The Nikon D700: From My Cold Dead Hands

By Christopher Lane

I acquired Nikon's new D700 on the day it was released. That day I made over 100 images with the camera under various lighting conditions. Frankly, I had a hard time putting it down. As of this writing, I have been living with the D700 about two months, and according to my image counter have made about 5,000 images. I think the D700 is a nearly flawless camera and here's why.

Ergonomics
I've used DSLRs from Pentax, Nikon and Canon. In addition, I've tried out a lot of others, including Olympus. In my hands, Nikons have the best combination of ergonomics of any manufacturer's cameras, and the D700 is no exception. The D700 retains the D300/200 arrangement of WB/QUAL/ISO buttons.  Although the D3's layout may be preferable to a pro, this works much better for me. The OFF/ON switch is on the top of the camera surrounding the shutter button, where it should be. I also like the instant access to shooting modes and exposure compensation afforded by the D700's buttons and wheels. The diopter adjustment is the easiest I've ever used. The back of the camera is sculpted to fit my hands perfectly. All in all a real joy to use.

Features
The D700 shares some features with its larger sibling and adds some new ones. First, of course, is the big, bright viewfinder. Although the coverage is a bit less than the D3 (95% vs. 100%), that is a very small bone to pick. I also appreciate the extended dynamic range afforded by Active-D Lighting and the flexibility of Picture Control which allows you to custom design settings. For example, I have created one that mimics Tri-X. 

In addition to all the D3's goodies, the D700 adds a couple of things I really missed on the D3.

• Grid display: I use a grid display whenever possible to assist me in composition. While this feature can be set via a menu on the D300, it was missing on the D3. I am overjoyed to have it back. 
• Sensor cleaning: These days when sensor cleaning systems are ubiquitous, I was pretty surprised that the $5,000 D3 was lacking one. Fortunately, Nikon remedied this on the D700.

Autofocus
Like the D3, the D700 has a very complex autofocus system. On the back of the camera the user must select one of three settings:

• Auto-area AF (The camera uses all focus areas and automatically selects the correct focus points.)
• Dynamic-area AF (The user manually selects one of the fifty-one focus points, however the camera uses information from multiple focus areas to determine focus. You can choose between 9 points, 21 points, 51 points or 51 points with 3D tracking.)
• Single-area AF (The user manually selects one of the fifty-one focus areas.)

On the front of the camera the user must also select one of three settings:

• Single servo AF (AF-S) ( The camera focuses when the shutter release button is half pressed and locks.)
• Continuous servo AF (AF-C) (The camera will focus continuously while the shutter release button.)
• Manual Focus

Getting the right combination with so many options can be quite tricky. The fact there are four different point settings adds to the confusion. I am still experimenting to get my preferred settings. I can report that I do not use the single-area mode.

 

Image quality
Another thing the D700 has in common with the D3 is its 12.1 megapixel sensor and Expeed image processing system. The result is that the D700 delivers superior image quality equal to the D3's. White balance and color rendition are the same, if not improved a bit.

High ISOs
I continue to be amazed at the images that come out of this DSLR. I have shot as high as ISO 25,500 and while an image taken at that setting would not be publishable as artwork, it could certainly be used for photojournalism with the use of some noise reduction software. Images at less than ISO 6400 are very clean as you can see below.

ISO 900

ISO 3200    

The Bad News
Like the D300 and D3, the D700 is no compact lightweight. Even mounted with the relatively compact Nikkor 50mm ƒ/1.4, the camera weighs nearly 3 pounds without battery. It is quite large and does not fit nicely in a small case for transport. I carried it around the Minnesota State Fair for three hours and I was pretty darn tired.

The D700 also suffers from something that every Nikon does. Nikon's fast primes (24/35/50/85) have not been updated since the mid-1990s. That means they lack AF-S and a lot of other improvements in lens design. As of this writing Nikon has announced a new 50mm ƒ/1.4 prime that will ship in December. What will happen with the remainder of the line remains to be seen.

The bottom line
Even after two months, I think Nikon's new D700 DSLR is the most perfect camera that I have ever held in my hands, and I've held a lot of them. In terms of features, ergonomics, build quality, image quality, and gestalt, I can find no fault with it. It is a state-of-the art-imaging tool that for me continues to be well worth its price tag.

______________________

Chris

Featured Comment by Aaron Spence: "I must agree with Chris; the D700 is a stunning camera.

"Not since my high school days with the good old Nikon F-801's (N8008) from the late '80s with their high eyepoint viewfinders & great ergonomics have I been so happy with a camera.

