Now that the Nikon D800 is officially out, I am sure many photographers will be interested in seeing feature differences between the now obsolete Nikon D700 and the new D800. Please keep in mind that this Nikon D800 vs D700 comparison is purely based on specifications. A detailed comparison with image samples and ISO comparisons is already provided in my Nikon D800 Review.
Before the D4, Nikon had two flagship DSLRs for different photography needs – the Nikon D3s for low-light and the Nikon D3x for high resolution. The lower-end D700 camera had the same sensor as the original D3 and was never updated with the D3s sensor, because Nikon did not want it to eat up the D3s sales. Looks like starting from the D800, Nikon is now reversing the game, offering a high-resolution sensor on a lower-end body and keeping the single digit line for low-light work exclusively. By doing this, Nikon is following Canon’s strategy. The Canon 5D Mark II with its high-resolution sensor has been eating up the Canon 1Ds line for a while now and those expensive 1Ds bodies are not selling as well ever since the 5D Mark II came out. The same is true with the Nikon D3x – while it is quite popular among landscape, architecture and fashion photographers, it is just not selling well overall. The Nikon D700 sells better than the D3s and D3x combined. By introducing a lower-end high-resolution professional body like the D800, Nikon will most likely do away from its high-end “x” line, which would be a smart move on behalf of Nikon – keeping the D3x production line is expensive. At the same time, those of us that shoot sports, wildlife and various events that require good low-light capabilities and cannot afford spending $6K on the D4 will be left with only one choice of a high-resolution full-frame camera (unless Nikon releases a new product for low-light photography, which I doubt will happen anytime soon). I believe Nikon’s thought process is like this: Canon is selling their 5D Mark II as an all-in-one solution quite well, why not do the same? After-all, many wedding photographers do use the high resolution 5D Mark II and do not seem to be complaining much about its high resolution.
Will the Nikon D800 be a good wedding photography camera? Absolutely. Expect it to perform better at all ISOs when the image is down-scaled to 12 MP. And to those that are scared of down-scaling an image: don’t be – the process is pretty straightforward and it is built right into Lightroom’s export window, as shown in my “how to resize images in Lightroom” article.
And for all Nikon landscape photographers out there – this is the camera we have been waiting for. Finally, we have a high resolution camera that will deliver outstanding images with great dynamic range at base ISO of 100. And best of all, compared to medium format and other expensive cameras out there, it won’t cost us an arm and a leg!
Nikon D800 vs D700 Specification Comparison
Camera Feature | Nikon D800 | Nikon D700 |
---|---|---|
Sensor Resolution | 36.3 Million | 12.1 Million |
Sensor Type | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Size | 35.9x24mm | 36.0×23.9mm |
Sensor Pixel Size | 4.8µ | 8.45µ |
Dust Reduction / Sensor Cleaning | Yes | Yes |
Image Size | 7,360 x 4,912 | 4,256 x 2,832 |
Image Processor | EXPEED 3 | EXPEED |
Viewfinder Type | Pentaprism | Pentaprism |
Viewfinder Coverage | 100% | 95% |
Built-in Flash | Yes, with flash commander mode | Yes, with flash commander mode |
Storage Media | 1x Compact Flash and 1x SD | 1x Compact Flash |
Continuous Shooting Speed | 4 FPS, 6 FPS in DX mode with MB-D12 battery grip | 5 FPS, 8 FPS with MB-D10 battery grip |
Max Shutter Speed | 1/8000 to 30 sec | 1/8000 to 30 sec |
Shutter Durability | 200,000 cycles | 150,000 cycles |
Exposure Metering Sensor | 91,000-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering III | 1,005-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II |
Base ISO | ISO 100 | ISO 200 |
Native ISO Sensitivity | ISO 100-6,400 | ISO 200-6,400 |
Boosted ISO Sensitivity | ISO 50, ISO 12,800-25,600 | ISO 100, ISO 12,800-25,600 |
Autofocus System | Advanced Multi-CAM 3500FX | Multi-CAM 3500FX |
AF Detection | Up to f/8 | Up to f/5.6 |
Camera Lag | 0.012 seconds | 0.012 seconds |
Video Capability | Yes | No |
Video Output | MOV, Compressed and Uncompressed | N/A |
Video Maximum Record Time | 20 min in 24p, 30 min in 30p | N/A |
Video Maximum Resolution | 1920×1080 (1080p) @ 24p, 30p | N/A |
Audio Recording | Built-in microphone External stereo microphone (optional) | N/A |
LCD Size | 3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD | 3.0″ diagonal TFT-LCD |
LCD Resolution | 921,000 dots | 921,000 dots |
HDR Support | Yes | No |
Built-in GPS | No | No |
Wi-Fi Functionality | Eye-Fi Compatible, WT-4A | Eye-Fi Compatible, WT-4A |
Battery | EN-EL15 Lithium-ion Battery | EN-EL3e Lithium-ion Battery |
Battery Life | 850 shots (CIPA) | 1,000 shots (CIPA) |
Battery Charger | MH-25 Quick Charger | MH-18a Quick Charger |
Weather Sealed Body | Yes | Yes |
USB Version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
Weight (Body Only) | 31.7 oz. (900g) | 35 oz. (995g) |
Dimensions | 144.78 x 121.92 x 81.28mm | 147 x 123 x 77mm |
MSRP Price | $2,999 (as introduced) | $2,999 (as introduced, dropped to $2,699.95) |
