated?? Especially for someone like me who can’t hardly compose a good shot anyway?
Answer by fhotoace
You will have to ask someone who uses both cameras.
A colleague of mine uses both and claims that his Canon 1Ds, Mark III with 70-200 mm f/2.8 zoom, has to search for focus a lot … He claims the the Nikon D3 with Nikon’s 70-200 mm f/2.8 nails the focus every time. He shoots NBA and WNBA games and cannot afford to miss shots waiting for his camera/lens combination to find its focus.
In my shooting, I have found that certain lenses seem to take longer to find focus quickly and the camera has little do to with it, after all, most pros have been using 35 mm SLR’s long before DSLR’s were introduced and we used one AF point
If you cannot compose good shots, look at this link. After all, photography is all about creating images with a lot of impact, not just taking a lot of snap shots.
http://photoinf.com/General/Robert_Berdan/Composition_and_the_Elements_of_Visual_Design.htm
The best and least expensive way to go, is to learn to use the camera system you have and not jump from one system to another … That strategy can get real expensive, real fast
It is NOT the camera the makes the great photos, but the thing that is just behind it. The eye and mind of the photographer.
Just because you spend $ 35,000 on a master mechanics tool set, it will not make you ready for the NASCAR pits. Education, experience and specific skills are much more important than the tools you own
Answer by AMPhoto
No, for what you want to do they are not, chances are you will end up using the center focus point 90% if the time to focus and then just recompose especially with model shots. AF points come in handy when continuously tracking fast moving subjects such as in sports and wildlife. Even with the 45 AF points of my 1D mark IIN, I use only the center one unless I am shooting moving subjects and tracking them in AI servo mode. For you it wont matter. If you have money for the D300 I would recommend trying to snag a used Canon 5D which would serve your purpose much better its full frame and the bokeh is going to be much nicer and you will have more resolution.
Answer by anthony h
All of these cameras are very fine cameras, with the D300 being the best of the three cameras you list. But for the use you specifically cite–landscapes and female models, all of these cameras will work just fine and give you excellent results.
As for the extra focus points, the important thing here is that you can select the correct focus point and avoid having to “focus, recompose, shoot.” For example, for a female model with the camera in the portrait orientation, selecting a focus point over the model’s eyes would allow you to simply compose the shot and take the photo–no need to adjust the camera after focusing. If you are willing to focus, lock the focus (i.e. by keeping the shutter partially depressed), recompose and then shoot (pressing the release the rest of the way), then the Canon 40D will work just fine. I looked at the viewfinder focus points, and I believe it has sufficient focus points (all with cross-sensors) for your purposes and in good locations.
If you were shooting action though, the D300 would be the obvious choice, with 51 focus points to the 9 points of the 40D. That’s because the D300 has an active 3D focusing system that can actually track a moving object–perfect for action, but not really needed for a landscape or a model (unless that model is running across your frame).
I do think that the D90 has a decent AF system, but it’s not as good as the 40D or D300, particularly for action. The D90 has consumer-level AF performance with only the center sensor as a cross-sensor (ie, sensitive to both horizontal and vertical lines).
So, stick with your Canon 40D. It’s fine for what you want to shoot. No need to get the Nikon D300, because you’d never use the extra focusing points. And the Canon 40D is an excellent camera!
What do you think? Answer below!
Watch in 720p! Canon 60D vs Nikon D90 Video Comparison
Video Rating: 5 / 5
No comments:
Post a Comment