"I primarily shoot georeferenced high rez panoramic virtual tours, but I also do stills for display homes and tourism.

"Up until recently I shot the architectural work on the Kodak SLR/n fullframe 14MP Nikon-bodied camera.  A real dog I know, but capable of good results if used very slow & kindly.

"I've wanted to move to a D200/D300 etc. for still shooting for a long while, but there is no lens capable of the results the Nikon 17–35mm ƒ/2.8 achieves.  I'd looked at the 12–24 Nikon among others, but to no avail.  I wasn't about to spring for a D3 to shoot something I don't do a lot of, so I'd given up and resigned myself to the Kodak.  Then Nikon pulled the D700 out of nowhere.

"The D700 has revolutionised my shooting, allowing me to shoot lifestyle/selective focus stuff by hand at up to 1600 ISO and still have more DR & quality than the SLR/n had at 160.

"In fact my first commercial use of the camera I shot 500 hand held images in 100 minutes in 5 display homes, not intending to use the images for anything other than testing and record shots to come back and do the 'proper' photos. Once I got the images into lightroom though...I soon realised they were good images, not just demo shots. I decided to show the 'demo' images to the client. They were overjoyed...so I already had the 'proper' shots. Saved me a huge amount of time right there.

"As someone who's owned a Nikon FE, Nikon F-801's (N8008), D1x, Kodak SLR/n, D200, D300 + a number of other SLRs & compacts both film & digital I finally feel like I have the perfect camera.

"I'm also shooting panoramic virtual tours with the D700 + Nikon 16mm fisheye...the perfect combo for amazing quality panoramic work."

Featured Comment by Eric Ford: "I agree with Chris, too. The purchase price of the D700 was very painful for me. Oh, I could afford it, but it seemed outrageously high: how could I explain it to any sane friend or family member? The more I shoot with it, the more that initial price tag seems unimportant. The camera effortlessly smokes any other camera I've used, in every way from operability to image quality. The weight is irritating for sure, and the lens lineup is sorely lacking on the wide-normal end. But on the body/sensor end, I finally feel that I have Arrived. My previous DSLRs always felt like stopgaps on the way to the right camera—this one does not."

Comments

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Well, I certainly HOPE I like mine that much. It arrived Wednesday, and due to things like working with a friend to repair the upstairs furnace before it gets cold, and work, I haven't done anything vaguely serious with mine yet. This weekend will be busy!

It's messed up my lens lineup a lot to go back to FX, which I wasn't expecting to do ever (let alone this soon). But the low-light performance got me.

[Martin Doonan]

I'd like to add a couple of counter-points, not to knock Chris' experience in any way.

Ergonomics I think are a personal thing. Personally I find a power button by the shutter release a distraction, adjuster wheels on the front of the camera fiddly and in particular the location of Nikon shutter releases uncomfortable. Partly that's experience but every time I've put a Nikon in my hands I've hated the control locations. As I say, a personal thing.

Point 2: getting results immediately from modern cameras. I've recently bought a couple of cameras. One, Canon 40D, I've not done any real shooting with in 2 months. Reason: I found on even a few test shots that there are so many settings that affect image quality and/or judgement of exposure that I actually need to spend time testing it to feel comfortable getting results. It's a curse of digital cameras - in camera settings are like choosing film, except you've got to test a whole new set of stock with each new camera.

[Iain Dawson]

"I have shot as high as ISO 25,500 and while an image taken at that setting would not be publishable as artwork,..."

That depends on your definition of artwork. Personally I don't subscribe to the view that excessive grain or noise disqualifies a picture from consideration as 'art'.

[John Beardsworth]

The one thing I don't like is that Nikon insist on placing the focus mode switch tucked in under the lens. It may be consistent with every other Nikon SLR, but it's consistently awkward. Otherwise, love it.

[photogdave]

"I have created one that mimics Tri-X."
Oh boy. Another emulation or simulation of Tri-X in digital. I wish everyone who did this would just USE Tri-X already! Support Kodak so the real thing will continue to be available to the rest of us!

[Daniel Sroka]

I primarily shoot macro, and I have been pleasantly stunned by the photographs I have gotten out of the D700.

When I first received the camera, I took some photos without turning any of my lights on -- just using the dim ambient light of my studio. I was just getting comfortable with the controls, and expected to toss the images immediately. To my surprise, the results were excellent: the color spot on and the noise nearly non-existant.