Now here comes the big question – does a high resolution sensor mean bad low-light capabilities? If you look at a picture at 100%, then yes, a high resolution sensor always translates to more noise at higher ISOs. However, when the image is down-sampled to smaller resolution, those differences are significantly reduced. For example, when you look at a 12 MP image at ISO 3200 at 100% and then look at a 36 MP image at the same ISO at 100%, you will surely see more noise on the latter image. However, if you down-sample the 36 MP image to 12 MP, then the 36 MP image is actually going to come out cleaner than the 12 MP image. In addition, if you had a slight focus issue on both, the 36 MP image would look sharper when down-sampled to 12 MP. What I am trying to say here, is that you should not be scared of a high resolution D800, thinking that it will be in any way inferior to your beloved D700. I will provide an in-depth analysis between the D700 and the upcoming D800 when I have it on my hands, but I can say with confidence now that the D800 will give better results than the D700 when its image is down-sampled to 12 MP. Overall, we should be getting around a full stop of advantage noise-wise with the D800 compared to the D700. Think of it this way – you will be able to get superb 36 MP images in daylight and you have the option to down-sample images to lower resolution in low-light.
Videographers should be super excited about the D800, because they can record uncompressed videos at 1080p full HD for 30 minutes straight, with full exposure control. The uncompressed video is a big deal, because it can give production-quality results for film-makers that can now record videos to external devices. There is even a dedicated live view mode for recording videos that gives quick access to exposure control, including white balance. The Nikon D700 has no capability to record videos, so that’s a huge difference there.
I am personally very excited about the Nikon D800, definitely more than the D4.
Hi,
This is what i found on Flickr
It sounds like compression artifacts in the export and that your monitor has lower DR than the source image. If you are not seeing it as easily when viewing 100%, but the banding shows up when the image is compressed, then it’s almost certainly an output interpretation issue — most monitors have far less DR capacity than most modern sensors.
One way to confirm is to output to a printer with a very wide gamut and hi DR capacity. The problem will almost always be less on quality print than it will be on a monitor. I paid a pretty penny for a wide gamut monitor that would prevent this sort of artifact from showing up while viewing — and even it cannot do 14.4EV of DR (it seems to run out of gas around 12.5EV). Conversion to JPG will crush things of course, as it closes the channels down to 8-bit.
Hopefully this is true, otherwise the dx mode is better for landscapes and blue…
regards
To whom it may concern,
I have just recently acquired the Nikon D800 and noticed that there is an uneven gradation on my computer screen with blue skies when shot in FX mode with varying Nikkor VR lenses. I also see this blue sky variation in tone that appears to resemble moire, or other horizontal and concave variation in pixel formation. I am very disappointed in this regard initially. Is it my computer screen from Powerbook G4 (2005) I sent the image to my iphone and noticed it to be similar. I will endevour to use newer computers at uni with greater resolutions. I have read somewhere in a forum that this change in tone is either ‘detail’ in the blue sky, to me looks unusual compared to traditional SLR photography and dark room processes.
I also read that this can be eliminated using photoshop…i have cs2 and it only seems to diminish it…can this be iliminated in ‘lightroom’? (which one is compatible with D800 please?)
I was quite happy to buy d800 after looking at the reviews fro smooth gradations for blue sky, as i use it for landscape photography quite often…This does not seem to be the case.
If i used either dx crop mode with 15 or so megapixels? would this fix my issue? or would lightroom mp downsampling give the blue sky a more natural look that i have grown to love from my days of using the darkrooms in the past. At this stage i do find an amazing resolution and detail in the foreground, objects, people etc in great light, particularly natural light and direct sunlight…and the video mode is amazing…
That seems to be my overiding frustration with the issue of the variation in the blue sky…can anyone help please, as it is driving insane trying to find a solution as the camera store said i was pushing the envelope, but how can this be true when i get the same effect as seen in your examples? Is this therefore normal with the d800 and considered detail as already discussed? I can get nice blue skies with my $100 kodak camera and 12.2 megapixels without the blue patterns of two tones that resemble moire…thankyou in advance
What you described did happen exactly to me with my beloved D700, when I did landscape photos using a polarizer filter. I didn’tn know what it was, but finally I related the phenom with moire. Time to time in some other situations I got some moire using my D700, but never so consistently as using a polarizer filter while shooting landscape.
