I am relatively new to Nikon cameras. I have a Canon Mark III and 5D as other bodies. I have seen that other readers giving 4 stars based on small or personal preferences. In my opinion, D700's technological advancement over 5D is light years ahead. I don't think most wedding photographers will argue against the 5D's image quality and reliability. But also remember its cost when it was introduced. Nikon definitely done an excellent job with this one. And the price is very reasonable.

This camera's got soul, and so much personalization options that you could spend all day configuring all the buttons and dials to your exact liking. Nikon really went deep on creating that user friendly "give it me when I need it" feature set on the D700, they really have not left one stone unturned. This really is a camera to satisfy the pickiest of the pros.

The sensor -

It's a FX sensor, which means that it has the same recording area as 35mm film which is great news because now I can get the D.O.F. and Lovely Bokeh that I loved so much back in 35mm Film days. HIgh ISO looks great, ISO 6400 on the D700 looks like ISO 1600 on my Fujifilm S5 which was highly regarded as one of the top high ISO performers back in it's day. Bravo Nikon on this crowning achievement. They've also managed to magically reduce most of the chromatic aberration that occur with some lens in certain lighting conditions. This is voodoo, because it means that the D700 makes my 300 dollar lenses look much better than they should. Color response is neutral and I feel like I have great control over the color pallet, shooting in Raw offers you even more control and precision.

The Focus and general speed of operation

Wow!!! everything is fast and instant, it's almost telepathic, always a step ahead of you, seems to read my mind, there is no back focus issues, no front focus issues, nothing between me and perfect focus every time I take a photo.

the Image feedback is instant, image review is snappy and well though out, miles and miles ahead of my fuji S5 which I still own and love. You can zoom in with a no fuss button push and zoom out and access thumbnail previews with the same amount of simplicity.

little things and big things I like and use all the time-

Giant info display on the back LCD. This feature is great for tripod shooters and isolates features and settings as you're setting them on the spot.

Commander mode - Wirelessly control all my flash units from my pop up flash!!!

Focus check - a little green dot and two little triangles to tell you if you're in focus, back focused or front focused, Nice feature!!!

Custom Function buttons - I can assign almost any feature in the camera to the two little buttons to the right of the lens mount for instant access.

Auto ISO - I use this all the time in conjunction with Manual mode, I now have no excuses to miss a shot... ever!!!!


Why did I give it 4 stars instead of 5 you say? Well, I think Nikon could have done a better job with auto White Balancing, and it's sharpness and per-pixel is just a hair behind the Canon 5D ( a 3 year old camera with a 3 year old sensor) But I'm nitpicking here on an otherwise perfect camera, the D700 is light years ahead of the 5d and almost every other DSLR on the market in terms of operation speed, High ISO performance and ergonomics. Plus, it's eliminated every excuse that I have for not producing world class photos, so I can no longer use that as a crutch. I think I'll be keeping mine close to me at all times. Overall, I think it's worth every single penny and then some.

The Nikon D700 is exactly the digital SLR that I envisioned when I first heard that such an animal existed. After over a quarter-century of shooting film and gradually realizing the advantages digital holds for me through using a high-end point-and-shoot as an adjunct to my faithful old Nikon SLR film camera, I eagerly bought a D70s ... and was exceedingly frustrated and disappointed. My familiar old lenses responded differently (the 1.5 "multiplier effect") ... when they responded at all (a "non-CPU" lens could be mounted, but all camera exposure and metering functions were disabled, making the result disadvantageous even compared to a pre-AF film body and lens).

Not any more! Even though the D700 was primarily intended to be used with auto-focusing (AF) lenses, it also functions superbly with my non-CPU (manual focus) lenses, only losing the "shutter priority" and "program" modes (because, of course, the camera can't alter the aperture ... that's my job on any non-CPU lens) ... the D700 can even give me focusing feedback after I enter a manual lens's information into the D700's menu. I once more feel like I have good, quick control over the aspects of photography that create the character of my photographs. No more fumbling with lots of fingers over several sets of buttons to tell the camera the simplest things ... it's back to rotating the focus and aperture rings (or not, if I choose the AF lenses).

And the annoying "multiplier effect" is gone with the D700's full-frame ("FX") sensor. My 50mm lens -- my mainstay -- is now a true 50mm lens again (if you have to ask why that matters, the D700 isn't for you). I personally don't pursue wide-angle photography, but I definitely can see how those who do (and who haven't been able to afford a D3) will be doing cartwheels if they can get their hands on a D700.

The D700's viewfinder is also light years above my D70s, making everything from focusing to composition that much easier and more precise. The D700's whopping big LCD screen is also a big advantage. When in review mode, the display is large ... or, at my choice, the increased data option shrinks the thumbnail to a still-valuable size and places the data around the photo instead of over it like the D70s does.

I'm finding the grip very comfortable, and although the weight is hefty compared to any point-and-shoot, it is a well-balanced camera and that weight doesn't bother me. Being able to shoot in RAW mode is resulting in not only better end-result photos for me, but also (once I get the RAW files on my computer) much more accurate feedback on what I can improve about my technical choices ... and one of digital photography's most significant advantages is that faster feedback. Also of note for those who like working in RAW, unlike the D70, I now have the option to shoot ONLY in RAW mode, not just RAW + JPEG, and that saves valuable memory space.

My only negative comment so far is that Nikon's proprietary software (included with the D700) is necessary to download photos to one's computer. I'll adapt, but it just seems an unnecessary restriction.

Even though it's priced well under the other full frame Nikon, the D3, the D700 certainly does not come cheap. For me, it was the only affordable solution, and well worth every penny. If you spent years shooting film and count a bundle of old Nikon lenses among your close friends, the D700 is going to make you wonder if you'll ever stop grinning!

My first DSLR was the Nikon D50, then I upgraded to the Nikon D80. When the D700 was announced, I was patiently waiting for the yet announced Canon 5D replacement and was waiting to join the Canon side. Then when I saw the specs of the D700, I was floored. But what about image quality??

I've had the camera for a week, and took 3,000 pics, and it is amazing. I paired it up with a 50mm f/1.4 and the results are magical. Colors are vibrant, lowlight is ridiculous good. All around an amazing camera. Light years ahead of the D80 and the 5D. I did a shoot where I was able to compare images between the 5D and the D700, and it's just not even close. Don't know what then next 5D will be like, but the D700 is a winner, and worth every single penny.

This is an amazing camera. I am not going to go over the specs because you can read about them on just about any camera web site. What I am going to concentrate on is who should buy one and why.

First off, I've read about many folks lamenting having bought the D300 and now feel like the need to "upgrade" to a D700. These are two different cameras for two different purposes and as such don't compete against each other so much as complement each other. The D300 doesn't have the low noise capability (The D700 can get clean images at ISO1600 vice ISO400 for the D300) nor does it have the wide angle capabilities of the D700. The D700 doesn't have the 1.5x multiplier of the D300 so wide angle lenses are truly wide. Additionally, while you can use DX lenses on the D700, you will only be using 5 mp of your sensor.

Another comparison is between the D3 and D700. They both have the same sensor so the image and ISO abilities are the same. The D700 comes slower out of the box but with the Nikon EN-EL4a Rechargeable Li-Ion Battery for MB-D10 Battery Pack and Nikon D2 and D3 Digital SLR Cameras, Nikon MB-D10 Multi Power Battery Pack for Nikon D300 & D700 Digital SLR Cameras, Nikon BL-3 Battery Chamber Cover for Nikon EN-EL4 and EN-EL4a for the MB-D10, and Nikon MH-21 Quick Charger for Nikon EN-EL4 and EN-EL4a Rechargeable Li-Ion Batteries (~$500) you will be rocking with 8 fps and great battery life; just barely slower than the D3. Also, I have not found any technical data on the autofocus and processing chip but in my non-scientific side by side comparison the D700 seemed just as fast as the D3 while the D300 appeared noticeably slower. (This was shot with the 85mm 1.4D. This lens does not have Silent Wave Motor focus and therefore relies on the camera's focusing motor.) As I said this is not scientific but I am also guessing that Nikon saved on engineering costs by just transferring the guts of the D3 to the D700 and slowing it down (this is probably the reason the D700 gets such poor battery life (200-300 shots vice 1000 shots) in comparison to the D300).

