Kelby does a Lightroom 2.0 rundown Lightroom 2.0 upgrade complete

Nikon D700 against Nikon D300, Full Frame matters

70 comments

Posted by Patrick on Jul 29, 2008 in Cameras, Reviews

{ Nikon D300 crop @ ISO 6400 w/ED 17-55mm F2.8 }

{ Nikon D300 crop @ ISO 6400 w/ED 17-55mm F2.8 }

{ Nikon D700 @ ISO 6400 w/ 24-70mm F2.8 G ED }

{ Nikon D700 @ ISO 6400 w/ 24-70mm F2.8 G ED }

If you’ve been trying to convince yourself that full frame isn’t that big of a deal, well you’ve been lying to yourself. As I said before, that bigger sensor makes a difference and most of that is evident in a little something called “image quality” (imporant to quite a few photograhers I hear). Full frame provides better, crisper, clearer, cleaner images.  There’s a terrific example of this advantage at  Japanese site DC Watch with excellent comparison shots of the D700, D3, and D300. As expected the D700 and D3 look quite similar. And while removed from this context the D300 looks very good, it just can’t compete with its siblings in overall IQ. When the ISO gets cranked up it falls even further behind.  This has been repeated ad nauseum, but the D3 (and D700) have just utterly ridiculous noise management at high ISO. This amazes me because 6400 ISO looks like 400 ISO on my D80. True, the D300 is infinitely better performing than the D80, but the D700 gives even more detail, and even less noise, at a $2000 discount to the D3 (for right now).

In short full frame matters.

Similar Posts:


70 Responses to “Nikon D700 against Nikon D300, Full Frame matters”

  1. Andy Richards says:
    November 29, 2009 at 7:45 pm

    If you are willing to go with third party glass, Tamron makes a 28-300 image stabilizing lens for Nikon that would get you almost the equivalent of the 18-200 on the dx sensor.

    reply
  2. Andy Richards says:
    November 29, 2009 at 7:47 pm

    I am confused about one of the comments here. One commenter said that if I mounted the fx camera on a tripod and the dx camera on a tripod, I would see a difference in the image. If there was a control comparison, what difference would this make??

    reply
  3. wedding photographer swansea says:
    January 12, 2010 at 7:17 am

    would you go with 3rd party glass is the question!! after buying a d3 or d700 LOL

    reply
  4. Ellis says:
    January 19, 2010 at 6:14 pm

    You should put the same 17-55mm F2.8 ED on both D700 and D300 for the comparison test. Or the 24-70mm F2.8 G ED on both D700 and D300.

    reply
  5. Jim says:
    January 21, 2010 at 2:51 pm

    I second Ellis’ point. The lens makes more difference to the IQ than the sensor at ISO 200. In the test with the flowers when both used the 70-200 they were virtually identical, in fact the D300 image looked slightly sharper. I’ve been struggling to decide whether it’s worth upgrading my D300 and I’ve concluded that the only reason for splashing out the 2k on the D700 would be for low light capability which doesn’t seem enough. I’m waiting for the D800..

    reply
  6. tito says:
    February 26, 2010 at 12:48 pm

    Yes , I’ll waiting for the next FX generation too, perhaps D800.
    But when Nikon launch the next D800 series?,

    reply
  7. Jim says:
    February 26, 2010 at 2:30 pm

    Ok, after all I said I went and bought a D700.. My first impressions is that it makes my (beloved) D300 feel like a toy in comparison. Performance wise I haven’t been disappointed so far, at 6400iso it is fairly smooth although not as grain-free as I was lead to believe. I don’t think I’ll be going above 1600 but the 1600 is roughly as smooth as 400 on the D300.. What finally swung it as being able to use my wide zoom. That and the D300 for the reach seems a winning combo.

    reply
« Older Comments

Leave a Reply