Thanks for the reply…sounds like an issue with the d800E rather than the d800 according to the forums…yes i believe from a recent review that the d700 seems to deal with this better, but i am now thinking that this is because of the lower megapixels and i have just come across an article thank goodness which seems to explain this partly…it states that is has something to do with Dr…not sure exactly what this is? something to do with screen resolution and pixels…apparently the older screens are not able to recognize the increase in resolution…and another person was saying they did not see an issue apart from ‘jpeg compression’
So this is the issue with using this sort of pixel capability as it does not seem to be able to be seen appropriately with the older computer screens that do not have a compatible resolution…although this as stated by somebody else to be non existent when printed or by using a recent ipad…
I am a little sceptical as i seem to have a similar issue on the iphone when mailing the image to myself,but this was purchased prior to the new release of the d800 and the new iphone eos…
I am thinking like the lightroom 4 issues with d800 that they have not yet caught up with the new technology…?
Thankyou for the input
scott
Hi,
This is what i found on Flickr
It sounds like compression artifacts in the export and that your monitor has lower DR than the source image. If you are not seeing it as easily when viewing 100%, but the banding shows up when the image is compressed, then it’s almost certainly an output interpretation issue — most monitors have far less DR capacity than most modern sensors.
One way to confirm is to output to a printer with a very wide gamut and hi DR capacity. The problem will almost always be less on quality print than it will be on a monitor. I paid a pretty penny for a wide gamut monitor that would prevent this sort of artifact from showing up while viewing — and even it cannot do 14.4EV of DR (it seems to run out of gas around 12.5EV). Conversion to JPG will crush things of course, as it closes the channels down to 8-bit.
Hopegully this is true, otherwise the dx mode is better for landscapes and blue…
regards
Thank very much for your info. Sounds logic. Best wishes.
i have nikon d7000 24 70 2.8 , 50 1.8, now i have a budget for buying d800 but still cant decide weather to buy d800 or 70 200 2.8 lens, please need your openion on this. this are my savings which i keep it every 8 mths to buy lens or camera or other acc.
Regards
suraj
suraj in all things photographic the touchstone for for buying decisions has been how will having this change your (way of doing) photography. will it enable you to produce better quality of pictures ? Increase your keeper rate ? enable you to do some area of photography that your current set of equipment does not allow you to ?
Both the long lens (70-200) and the D800 have valid reason to be in your bag. A body allows you to get a better quality of captured/created file, the lens enables you to do that capture/creation. From a form, shape and perspective point of view the use of the correct focal length and shooting distance plus angle of shooting will produce a truer depiction of the subject form be it human or non human. Issues like your become clear once you sit down to look at how are your pictures from which ever area of photography you do (nature, landscape, macro, people). How can having this new piece of equipment help you move up in quality or being able to do more.
re “now obsolete Nikon D700 and the new D800” … I would prefer to think of the D700 as superseded, rather than obsolete. It’s still a great camera, and there are times when 12mp are perfectly adequate or fine. I do want 2 D800s though. ASAP!
Yes, the D700 is more than adequate more of the time; very much more than the D800.
What should you suggest for interior and architecture photography ?
The d700 will be more then fine I suppose ?
I have been spending a lot of time researching which camera I should buy to replace my D300. I feel (for me) that the D800 is a bit too slow and the files way too large for my needs. I am hesitant about buying the D700 as it is 4 years old and only 12+ megapixel, but at least I have 2 Nikon FX lenses along with the MBD10 battery pack, SB 800 & SB900 flashes which will work with the D700. I probably can’t go wrong, but is this the right decision, I can’t seem to make up my mind whether to just go ahead and get the D700.
With the introduction now of the d800, the d700 comes in at a good buy for a little over 2k where i am from.. However i am reading on a lot of blogs about issues with this camera particularly with the hotshoe. Is this so much of an issue – something which can be easily fixed? Have you any personal experience owning the d700 with speedlight firing randomly? I don’t want buyers remorse spending 2k on camera which will give me headaches.
kind regards,
kapitan
Can anyone recommend a studio plash system for the D800? I have an old Speedtron 2400ws system for my film cameras. What system do you recommend for this camera? I plan to do weddings and hope the D800 will be a good choice.
Thx,
Steve
OMG!! D800 is so much more better that I don’t even understand how I managed to take all those outstanding pictures with my poor old D700.. OMG! What should I do now?!
Насим привет!
Когда уже можно его купить?
Ravil, uje kupit’ mojno: photographylife.com/go/bh