So without further ado:

Buy the Nikon D700 12.1MP Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) if:

You need to shoot in no flash low light situations. With a 1.4 lens at 1600 ISO you would be amazed at the quality of the photos! If you are not doing close up work of people you can get great shots @ 6400 ISO. If you can stand a grain in B+W(a very cool effect by the way), then you can get good shots @ 25,600!

You want to shoot ultra wide. With no multiplication factor, you can shoot truly wide angle photos. The 14mm is 14mm not 21mm like on a DX camera. Also, although you can get the Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens which will be the equivalent of 18-36mm, it will still have the distortion of a 12-24mm lens. So compared to the FX D700 you would get 14 deg less width with more distortion.

You are willing to spend $4500 more on the lenses. The body is disposable, the lenses are what last. You could get away with a 50mm 1.4 and that would be a fine place to start and a great way to learn how to frame a picture. However, I would recommend the following 3 lenses and I would recommend getting them in the following order. 1) The Nikon 85mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras - $1000 (Super fast, incredibly shallow depth of field, and amazing construction. Get this lens and practice getting good with a fixed length lens! Get this lens over the 85mm 1.8 for the construction and 9 blade design. You will be blown away with how low the light can be and you can still get the shot! (Rumors have it that Nikon is about to replace this lens with a new improved version. I expect the new lens will be better but will likely cost 1.5 to 2x as much.) 2) The Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras - $1700 This is the lens pros use to earn their living. (It has been 5 years since Nikon updated this lens so it is due for a replacement soon but again I am sure it will be more expensive and this lens rocks right now) 3. The Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens - ~$1600. Stupid fast, stupid wide, and stupid great. What more can you ask?

Buy the Nikon D300 DX 12.3MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Nikkor Zoom Lens if:

You want an amazing all around lens. The Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens (27-300mm equivalent) You really never need to take this lens off. You can shoot wide (27mm) and telephoto (300mm) Wow this lens does it all.

You want to shoot long. If you take a D300, the 70-200mm 2.8, and a 1.7x teleconverter you get a 178-510mm F4.8 for $3600!! Or add the 300mm 2.8 and you get a 765mm F4.8 for $6500 ($3000 cheaper and 5 lbs lighter than a 600mm F4 lens). Totally astounding.

You shoot in relatively decent light. Until I got the D700, I routinely shot great portrait shots at home, at night, and with poor lighting using the D300 and the 85mm 1.4 at 1/30s and ISO200-400.

You want to buy and take advantage of DX lenses. Really you only need 2 lenses with the D300. You will want the 18-200mm and the 12-24mm. That will cover everything you need for a grand total of $1500. I would still recommend the Nikon 85mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor Lens. A stupid fast 128mm 1.4 on the D300.

Buy the Nikon D3 12.1MP FX Digital SLR Camera (Body Only) if everything about the D700 fits your shooting requirements and:

You shoot more than 3000 photos per month. The D700's shutter is rated to 150,000 cycles while the D3 is 300,000. Nikon's generational replacement cycle for their flagship camera is 4 years. That means if you shoot ~3000 photos per month you will shoot ~150,000 shots in 4 years and it will be time to replace the camera anyway. If you shoot 10,000 shots per month you will have to replace the camera in 15 months. However, with the D3 you would not have to replace the camera until 30 months.

You earn your living shooting photographs. Memory cards rarely fail but do you want to lose thousands of dollars and your reputation by risking it. Get the D3 and set it to write the images to both cards. Yes, there are other techniques to minimize your exposure to this failure but none are as easy and reliable.

You don't want the option to remove the battery and vertical grip. With the D700 you can add the MB-D10 to make it 98% of the D3. However, if you don't want the weight or need the speed you can remove it and save the space and weight. This is useful for long hiking trips (However, I would recommend a D300 for this unless you were hand shooting in low light).

Even though I've only had my D700 a few weeks it is clearly far and above my privous dSLR cameras and I feel the D700 is well worth the extra money over the D300 I just sold. Highlights are: the big bright viewfinder, having my 50mm lens be a 50mm lens (et cetera) again, the shutter feels and sounds great (solid and smooth). The sensor, of course, is the heart of the camera and the reason this camera is worth big bucks. The image quality over my old D300 is very obvious, especially the amazing high ISO quality. It also seems like the focus works better (mostly more precise), even though I've read it's the same as the D300.

This will make my 4th dSLR in 5 years, and I expect this one to be a keeper for many years. Even after owning the: Fuji S2, Nikon D70s (the worse of the lot), Nikon D200, and the Nikon D300, I never could warm up to the APS-sized sensora. The small viewfinders, the 1.5 magnification factor, and the digital noise have always been a problem for me.

Anyone shooting wide angle shots or needing to use high ISO settings needs this camera.

I've owned it for over a month now and this seems to be the digital SLR I've wanted since I stopped using my old Nikon F. I have owned the D200 and D300, but as expected, this surpasses all. You really need to look through the viewfinder to appreciate the beauty of full frame. It is as if someone turned on the light. And with a fast lens, it is so much brighter than a cropped sensor camera. I added Nikon's magnifying eyepiece and rubber cup - as a result I use autofocus a lot less.
The other aspect that sets this camera apart is its ability to render color. It is hard to articulate, but there is a certain "rightness" to the colors.
There are too many features to discuss, but one that I really have come to appreciate is auto ISO. In low light situations, the full frame sensor is simply masterful at letting you shoot at ISO 3200 when needed.
This camera cries out for good glass. Do not put a cheap lens on this camera! Not only will it expose any fault a lens has, but you will cheat yourself out of the superb results this camera will yield. I splurged for the 24-70 f2.8, and it is a marvelous lens, very sharp and contrasty, albeit large, somewhat ostentatious and heavy. I am getting some unwanted "that's a big camera" comments. It is not a kit for times when discretion is needed. If you want the ultimate portrait camera, this paired with the 85mm f1.4 or 1.8 would be it. Great job Nikon!

The title says it all - fantastic camera, awful lens. I give the D700 5 stars with no reservations, but the 24-120 lens is a shame for Nikon and should have never even be allowed into production. The lens is designed to be unsharp and have significant distortions and no amount of stopping down can improve the situation. The only positive thing I can say about it is that the tonal reproduction is great,
I returned this combo and bought D700 body only.

I have taken photographs for more than 30 years and have used a D3 for the past 8 months after using a D2hs for several years.

I had the opportunity to use a D700 today. A friend had purchased this camera and I was helping her get acquainted with its functions.

I must say, I was VERY disappointed. Its playback function is inferior when reviewing shots, and its overall ease of use just doesn't compare to the D3. Now, I agree it shouldn't be as good as the D3, its a 1500 or 1600 $s cheaper than the D3, but for $3000, I expected more of a professional model; It isn't. I could give a couple thousand words and introduce issue after issue that I have with this camera, but what for?

Let me just say, don't buy the D700 thinking you are getting a professional type of camera, you aren't. Don't get the D700 thinking you are getting anything but what you are getting: a VERY cheap, inferior version of the D3.

I'll let others proclaim this cameras greatness, but for me. . .its junk.

Sorry

I purchased the Nikon D700 about three weeks ago now and it is an awesome camera. My previous frame of reference is my four year old Canon 20D and the D700 beats the Canon on every front. The added dynamic range of the Nikon's full-frame sensor means most photos are well exposed - including the sky and shadows. Often only minor adjustments are required post camera (I use Lightroom 2). I've also found that the autofocus on the Nikon D700 is light years ahead of the Canon. Focusing is not a problem. Then there is the low light performance of the Nikon D700. Wow! Indoor photography without flash is now possible. I purchased my D700 in a kit with Nikon's 24-120 mm zoom lense with vibration reduction. The vibration reduction combined with the ability to shoot at higher ISO settings means photos of moving subjects can be shot at higher shutter speeds - resulting in less blur. Overall, I am very satisfied with the D700.