And the LiveView mode has saved back! Instead of crouching to peer through the viewfinder, I can now sit comfortable behind my camera. I have found that LiveView is useful enough to let me focus with great precision.

After years of working with the Kodak SLR/n (the VW Van of cameras - it'll get you there, if you can deal with an oil leak or two), I am quite pleased with the overall usability of the D700.

[Chuck Holst]

Choices, choices. There are times I wish I had put off the purchase of my D300 and waited for the D700, but who knew? Besides, one thing the D300 does (as does the D700, for that matter) that my old D70 didn't do is to meter through my old AI-S prime lenses. Another benefit of not having waited: I'm in the market for a new printer, and the difference in price between the D300 and the D700 is about what an Epson 3800 costs.

By the way, I highly recommend the South Pier Inn, which is at the right end of the Duluth Lift Bridge, just behind the fireworks burst. Rooms on the canal side are equipped with binoculars for watching the ships go by.

[John Camp]

I don't have the D700, but I have the D3 and the D300, and Thom Hogan describes the 700 as a kind of merger of the two...and I can't decide which of the two I like better. They're both terrific, and since they give you different fields of view with the same lenses, they make a great combo. I've often thought that Canons are a kind of everyman's pro camera -- good in every way, but sort of homogenized, too. Nikon people tend to like Nikon specifically, not so much for any definable image qualities, but because they simply fit so well, both physically and psychologically. And some people don't like them at all, as we've seen here, and so go to Canon or some other brand. (Leica and Olympus also seem to have fans who buy for fit, while others disdain them.) This matter of image quality is one of the reasons I dissed the new Sony a few weeks back -- I suspect the sweet spot for resolution, dynamic range and noise control (essentially, ISO) for full-frame DSLRs, with current and foreseeable technology, is somewhere between the Canon's 21mp and the D3's 12mp, and the Sony's 24mp was purely a PR decision ("We've got the most.") It's hard to imagine that ultimate image quality could be much better than the D3's, but fans of the 1DsIII and the new 5DII say their cameras are better, and maybe they are. We'll see, I guess. What a great time this is for cameras.

JC

[Harry Lime]

"For example, I have created one that mimics Tri-X."

This gentlemen figured out how to get 12 stops out of a camera that delivers about 8.5? ;-)

I also have a D700. Brilliant camera. Very much the digital equivalent of a F100.

Full frame, ultra low noise at high ASA, weather-sealed, manual focus lens support, fast and relatively compact.

Amazing piece of gear. If it really did deliver 12 stops, instead of the 8.5 it actually does, I would have a good excuse to stop shooting film (just kidding).

So, for the moment I pretend it's loaded with Kodachrome, with a stop of headroom.

[Andreas]

My first thought was also that art should not be equalled with absence of noise, i.e. clean look.

Also the review is very biased to jpeg shooters, concerning controls and image processor.

And saying that the EXPEED image warp drive engine provides "superior image quality" - honestly - sounds like a marketing phrase.

[jk]

What is art? As far as I am concerned it is as irrelevent as discussing and pondering what I ate for supper last night when pertaining to this article.

[Christopher Lane]

My thanks to Mike for publishing this article. I have written a response to some of the commentators as well as an update based on a solid week of shooting with the D700. You can read it at http://writtenbythelight.blogspot.com/2008/10/back-on-line.html.

Chris

[font9a]

Is it fair to compare TRI-x film to the resolution of a 14-bit NEF from a D700/D3?

From Thom Hogan: he expects about a 9 stop range, where the "best" film gets about 11 stops. I believe he goes on to say that other reviewers increase these ranges to 11 and 13, respectively.

Whatever.... that's a lot of technical gerrymandering to be sure.

I've shot reels of TRI-x in my day and unless you are dedicated in the darkroom with your own process you're losing 2-3 stops + a lot of risk of user error. Leave it up to a lab and you're the fool to blame.

At least with NEFs you aren't backed into the cul-de-sac of processing.

Meanwhile, if you're shooting TRI-x-- how much DR are you expecting to get from a general buearue's printer? I'm guessing the Epson 3800 gives you maybe 9 stops. 10 if you are really anal and Gretagging the entire process.

I'm not trying to criticize. I'm simply trying to put things in perspective: are 11 stops really an improvement over 9 in real-world conditions? I'm not entirely convinced they are.

Best, f9a

[NightVisionCindy]

Its critical to know what your needs are prior to shopping so many selections. I found its best to write down what are we looking for then when your shopping you know immediately what make and model fits your criteria.