no DX? Surely its not just me struggling to move on?
Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:43 PM
Posted 18 October 2012 - 02:57 PM
I don't think its a question of no suitable options but what UW set up suits you best. The market seems to have something for everyone now. We might be in that rare time that it really doesn't matter which way you go. Whatever you pick (m4/3, Mirrorless APSC, APSC SLR/DX, or FF) will still supported well into your estimated upgrade horizon (3-5yrs on average?). Its more what you feel comfortable with and suits your needs.
Personally I moved to the nex system b/c I needed something lighter to travel with. If this wasn't such an issue and I wasn't missing out on photo ops/dives, I would have been more than happy to stay with the D7000.
just some thoughts...
Posted 18 October 2012 - 02:59 PM
Posted 19 October 2012 - 01:04 AM
Posted 19 October 2012 - 06:17 AM
Posted 19 October 2012 - 07:41 AM
Edited by John Bantin, 19 October 2012 - 07:41 AM.
Posted 19 October 2012 - 08:59 AM
Posted 19 October 2012 - 01:35 PM
I think you will find the differences in most cameras today to be underwhelming, particularly as it relates to basic image quality particularly for web and moderate size prints. I guess that is why I posed my original question. As much as the D700 is a great camera for example, you will not see any major differences form a D90 and definitely not a D7000 (even if it is 2 years old). Even low light capabilities of the D700 and D7000 are not that far off each other. You will trade the use of your 10-17 for example by going to full frame. Really not trying to detract from John's offer, but if the age of the system is an issue the D7000 is a lot newer than the D700. So I guess that's why I make the point that you should make a list of specific attributes that you want from a system before taking the leap, either to full frame, or another system altogether.
Hi Loftus, I don't want to buy a 2 year old camera. I'm after a new one. When I bought the D7000 2 years ago I wasn't really impressed with the differences to my D90. But I loved the Nauticam so much. I tried to sell my AD90 set up at the time but couldn't so sold the d7000 on as I still had the AD90 at the time. Hi John I've been seriously thinking about it just for UK use but just can't afford 2 at the minute. You've got no ports either have you with it?
Edited by loftus, 19 October 2012 - 01:41 PM.
Posted 20 October 2012 - 06:33 AM
For the sort of pictures I do, the D700 is perfectly adequate. Take a look at the couple of DPS on Tubbataha in this month's Diver Mag. In fact, I am tempted to sell the D800 outfit! You're right. I am keeping the ports either way. If you are interested, I will sell the D700/hugyfot for a blindingly good price. £2100.
Edited by John Bantin, 20 October 2012 - 06:35 AM.
Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:15 AM
Posted 20 October 2012 - 12:41 PM
The D7000 is a lot better than the D90, especially at high ISO/low light. It also has reasonable video performance and better AF! I actually think part of Nikon's problem is improving on it and still staying with the limits of current DX technology.
I have not used the D700 so can't comment, although the D700 would still require the investment in glass that you are unwilling to make.
The mirrorless cameras I have used so far, although very good, do not compare with an SLR underwater.
Posted 22 October 2012 - 08:48 AM
No the 10-17mm will not work well on the D700 as it is a DX lens. You would need either the Sigma 15mm or Nikon 16mm.
Both the 60 and 105 will work fine.