I'm upgrading from a D200. By comparison, the low light capability is outstanding and the image quality is even better. Highly recommended. I didn't sell my first born for the D700 but it would be arguably worth it. :)

Page 59 of my D700 manual asserts that whenever a DX lens is attached, auto crop is turned-on; the FX image area of (36x24mm) drops down to a DX (24x16mm). This is an area ratio of 0.44. So, with a DX lens attached, I now only have a 0.44 x 12.1 megapixels = 5.38 megapixels camera?! Am I better off with a D300 or should I sell all my DX lenses, hmmn? I can't wait until all this transitional technology shakes itself out.

This is a wonderful camera. With quick startup, solid focusing, excellent exposure control. The fast speed allows the "existing light" photography so enjoyed the fast film camera days. While the D700 has controls for everything conceivable it is easier to select these features than it is with lesser Nikons. If you feel your digital photos are important then consider the quality the D700 offers.

I've been a semi-pro digital user for five years. I started wtih a Fuji S2, moved up to the Nikon D2H (horrible reliability, expensive), D2Hs, D200, D300 and finally the D700.

With every camera prior to the D700 there were compromises and Nikon was always two years behind Canon. Finally, when the D3 came out, they were in the lead again, but the price was too much for my semi-pro use to justify. So I struggled along with a pair of D300s for another eight months. The D300 is an excellent camera, however, it has some serious flaws: It overexposes and is particularly hot on the red channel. It's higher ISO performance is mediocre and really kills detail. And it's DX.

I bought a D700 for $2950 and, predictably, the price fell $200 a few days after that. But I needed it for an assignment that would involve shooting in a dimly light garage.

The camera worked perfectly, although once again, I am seeing overexposure in some scenes. The auto WB is much improved over the D300. The dynamic range is much improved, as well. And the AF seems faster.

This camera has me going back to prime lenses. The DOF is much shallower and the bokeh much nicer with my 85mm and 50mm lenses on the D700. Eventually, I want to be all primes on the long end. My 300 f/4 gives wonderful results on this body. The 70-200 is a mixed bag. I'm just not happy with the look of the images. They are not as sharp as they are on the D300 (I kept one). Weird. I'm still testing.

I love everthing about the D700 except it's tendency to overexpose and the fact Canon's competitor has video and more MP. Video really should have been on this camera; after all, the D90 at 1/3 the price has it. Nikon dropped the ball by not including it on the D700. Two months after being introduced, the D700 is already a somewhat obsolete camera, thanks to Canon's offering of more mp and video.

All that said, as a Nikon user I'm glad to finally have 5D image quality in a full-frame Nikon, even though it comes at a premium. I feel the current combo of the D300/D700 will last me for several years, and will eventually result in a transition to almost all prime lenses, if Nikon ever gets its act together and offers some worthy wide angle primes to match with this body. Meantime I find the 35 f/2, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.4, 105 micro, 180 f/2.8 and 300 f/4 to be excellent matches for this body. The Beast 28-70 f/2.8 is also a good performer on this body, as is the 14-24 f/2.8. The 70-200 f/2.8 is questionable.

Be sure to get the grip for best balance and extended battery life. I find the D700 has better battery performance than the D300. Also if you do portraits, get a portrait Expo Disc and download the portrait custom setting for your camera. The results are very nice.

numerous reviews have been written already about this classic....if you can't afford a d3, get this one instead. if you can't afford d700 get the d300.

The camera has exceeded my expectations, due to work requirements I have not been able to use it as much as I want to. Also expected to take a trip, but that has been put on hold due to a medical issue. Anticipate being able to use the camera like I expected to shortly after 1 Jan 09. So far I love the camera.

Please allow me to add my voice to the already considerable chorus of praise that this camera has received. I have been using Nikon cameras since the days of film, and have owned the D100, D70, D200 and D300. I jumped at the chance to get the D700 for two main reasons: 1), the FX sensor took away the sometimes annoying multiplication factor for focal length, and 2) the wide acclaim this camera has received for operating with very low noise at high ISOs. The FX sensor has breathed new life into my considerable investment in Nikon glass over the years, and the low noise at high ISOs is nothing short of astonishing. I really don't like to shoot with flash (and I have tried everything from built-in flashes to various SB-800s set up with the Nikon CLS system), but with this camera I have been able to shoot indoors at night with low ambient light up to 6400 ISO and produced results that put my previous Nikon DSLRs to shame, with the exception of the D300 which was reasonably good in low light, but had the DX sensor/multiplication issue. Now a 50mm 1.4 lens really IS a 50mm 1.4 lens! Of course, it's not just the sensor and the FX format, it's also about your investment in glass! Nikon Professional Lenses turn this thing into a truly professional, beautiful tool. I have managed some amazing shots with my 50mm 1.4. Even at ISOs higher than 6400, using custom profiles that I post-processed with Noise Ninja software, I have managed to achieve clean, clear shots with very little chromatic noise in the shadows. It has to be seen to be believed. At one point I considered abandoning the Nikon platform in favor of the Canon 5D after having a chance to play around with one that a friend had, and I was especially intrigued by the 5D Mark II. Of course, that would have meant abandoning my investment in Nikon glass, but I was intrigued by the results my friend was getting, and also the higher pixel count. However, there are numerous discussions on the Web and elsewhere about the value of pixel count, and the 12mpx D700 generates super high quality images that withstand considerable enlargement, perhaps due to the favorable pixel density ratio. The controls are very similar to the D300, though it feels a little heavier and sturdier. It does have a somewhat disappointing CF flash flip-open door - the only 'cheap' detail on an otherwise premium body. The rear LCD is much brighter than the D300, and the new viewfinder is bright, clear and a joy to use. I love the virtual horizon feature which displays on the rear LCD. Just as a side note: I am a creative director, and I shoot semi-professionally for some of the projects I get involved in. I was responsible for the Adobe CS1 and CS2 creative suite and individual product packaging, and some of the flowers that appear in the Adobe Illustrator CS1 packaging were shot by me with my D100, what seems like an eternity ago... So I have had to shoot a lot of different subjects in widely variable conditions, and I have no doubt that my new D700 will handle whatever I throw at it! Now that FX sensor sizes appear to be within the grasp of what I would call 'affordable' DSLRs, there is a distinct possibility that the DX format (and maybe DX lenses) may not have such a long life span. This is worth considering as camera bodies are certainly an investment, but your investment in lenses is where the real money is, and in the long run may favor non-DX formats. Hope this is helpful!

Amazon's customer service is far superior to any of the other camera dealers. I had a problem with the first D700 and they replaced it without question. I would recommend anyone wanting to buy products from Amazon and their deliveries are excellent. Most of the other dealers charge delivery and often you can get free delivery from Amazon. I don't buy anywhere else.
thank you Amazon
Michael

Having done a lot of research on this camera and reading all of the positive reviews I knew I would be getting a quality piece of equipment. This camera has been reviewed to death so there is really nothing new I can add just to say the only thing that gave me pause was the price tag. Let me assure you that this camera exceeded every expectation I had and is worth every cent I paid for it.

There is a reason this camera has single handedly converted more Canon shooters than any other. The D700 will add a whole other level to your digital photography. Just do it, you won't be sorry.

If you already have Nikon lenses and want a full-frame DSLR, but you aren't ready to drop almost $5k on a D3, then this is the camera for you. I have been using a D200, which now becomes my reserve, and the transition to the D700 was seamless. It feels the same except that it has a fuller viewfinder and a much nicer LCD. The results so far are indistinguishable, but only because I have not had access to a printer that can do these images justice. There is no physical reason why I did not give the D700 five stars--only its price. You need to think hard as to whether it is worth the premium over the D300 or even the still-available 200. Since every single lens I own is full-frame, it was to me. Now the images from the 10 MM end of the range on my Sigma short zoom will be REALLY wide-angle. And kudos to Nikon for maintaining their backward compatibility with their really old glass. There is hardly a lens that Nikon has made that can't be at least optically functional on this camera.

Best camera I have ever owned, and I have owned many. 12 MP is plenty, and you get absolutely oustanding pictures with great resolution. When teamed up with fast, high quality FX lenses, pro results are possible. The attached flash is almost unnecessary, since with the high ISOs you can just about take pictures in the dark.

Pros:

Lots of controls, allowing you to change settings with the press of a button or the flip of a switch.

Has a built-in flash, which can be useful sometimes.

No megapixel race noise. The D700 tops the DxOmark results in IQ, behind only the D3 (80.5 vs 80.6, but I wonder if that's rounding error :)

Probably the best DSLR for low-light shooting.

It's a great camera as many have said, except for these minor nits:

The directional pad is too "plasticy". It would feel more solid and it would be easier to navigate menus and such, if it were made of metal.

The built-in-flash is almost useless for continuous shooting without the battery grip -- too slow to recharge. Even the Canon xxD series are able to shoot continuously with their built-in-flash, up to a point. I have a SB-900 but sometimes I'd like to be able to use the built-in flash for spur-of-the moment things.

There is a small amount of image reflection in the bottom of the viewfinder (looking down directly at the eyepiece). You can learn to ignore it, and it can be reduced with lens hoods.

The kit lens is not worth it, as people have said. I'd go with the 24-70 f/2.8 lens for starters, instead of the 24-120.

The viewfinder is only 95% coverage. For composing at 100% coverage, such as in wide-angle shots, you must use live mode.

If you don't mind the larger size and weight, you might want to save up for a D3, for faster continuous shooting and 100% viewfinder coverage. But if you're like me and don't want that size, then the D700 has plenty of features and quality, at an affordable price. It's the perfect camera for low-light indoor shooting.

I previously owned a D300 and I have to say that the D700 is an incredible piece of technology. In short this is my first full frame and I am truly amazed at what this camera can do with my 50mm f/1.4. Even at relatively high ISO the picture quality is astonishing, I don't even need the flash anymore in low light! Great job Nikon.

I went from a D80 shooting weekends for fun. It was a great camera to learn with but when you need to move into something that you can count on, the D700 is it. Doing editorial stock and portraits, you need a versatile camera for a variety of shooting locations. The overall control and parameters to be ale to set within the camera provides great control over your shot. If you find you're shooting a couple of different situations repeatedly, you can make the changes on the camera and save the settings as s starting point for the next time around. A huge time saver.

Hands down, this is a great camera at a fair price. In regards to a few comments about it not having video... This is a still camera. If you need video, buy a video camera.

I just sold my D90 that I had for six weeks for the D700 and bought the nicer lenses. I do like the D700 more. It is easier to operate, feels more substantial in your hand, more professional and is a full frame sensor in a D300 body and smaller than the D3. I would like to say there is a huge difference in the pictures between the Nikon D90 and the Nikon D700. The difference is there BUT NOT as great as I thought it might be. I am still glad I bought the Nikon D700 knowing I now have one of the best full frame digital cameras out there. This camera is excellent in low light for taking bright, clear, detailed pictures. This is one place it will excel over the D90 and many others plus the lenses are now the same as a 35mm would look which seems much brighter through the viewfinder as opposed to the cropped sensor camera. If you have the D90 and are considering changing to the D700 I can't recommend that one way or the other. I would do it again just knowing now I can focus on becoming a better photographer and not worrying if I have the best gear I can get short of a medium format camera. A few cons for the D700 would be the loudness of the shutter or the mirror when taking pictures. My D700 is louder than the D90 was and the feel of the shutter release is not as solid. But everything else considered the D700 seems better. The D700 is a very nice camera and I can recommend it as one of the best full frame DSLR cameras on the market today. It is very fast focusing, at start up and taking pictures. Plus the ability to personalize the settings and different buttons for different functions is also very handy and makes it easier to use the camera. Along with knowing some of the best lenses are also offered from Nikon for this camera makes it an even easier choice.

"Wohohoho!" <-- that was what I "said" when I saw the first shots taken with the D700. Maybe this expansive reaction does not describe exactly the differences in image quality nor does say much about handling and ergonomics, however it says that I was QUITE surprised coming after almost one year of using an already wonderful dSLR that I enjoyed a lot.
What I will try to do is to put down some differences between these two cameras and pinpoint some considerations you might be interested in if you want to jump full-frame. Keep in mind that although astonished by differences in image quality, I haven't taken this step yet and the reasons will be explained a little bit later.

The Image - noise, color, accuracy and some more
When talking about Nikon full-frame cameras (D3/x and D700 - for the moment...) what probably comes first to one's mind is high ISO low noise capability. The improvement in this area is so dramatic that this alone might be a reason to go FX. Endless debates about EV differences in noise levels may continue for ages and, probably, no definitive objective answer will be written down. The point is that shooting at ISO 6400 is a must if you want to truly understand what high ISO low noise really means. True, a relatively lower resolution, 12mp sensor helps achieving such results, but the key here is not only the noise is less obvious or less chroma or... whatever, is the fact that, combined with the dramatic dynamic rendition in image of this camera, D700 allows you to do things that were not possible with D300 (or other DX camera) without a drastic reduction in detail and smudging shadows with impossible noise. For example - and that is the best argument I can raise - I am a big fan of underexposure as creative tool in photography. With the D300 I had to pay attention of exposing correctly at high ISO - maybe to overexpose a bit - then to bring down exposure in Capture NX2 if I wanted to achieve a 1/ creatively underexposed image with 2/ inapparent noise in shadows and 3/ preserved details, all these at ISO higher than 1000. To my surprise, D700 is much more forgiving with drastic (>1EV) underexposure in what relates to noise levels and lack of suppression of details. The image is clearer and more detailed that a corresponding DX one, underexposed with the same amount. The direct consequence of this is less time in post-processing (which I am not a very big fan of) and more keepers for your portfolio. Oh, and by the way, talking about Capture NX2, don't believe all those that complain about it. At least on my 4GB 2.4 iMac works flawlessly and, up to this moment, is the best RAW convertor for NEFs in my opinion.
Back to noise, you might be interested to find out that ISO 6400 is a new, virgin territory to be explored with the D700 and this opens you the world of almost noise-free still photography at candlelight (exposure at 1ft/ 30cm from a small candle is 1/60 sec at F/1.4 at ISO 6400). Of course, you can push the limits and go further if you have a less expensive lens (mark that I avoided the term "non-pro lens") using a good de-noising software in post-processing. Coming to that, I tried Noise Ninja, Imagenomics Noiseware and some other software but, whenever I need to artificially remove noise, I always get back to Nik Software Dfine 2.0 which is a superb plugin for Photoshop. In my opinion, it does the best compromise in noise removal vs. detail preservation. Get the trial version and make some tests, you will understand my point.
One more thing about high ISO: usually performance at these levels come at a price: sacrifice in detail rendition and errors in color accuracy. If the first was covered some lines above, I just want to say some words about color at high ISO.
Contrary to some beliefs, color accuracy depends not only on the gear but most important to the quality of light. One has to work with a balanced spectrum to achieve good color rendition and maybe this is the reason that difficult colors (e.g. skin color, colors in shaded areas etc) should have high quality light sources to be put in their real value in a photograph.
Strangely enough, the best artificial light source that comes immediately after the natural sun (with a bit of energy "taming"), is the cheap incandescent lightbulb (see color spectra vs energy for incandescent bulbs, lowell lamps and xenon lamps compared to CFL and laboratory reference lamps). Thus, even at low light energy, D700 behaves wonderful and on PRE white balance setting color accuracy is excellent and quite identical over the entire range of ISOs up to 6400. This is even better under natural light, color gamut is well preserved with a slight reduction in shades of deep red and blues (sky gradients may become slightly masked at high ISO levels. Overall, colors are exquisite and beautiful and extremely natural as long as you shoot under balanced light or, at least, under balanced gradients of light. Keep in mind that the worst white balance scenario is, always, auto white balance and fluorescent which, due to the inherent limitations of color distribution within fluorescent spectra, photos tend to have unpleasant hues.
What is different, too, from D300 is the noise absence at low ISO levels, maybe more important than the same behavior at high ISO.

Optics and cost of transition
The conclusions of the discussion above will provide you a huge latitude of creativity. You will not feel "limited" anymore even using lower quality optics. However, if you own a lineup of consumer-grade optics, some deteriorations in the outcome will be evident. The problem is that with a higher pixel pitch and full frame, all, but ABSOLUTELY all flaws of your lenses will show up in capitals. D700 comes with a kit lens that serves better as body cap than optics on such a camera. Get rid of that AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF QUICKLY, otherwise you might feel the urge to send your D700 to Nikon for a checkout. Not even the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras will be spared, some vignetting will be obvious under certain shooting conditions (clear sky that covers half of image, large areas of light and uniform color etc). The latest additions from Nikon optics, the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens and the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens are both good match for this camera and also some of the older lenses, especially the Nikon 85mm f/1.4D AF , the 35mm f/2 AIS and the 105 AIS versions of the lenses (which render a creamy, "de-focus"-like of images). Unfortunately, the rest of the pro grade lenses from Nikon are out of reach of the majority of us, but one can try and feel impressed by the older 80-200 or a fixed 300 f/4 that are to some match of this superb but unforgiving camera.
This may create a budget problem and it is the main reason I haven't upgraded to a D700 yet (although my fingers burn...). If you just make a quick cash flow analysis, the investment for getting a FF "pro-grade" image with a D700 will hang heavy on your income, and includes the body and, MANDATORY, a pro-grade lens. And I will strongly suggest to go for the 24-70 f/2.8 nano coating AF-S something, which is the best walkaround zoom you might get for this camera. I have sold my 17-55 (a superb lens, but DX) and got the 24-70 just to be prepared for the next year upgrade to the FX format and decrease the financial shock one might feel with such a heavy investment in both a body and a pro lens.
Another optical issue is that going only FX with the D700 means that you have to say goodbye to any Sigma 10-20mm, or Nikon 12-24mm, or Tokina AT-XAF124DXN 12-24mm or whatever cropped format wide (or extrawide) zoom unless you want to cripple resolution to 5 mp and work in the DX mode (selectable in the D700 settings menus). The only option for FF is the new 14-24 f/2.8 Nikkor. Folks, this lens is incredible. It performs so well that even Canonites are prospecting getting them with adaptors on their pro bodies. But- and I hate to say that - it has some MAJOR functionality flaws that are extremely non pragmatic: different from - for example - the 16-35 Canon L, the 14-24 cannot take filters on the front. Bye bye polarizing filters and protection of the bulky rounded glass that protrudes like a fisheye. And going wide and pro, now, will cost you almost another 2 grands (even more in Europe). Nikon thought it well, and it gives you no choice: wanna the best wide and worldwide performance on a 24x36 FF ? Empty your plastic. It is simple as that.
The conclusion is that upgrading to D700, although fascinating from image quality point of view, latitude of photographic creativity and performance will cripple your financial health. Of course, this holds true if you don't opt for a tammy or another cheap glass for your D700, which case might prove that you are... strange.

Body, controls, ergonomics
Who owns a D300 will immediately notice two annoying things: disappearance of the CF compartment lever and a smaller (=shorter) top LCD panel. The prism block is not so evident at first look, though obvious when putting both cameras side by side.
The CF card compartment has a D80/D40/D60 way of access, by sliding it open. This compromises the weatherproofing of the entire camera and if you are curious if I'm right, just try using it under rain. I've used my D300, I don't have the guts to do the same with the D700. One might argue that the popup flash (present on both D700 and D300) is also a weak link and I agree, however, having a sliding lid for CF compartment is a downgrade in my opinion and the most ZZZZ thing (replace with the metaphor of your choice) somebody could do with with such a camera. A minus 10 stars for that alone.
The dimensions of the top LCD might or not be an issue. However, more important is the cropping of the viewfinder to 95% coverage from the 100% of the D300/D3. Some say "because of the popup flash". Probably. Popup flashes have junk efficiency anyway, so why to cripple view in the viewfinder for this reason - it beats me. Moreover, try using the popup flash with a longer lens - nice effects you get !
So, Nikon, no excuse for the CF compartment lid and the viewfinder coverage which IS very important for composition.
The distance between the grip and the lens is slightly smaller than on D300. For me - it is a good thing since I have better reach for the function buttons on the right side of the lens, but I suppose this may be an issue for those with thicker fingers.
The multifunction wheel is more protrusive and the center selection button is something very useful. This IS an improvement over D300 when pushing the center of the multifunction wheel may accidentally activate other switches of the wheel. This was quite annoying especially when writing comments or labels for functions and settings.
Aside from these, the rest is identical with the D300. Ah, oh, I forgot: the unlocking lever for the CF compartments from D300 has been replaced with an "info" button which reminds me of the never-dying "print" button on the Canon bodies. Useless for such a camera. However, this may be debated. I leave it to you. I prefer to have better sealing.

Versus D3
It is arguable if spending almost double will bring you something of such a tremendous value that will worth the money. I don't think so, at least for the serious amateurs and maybe some of the pros also. However, D3 is quite different from fps point of view and some other "minor" differences (two CF cards, locking lever for CF compartment, no popup flash = better sealing etc) which might compel some of you to spend even more.

Conclusion
Man, but I wrote a lot ! The idea behind all this is that D700 IS THE ultimate a serious amateur may wish for now. Together with D3 has the best high ISO noise and color performance, excellent low ISO noise (= absence, different from D300 which is somewhat noisy on solid colors), FANTASTIC color accuracy for normal shooting conditions (ISO 100-800), incredible focus accuracy, cool feeling when handheld and, coupled with latest Nikkors - superb optics, sharpness, color balance and a very artistic (but realistic) look of the images. However, this comes at a price, you need expensive optics to match the body performance. The choice is yours. I made mine: I'll gonna wait for a while and make a smooth transition from the superb D300 DX to completely new (and certainly better) photographic horizons.

I hope this review will help you.

Happy holidays

12/21/2008

My purchase of the D700 met my expectations: Low light performance is very good, it works with AI and AIS manual lenses as well as AF lenses, and it is very well built though on the lite side (which is good) because of the materials used to make it.

And, when you make the comparison with alternatives from Canon, Sony, Nikon (the D3 which is also FX format), the D700 is a good choice in terms of specifications and price. In addition, Nikon stands behind their products, especially when you consider that they have maintained the same lens mount size since the 1950's: A very professional approach.

The REVIEW? by Felix Gumby "Quirrell" was written, according to him, after one day with the camera. I sold my D2Xs on E-bay and bought a D700. It is by far the best camera I have owned. As to how it compares to the D3, yes the D3 has a couple of features the D700 does not, but it has the same sensor and that's what counts. The only negative to the D700 is if you use DX crop mode forget it. Composing a picture in a sports event will trip you up. The masking function on the D3 works, the square box on the D700 does not. I am waiting on a 21MP Nikon with low light as good as the D700/D3, but the D3X is not it. As in indoor sports photographer, who does really low light the D700/D3 does it. Either one works for me. The D700 has some added functions and is newer technology. The Active-D lighting and sensor cleaning to name two. Felix's review is unfair and inaccurate. One day with a camera is a bias review. I did not like the button changes to the D700 from the D2Xs, but I am very happy with the missing noise.

No one should give any attention to Felix Gumby "Quirrell".

If anyone at Nikon reads this review just a quick idea. I am thinking of buying the Canon 5D MKII - it has the specs, except the slow frame rate, the D3X should of had. The D3X should have been no more than $5,500.00 on intro. I am now waiting for the D4/D400/D800?. The Canon 5d MKII is my next camera, will need an adapter for all my glass, including my old Canon glass too. Anybody know if Canon is changing the mount again?

This camera is absolutely the best! It's heavier than the D40 and also a bit heavier than the D200. However, its ergonomics make up for its weight. It makes super sharp images, even in low light. It you're into available light, this is the camera you want. I set it on ISO-Auto with a maximum ISO of 6400. I shot all day and night on Christmas day without a flash indoors. I used only a Nikon 28-200 lens which I bought used (they don't make them anymore). The results couldn't have been better. When you snap the shutter, the sound is very distinct, much like on my F5. It feels like a very high quality piece of machinery in my hands, just like my Leica M and R systems. If you can afford it and don't mind the weight, you can't possibly go wrong with this camera..

As a longtime F100 and D100 user, I've been holding my breath, on the edge of buying a new DSLR for years. I was so used to shooting with my F100 film camera and collection of Nikon lenses that I was somewhat disappointed when I first bought the D100: Performance, speed and of course the loss of lens range. However, I was pretty pleased with the image quality under most conditions. The full frame pro models were a bit too much of an investment for me then.
I got a chance to use both the D200 and D300 and although quite impressed, I still held off buying either even after the price drops for 2 main reasons: Still wasn't full frame and not made in Japan. Yes, I'm one of those who have a thing about stuff made in Japan and for good reason: Far less issues, if any, with equipment manufactured in Japan than elsewhere. Like all my Nikon equipment, film and digital, still going strong with the exception of my 18-200DX lens which I had to exchange due to AF issues (and made in Thailand, I might add.) Don't get me wrong, I think Nikon holds the highest of standards regardless of where their factory is located, but the "longevity / reliability" factor increases at their factory in Japan for some reason. (This comes from years of personal experience) I got to the point I was ready to buy a used D2xs.

Anyway, when I first got to test drive a D700 a huge sigh of relief came out! FINALLY, a new Nikon that met my needs and wants for under 3 grand. Almost everything about it was perfect for me: Full frame, made in Japan, performance, speed, size, lightweight yet beefy construction. I was ready to buy but due to personal circumstances I had to hold off. Boy was I lucky. The price dropped more than 600 bucks by the end of the year! Thanks Santa!
I've had it a couple of weeks now and am very impressed with its performance. I'm most happy about the fact that I can fully use all my D type lenses and the camera's buffer keeps up with my trigger finger. I am also very impressed with the quality at high ISO settings. I have been given a huge amount of freedom not having to always rely on a flash in low light or long zoom ranges without always having to worry about the "noise".

Just a few of minor gripes, which led me to give it 4 out of 5 stars:
The color and contrast quality seems a bit "soft" compared to identical shots taken with my D100 using same lens and settings. (I prefer the "richer" contrast) I suspect this has to do with the fact that the D100 (and D200) used a CCD sensor chip and all other current cameras use a CMOS chip. Still, the image quality is fantastic and nothing that can't be tweaked in camera preferences or post processing.
Another gripe is that my current flash (SB-80DX) won't work in DTTL mode with the D700. Although it works ok in regular Auto mode, the exposures are a touch off when shooting portraits compared to identical shots paired with the D100 and I have to make flash exposure compensations for perfect skin tones. I know my flash is a couple of generations behind, but I figured Nikon would make it recognize the flash and give the option to be compatible to the limit of that flash's generation. Oh well, gotta move forward. Bottom line is, I have to invest in another 3-400 bucks for an equivalent paired flash.
Only other small gripe is the rubber flap for the connections is not tight and comes off too easily. The pull lip is along the back edge of the camera and catches on my hand easily. (I put a piece of black gaffers tape over it.) Though the rest of the camera is designed and built tight and solid.

All in all, I am extremely happy with the D700! It is so worth the price. (I paid a little over 2 grand as of 12/08)

I was debating if it was worthwhile to drop the dough to get the D700 despitte the same megapixel count, which didn't seem to compete with Canon's 5D Mark II. I have no regrets! The D700 out performs the D300 in low light (less noise), color rendition, and most importantly you get a full-frame sensor. 50mm is really 50mm, not 75. That was the achilles heel of the D300 in my eyes.
My three issues with the D700 are (and I can live with all of them):
1) It's RAW (NEF) files cannot be read by Lightroom 1.2, (you need version 2) Photoshop CS3 (you need CS4). This is my biggest beef. You would think that the most widely used software in photography would make an effort to honor the most popular new Nikon camera. I personally have no interest in paying for all the software upgrades quite yet. Adobe needs to get with the program!
2) The viewfinder doesn't quite present 100%. I think it's 95% of your actual frame so you wind up doing a little more cropping than expected.
3) Nikon should have designed this with a higher megapixel count. I know, I know, megapixels aren't everything especially when the pixel interpolation is as nice as the D700/D3's sensors but it would be nice to get a few more inches worth of enlargement (sorry to be Freudian).

Not much I can say about this beauty that hasn't been said here. Shooting at 6400 ISO is great. There is a feature on the camera that sets the highest ISO to shoot at before changing the shutter speed that is essential if you are shooting an event and are moving from light to dark areas. I abuse this feature. The CF card cover has only accidentally slid out once for me. No biggy. Get a good f/2.8 lens and shoot away. I tweak my photos in Lightroom 2. Get this camera and stop making excuses to why your images are not great because you won't have any besides your own abilities.

One word...awesome! If you are thinking of purchasing this camera, then do it. You will not regret it.

I managed to hold out until now on buying a DSLR but once I saw the specs and read the reviews of the D700 I knew I had to have it. So far it's been about a month and it's everything I hoped it would be. The controls are very well laid out, ergonomic, and intuitive. The camera body feels very sturdy, if a little heavy. It works great with my old non AI manual focus Nikkor wide angle as well as my zoom and new 50mm portrait lens. A few minor quibbles: the Live View function seems utterly worthless but hey, you don't have to use it. I am also a little concerned with the quality of the door that covers the CF slot, it pops open fairly easily and I hope it won't wear out soon. Also the lock mechanism for the door for the battery slot seems like it might wear out. Time will tell.

I couldn't be more happy with the purchase of Nikon D700 Digital SLR camera. It replaced my 3-year old and retiring Nikon D200, which I have put well over 100,000 images through (and it's still going strong.)

I'm an actual photographer, not a camera-aholic who buys camera equipment and lenses as "collection". So a camera that "feels right in my hand" is very important to assist my creative productivity flow.

The camera have a very solid construction, it is said to use a thicker magnesium body than the D300 and D200, and is very water-resistant (one reviewer used the camera for 4+ hours in the rain with absolutely no problem).

For the first time, I have absolutely no worry about setting my ISO at 6400 and know for a fact the images will come out far superior than that would produce on my old D200 with iso of just 640, sharpness and resolution wise. The High ISO performance is astonishing on D700, thanks to Nikon's full frame 12mp sensor (the exact same sensor that's been used in Nikon's top of the line D3). The sensor's default setting produces neutral, film like results, with the ability to fully customize color/contrast/sharpness.

The ability to produce 14bit raw files would put some of the most critical photographer on the ease, knowing that they will not compromise on the shadow and highlight details while shooting in 14bit raw. However, in my field test the difference is impossible to distinguish with human eye, it can only be detected with the aid of a histogram.

I love the cameras ability to customize at least 3 different function keys for various tasks (the DOF button, Function button and AE/AF-Lock button). The ability to use the en-el4a battery with the MB-D10 grip is a huge plus (although the grip, adapter, the battery itself and the charger for battery costs well over $500 dollars), it enables the ability to shoot well over 2,000 images on a single battery charge, and amazing 8.1fps frame rate (16 raws continues shooting, or unlimited jpgs)

The LCD screen is truely a joy to stare at, it offers 3x more pixels than the old 320x240pixel screen. With 178 degree viewing angle, and anti-glare coating all help ensure accurate color rendition. (mine comes with 1 stuck pixel however that's not noticeable unless screen is displaying complete black)

If you've used Nikon's DSLR before, you'll be at home with D700's menu system, very intuitive with a help function which explains every setting on the fly. Some really useful features include: Self sensor cleaning, Mirror lockup, Multiple exposure, Intravelmeter, Visual horizon and much much more.

Nikon's Speedlight flash system is the best in the industry, and Canon's offerings are all far behind. This camera's build-in flash can remotely control SB-900/800/600 flashes to be fired at distance. Nikon's i-TTL metering is spot on every time during most normal shooting situations.

Some little detail that I really appreciate is the build in rubber caps for the accessory socket and the pc flash sync socket, now I would never have to worry about losing those little caps anymore.

Rival Canon 5D Mark II have the pixel count advantage and the ability to record videos, which would attract a lot of photographers who's also doing motion film works, or landscape photographers who want the absolute highest resolution at lowest iso settings, downside of the 5d mk ii is the increased noise pass iso 1600, lower frame rate, cheaper build, and lower quality lens offerings. Oh wait, did I mention about the ultra tiny buttons that's impossible to press when wearing gloves during winter time?

I would highly recommend Nikon D700 for it's serious high iso performance and incredible usability.

D700 is superb fast tiny bit less than D3 but whole lot better than D300.
I used to nuts with D200's noise, but D700 is almost perfect camera for me.
compare to 5DMarkII other than 21MP and Video feature, D700 is faster, more durable, and cheaper.
I would recommend D700!

Excellent camera.. if you read the specs carefully it is nothing but a D3 in a smaller body and for $2000 less..D3 has a slightly better viewfinder and slightly faster.. with MB-D10 even you can reach upto 8 fps with D700.

Since I ran out all of my budget I could not afford another expensive lens. So went with 50mm f1.8 lens.. It's a great combination..
If you can shell out another 150 [..] then go for 50mm f1.4 lens.

I am now enjoying this camera and the lens and the pictures are amazing.

The D700 is as capable as a quality Nikon F4 or similar SLR product. Image quality is excellent, accessing features of consequence to a photographer is intuitive. I have used the camera for scenic, still life and portrait photography. Lighting has been daylight, mixed source, low level available light and studio flash. The camera provides lots of photographic latitude, offsets and adjustments are predictable. Digital control genuinely provides all of the looks typically determined by film type and speed. Battery service between charges is long.

Auto focus is fast and accurate, auto exposure is the same and manual operation offers precise control over aperture and shutter speed while maintaining auto focus function with manual setting as an alternative. Metering, even with fancier names, offers scene averaging, center weighted and spot capability. Focus emphasis is approximately the same.

Within a few days, as an experienced SLR user with a little computer lingo knowledge, I was taking pictures that were better than any I ever took with 35mm film. Then I spent the next month working my way through all of the menus and submenus until I realize that much of it has no place in the routine of photography.

The D700 worked to the capabilities of all of my F4 legacy autofocus lenses, flash units and, of course, the full capabilities of newer CPU lenses. Radio signal remote flash triggering systems work just fine in manual mode.

Negatives -

I don't care for the Nikon editing software or the editing functions that are built into the camera. They are not intuitive and they don't offer a lot of user control over images. There are far better stand alone editing programs.

I think Nikon camera bodies and lenses have gotten a little cheesy for the price they command. Large rubber access doors, flimsy plastic access panels and lenses with way too many plastic parts have replaced some really nice looking machinery of Nikons past. But then, so have virtually all consumer electronic products. Functionally, the camera is excellent and provides all of the features and functions a 35mm photographer could use.

With many very positive reviews already written there is not a lot to add. I have a D300 and was very pleased with it but the high iso capability of the D700 intriuged me. Having used the camera some, the high iso capability is extraordinary - I took a black & white shot at ISO 25,000 that actually looked pretty good (looked like B&W film pushed). DX lenses are usable but not the first choice with this camera. I will continue to use my D300 for long telephotos in most cases. However, if light is an issue - I will always use the D700 even with telephoto shots.
Not too many negatives with this camera at all. If I had to pick one it would be the lack of a 100% view finder (the D300 sploiled me there)-- but it is a minor flaw. Great camera and I feel like I made an excellent decisionn to purchase it.

D700's 51-point AF unit has some serious technical limitations for FX format CMOS sensor simply because only center 15 out of 51 are cross sensors. If you shoot portrait in vertical, D700 is quite likely to struggle with AF. I am returning mine because of this serious issue for me. If you need to read more, here is one pointer. http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00RWJC

I recently purchased the Nikon D700 and couldn't be more pleased. The two things I looked forward to the most in the camera were the benefits of the full-frame sensor and the low noise. I find myself shooting at 800 and above a lot of the time and have to remind myself to crank it back down when using a tripod. The low noise is superb. With the full-frame sensor I can now get the shots I should from my 17-35 f/2.8. It's nice to get back into the world of true wide-angle.

I received the camera in the original box, good condition with all the accessories. The camera work very good, I haven't try all the functions yet but all the general functions worked very best. I like it, it best fit with my lenses 70-200 VR f2.8 & 85mm f1.4 & 17-35mm f2.8 and it's worth for the money spent too.

First things first: I had waited for a camera like this to go digital. Of course, as part of my transition and as a way to cope with the learning curve, I decided to look at this camera as if it were some type of cross between the Nikon F100 and the F5. It does have the heft of the latter, and the ease of use of the former. The complexity of the menus was intimidating at first, but a couple of evenings with the manual, camera in hand, took care of most of my questions. Now, I simply take photographs with my film lenses and the behemoth I purchased to accompany this camera: the AF-S 24-70 f2.8.

Even for a newbie in the digital world, this camera is fairly uncomplicated; since the layout resembles so much that of the F100, the photographic part of the workflow was a joy. However, things get complicated in the digital end: 1. Do I have to shoot RAW, JPEGs, both? 2. What to do with RAW files? 3. How to download them to the computer? 4. Which type of cards works well with the camera? 5. Do I need Nikon software absolutely?

Answers found:
1. Not necessarily; the best compromise is to shoot RAW and JPEGs at the same time, but it may create storage crisis.
2. One can treat RAW files as digital negatives and that helps in case one screws up a JPEG.
3 Either from the camera or with a card reader, the choice is personal. I've done both, and found I like the card reader better because it won't use camera juice.
4. Best: Sandisk Extreme III or Lexar Pro, with a transfer speed of at least 80 MB/sec.
5. No, unless one wants to replicate some of the in-camera editing.

And this brings me to something else: the D-Lighting magic wand! I simply love this feature, but I don't use it while shooting, as it creates an unnecessary amount of noise. However, together with the color rendition, I like D-Lighting a lot. I dislike the fact that not all AF sensors were created equal (some in the periphery are not cross-sensitive), but then, it's relatively easy to work around this problem. In short, for those going digital from an extensive film background, it's an excellent camera body, and it will remain unparallelled for a long time. Who needs more megapixels when the camera is so well-crafted?

Did I mention that it fell on the floor on my third day of ownership? Granted, it fell of a chair because I pulled the strap with my foot. Nothing happened. Also, I took it on a walk in the frigid winter of IL, and the camera worked as well as any of my other weather-resistant Nikon bodies.

One recommendation: do not use the Nikon strap. It hurts! From experience carrying heavy cameras, get a slightly elastic strap, as the camera can be very heavy, esp. when combined with the 24-70 or the 80-200.

You can read specs until your head is spinning. Look at the image quality. The D700 produces incredible files, and that's what matters.

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R20YJ4WTXIPCX4 I have owned the D700 for four months now and I would highly recommend it for the many features inherent on this camera. Nikon is known as a pro-grade camera company and it truly shows in the usage of this camera. Whereas other camera's have you fumbling through menu's to get at settings. The Nikon D700 has most right on the top or back as a Hot key. You can change the ISO, Image Quality, Mode, White Balance, Aperture, Shutter, Bracketing, Flash, Speed of the Continuance Shooting, Mirror Lock, Live View, Image Review and timer to name a few items without looking at the menu feature (these are all hot keys). Because of this I feel this is a very easy camera to step up to. I am very happy I purchased this camera and I am sure if you try it you will also. I have posted some images for your review. Thanks and enjoy!!

The D700 is an excellent camera, especially in low light situations. I have taken landscapes by moonlight with this camera at ISO 6400 and almost no noise.

The 24-120mm kit lens however is not so good. Severe vignetting at the 120mm end, and also loss of sharpness in the corners at all focal lengths. Having said that, Amazon was selling the kit for less than a lot of other retailers were charging for the camera body.

I am using some older Nikon glass which was produced mainly for film cameras . Works great with the D700 being a full frame sensor. These lenses give excellent results.

I have given 5 stars because the camera is worth it, pity about the lens.

This is not a review of the D700 but some suggestions for those with just as much brains as money. For this group the Nikon D700 has got to be a favorite.

Full Frame is worth so very much. If you've gotten this far in your considerations I do not have to go further. No half breed or best fit this is a full fledged Nikon.

Since you are looking at the 'Body Only' version, I have to also surmise that you to see no need to waste money with a special low end Nikon lens.

Through Amazon I purchased the D700, a Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens and the MB-D10 power pack. Also I should suggest that you consider the MB-D10 configuration that allows for easily recharged 'AA' batteries. For the batteries, I went for the eight pack of Sanyo Eneloop batteries. Eneloops are very nice.

My configuration tells you know what kind of photography I'm interested in and I guess, what type of person I am.

Everything arrived the same day and within a half hour I was out running the D700 through it's paces. After a few minutes I was taking bracket shots that feed my interest in HDR processing via Photoshop. So cool, enter the settings and in a little more than a second fire off 3 full frame bracketed exposures!

I could have afforded the D3 but chose Nikon's entry for 'The Thinking Persons Nikon.

i wonder where Nikon D700 sold by Amazon where made and/or assembled.
thanks.

I took delivery of this camera and a new 70-200 f/2.8, and combined, they are unstoppable. While I've never been unhappy with my D200, I needed a camera that performed better in low light situations, and this camera has not failed to provide the "wow" factor every time. I recently did a wedding photoshoot in very dimly lit conditions, and my backup photographer used the D200 with a 1.4 lens while I used the D700 with a 2.8 - the difference in the photos in phenomenal. The colors are rich and warm and have so much less noise than the D200. It's a difference that you absolutely have to see to believe.

I had originally been a little apprehensive about a full-frame camera, seeing as my main photography comes from photographing horses, and a little longer reach on a lens can sometimes be necessary, but I have found I don't miss my DX sensor at all. When I switch from the D700 back to a crop body, I even feel "cramped" now because of the zoom. And if you should ever find that you miss DX (I doubt you will), you can replicate a DX sensor in camera on the D700. Very useful.

I had read all the reviews on this product before buying, as I'm sure you have too. I had really high expectations for it, but even still, it shattered all of my expectations and set the bar that much higher. It is just that good a product.

I already owned a D 300, and was very happy with it, but I knew I would not be happy until I got a full-frame. The big advantage to having both is that I can go from extremelty wide angle to extreme telephoto with the same set of lenses.

I expected the D700 to be better than the D300, but not much better. However, when I started to shoot with it, I was blown away with the difference. In fact, I haven't picked up the D300 since getting it. Actually, even with the further telephoto reach I can get with the D300, I think I'm better off shooting with the D700 and cropping more.

I shoot consistently at 3200, and what I get isn't just acceptable, it's just fine. In fact, 6400 or even higher will surprise you, no matter what you're expecting. I can't believe what I could do hand holding with only a single candle as a light source. This camera changes the way you think about flash forever.

Now, I have to wonder about the 24 mp D3X. Would it blow me away just as much? Maybe the ideal pair of cameras aren't the D300 and the D700, but rather the D700 (for low light) and the D3X (for unbelievable resolution). Or,maybe all three bodies are even better. . .

This one lives up to all the hype. I came out of a D200, and difference in image quality is immediately obvious. Of course, the move to FX comes with the ability to shoot with Nikon's pro lenses again, and the combo of the two gets you back to the kinds of images you remember from your film days. So ... the improvement is part camera, part lens upgrade ... but the results are just fantastic. Now I can use the same lenses for my D700 and my F4 body (backup) which makes packing my backpack a whole lot simpler.

For those of you moving up from the D200, the control layout of the D700 is very similar, so there's little learning curve regarding handling. If you are a tripod shooter like me, you'll love the ability to display the camera's settings on the rear display. I haven't found much of a use for live view yet, but I'm still playing with it. You'll find an excellent D700 settings guide out on Ken Rockwell's site.

If you are thinking about this camera, just buy it ... I've not regretted the extra investment for one second.

I was holding out for the 5d mk2 with the kit lens and didn't really consider the d700 until it became evident that it was going to take a very long time and that I wasn't going to get a discount any time soon....

I was already not a 100% sure with the 5d because of it's plastic body, the low 3.9 frame rate and the fact that they have a fairly high number of issues per 'capita'. I was convinced though that the megapixels were important enough that I didn't really have any other choices in that price range.

I started researching the Nikon after I needed to find a "2nd" choice for my camera purchase.
I realized that I was going to get a better deal on the Nikon, have a weatherproof body and be up to 8fps for sports photography. All this for the cost of approximately half the megapixels.
I made the choice and purchased the camera and have been acquiring lenses to go with the camera.

Despite only having 12.3mp, I was very surprised with the quality of the images. I recently did a camera workshop and there was a person there with the 5d mk2 and after looking at the images of the same subject, under the same lighting, I liked the Nikon's images better.

I am not a pro, just an amature, but to my eyes, the images looked better.

So, to sum up, here are some features that I found where the D700 had the upper hand over the Canon 5D MK2:
1. Superior build
2. Better autofocus
3. Better white balance controls
4. Higher frame rate
5. More natural looking images
6. Much better in camera software/ image editing
7. Built in wireless control
8. Better lens inter-changeability (F-mount since the 50's)
9. Built in flash...I almost forgot about that....

Some of the pros on the Canon side:
1. Considerably higher megapixel count
2. Higher image sharpness
3. Built in HD vid
4. Better pricing for lenses on 2nd hand market

Those are my opinions of the Nikon and they are based on my interpretation of what I consider to be a good image quality. My opinions may not coincide with other people's opinions, and that's ok. I am very happy with my purchase and would highly recommend this to a friend or a family member.

i have switched from Canon EOS 5D to Nikon D700 and got 50mm 1.4 and 24-70 f/2.G this camera is amazing image quality are excellent build quality is very nice and contrast and colors are better than 5D.

OK, Amazon asked me (by email) to review this camera so I'm going to bite. First of all, I must say that I am a long-time Nikon user. I currently own two film bodies(N90S and F100) and one DSLR (D200). I've used primarily the D200 for the past 3 years. Before that, I collected a lot of "film" Nikkors as well as my film bodies, so that was one reason I wanted to go FX. So I'm not a troll or have any axe to grind with Nikon. Generally their products have performed very well for me and when (rarely) I have needed their customer service, it has been good. I love the F100 and if I had time, I think I would still shoot film with it. But this review is about the D700 and unfortunately, the D700 is on its way back to Amazon for a refund. There was a really bad spot on the sensor (many pixels were affected) that was visible on any image shot at ISO 400 or above. This "red spot" was even visible on jpegs on the normal size that opened with NX2 - no magnification. The main reason I am writing this review is to let prospective buyers know you should thoroughly check out your new camera ASAP after receiving it. Thanks Amazon for you great return policy! This was a BIG investment for me. I have seen images from the D700 and they are really gorgeous but now I wonder how good Nikon's QA/QC is. I'm undecided if I'm going to try another sample as this has created work and anxiety that I don't need. I may stick with my D200 for awhile, as it still works great an produces nice images. I have no idea what the probability of getting a defective Nikon may be, but I sure would like to know the odds. I'm pretty sure that if I would not have been able to return the camera that Nikon would have made some sort of fix under warranty, but that would have been even more hassle and anxiety. Hence the title of this review. Good luck and I hope you get a good sample. I'm sure this would have been five stars if I had gotten a D700 with a good sensor.

I just received the Nikon D700 in the mail. I have ONLY one concern. My computer came with the Windows Vista 64 bit operating system. Will the software that came with my D700 camera (Nikon Software Suite and Capture NX2) load and work properly on my Vista 64 bit system? All I knew about the software before I bought the camera was that it is compatible with Windows Vista. When I got the camera in the mail, the box said Windows Vista 32-bit. What do I do? I am really stuck in the corner on this. I have tried the camera and love the way it works, feels and looks. But I have yet to transfer photos to my computer untill I get the above question resolved. HELP!

I've had this camera for about two months now. Initially, when I first ordered the camera, I was concerned that there might be problems using the software that comes with the camera on a Vista 64 bit OS. It works fine!! I've been a photographer for almost 40 years.

The camera is a pro photographer's dream! I routinely shoot at ISO 1600 when indoors. I'm totally amazed at the lack of "video noise" (akin to grain in film photography) I get with shooting at ISO 1600 and above. Even the old Tri-X (a black and white film) cannot compare, when using standard processing times at ISO 400 to what I get with this camera at 1600!!

One word of caution. Do not expect to get pro quality images with consumer quality lenses!! I ordered the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 lens with nano crystal technology the same time I ordered the D700. The combination is a match made in heaven! So much less flare and so much more fine detail when compared to the 24-70 lens I had been using. Yes, I am very happy with this camera!