How do photos of the same subject compare between the Nikon D700 and D70?Does the camera matter?How can I compare the photo quality of a mirrorless vs DSLR vs compact vs phone camera?Can the Nikon D700 do automatic bracketing by aperture?7D or D700 for hockey?Is there any way past the 999 photo limit on the Nikon D700's intervalometer?What is the minimum cost “automatic” flash that I can sensibly use with a Nikon D700Can the ring which attaches the Nikon D700 strap to the camera be replaced?Would a Nikon D70 with 70-300 lens be adequate for photos of my kids' sporting events?Nikon D70 and Sigma EF-500 DG Super NA-iTTL FlashNikon D70, can I use manual aperture ring without getting the FEE error?Need help updating the firmware on my Nikon D700?I have a Nikon D70 and whenever I take a picture it comes out lookin red and stretched out. I’ve tried toggling with the settings but it doesn’t work.
Leveling up and Getting Items!
Are athletes' college degrees discounted by employers and graduate school admissions?
The last tree in the Universe
Can I appeal credit ding if ex-wife is responsible for paying mortgage?
Is fission/fusion to iron the most efficient way to convert mass to energy?
Was the Lonely Mountain, where Smaug lived, a volcano?
How did Avada Kedavra get its name?
Does anyone recognize these rockets, and their location?
Co-worker is now managing my team. Does this mean that I'm being demoted?
...and then she held the gun
Why can't we feel the Earth's revolution?
New Site Design!
Nth term of Van Eck Sequence
How to search for Android apps without ads?
A Tale of Snake and Coffee
Is there a maximum/optimum amount of ERC-721 that can be issued per contract?
Arcane Tradition and Cost Efficiency: Learn spells on level-up, or learn them from scrolls/spellbooks?
Does WiFi affect the quality of images downloaded from the internet?
How do credit card companies know what type of business I'm paying for?
How to avoid offending original culture when making conculture inspired from original
Leveraging cash for buying car
Why not make one big CPU core?
Fastest path on a snakes and ladders board
How to know whether to write accidentals as sharps or flats?
How do photos of the same subject compare between the Nikon D700 and D70?
Does the camera matter?How can I compare the photo quality of a mirrorless vs DSLR vs compact vs phone camera?Can the Nikon D700 do automatic bracketing by aperture?7D or D700 for hockey?Is there any way past the 999 photo limit on the Nikon D700's intervalometer?What is the minimum cost “automatic” flash that I can sensibly use with a Nikon D700Can the ring which attaches the Nikon D700 strap to the camera be replaced?Would a Nikon D70 with 70-300 lens be adequate for photos of my kids' sporting events?Nikon D70 and Sigma EF-500 DG Super NA-iTTL FlashNikon D70, can I use manual aperture ring without getting the FEE error?Need help updating the firmware on my Nikon D700?I have a Nikon D70 and whenever I take a picture it comes out lookin red and stretched out. I’ve tried toggling with the settings but it doesn’t work.
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I currently have a Nikon D70 that I purchased back when it was the "bees knees" and it has served me well for a long time. I get some great shots from it, but I really struggle in low-light situations. I hesitate to push it past 1000 ISO due to excessive graininess, but then need to fight with excessive flash (the cave effect), low shutter speeds, or unforgiving DoF. I think it may be time to upgrade...on a budget, of course.
I've been considering a D700, since it seems to be the cheapest way to upgrade to a solid camera with a larger sensor (and compatible lens mount). I feel like this will help me where I need it most; low-noise low-light imagery. However, even used it's a big purchase for me. Especially since my zoom lens is DX so I'll need a new one. I'm having trouble justifying the purchase unless I can really be sure of a substantial improvement.
I have seen a lot of comparisons online from automated camera database sites. What I'd really like to know is how these two cameras compare in sharpness and noise in low-light situations, though. This would be best seen through comparison photos (photos of the same subject taken with both cameras), especially with comparison crops, but surprisingly Google has failed to show me any...I guess because the D70 was more often compared to the D7000.
Can someone provide comparison photos with full resolution crops between these two cameras?
comparison nikon-d700 nikon-d70
New contributor
add a comment |
I currently have a Nikon D70 that I purchased back when it was the "bees knees" and it has served me well for a long time. I get some great shots from it, but I really struggle in low-light situations. I hesitate to push it past 1000 ISO due to excessive graininess, but then need to fight with excessive flash (the cave effect), low shutter speeds, or unforgiving DoF. I think it may be time to upgrade...on a budget, of course.
I've been considering a D700, since it seems to be the cheapest way to upgrade to a solid camera with a larger sensor (and compatible lens mount). I feel like this will help me where I need it most; low-noise low-light imagery. However, even used it's a big purchase for me. Especially since my zoom lens is DX so I'll need a new one. I'm having trouble justifying the purchase unless I can really be sure of a substantial improvement.
I have seen a lot of comparisons online from automated camera database sites. What I'd really like to know is how these two cameras compare in sharpness and noise in low-light situations, though. This would be best seen through comparison photos (photos of the same subject taken with both cameras), especially with comparison crops, but surprisingly Google has failed to show me any...I guess because the D70 was more often compared to the D7000.
Can someone provide comparison photos with full resolution crops between these two cameras?
comparison nikon-d700 nikon-d70
New contributor
Have you searched Flickr for photos taken by each camera? It's pretty easy to do.
– Michael C
Jun 7 at 19:23
@MichaelC I've done a little searching, but even if I find two photos with similar camera settings, different subjects and different lighting conditions create vastly different results, especially in regards to noise. The only way to get near an accurate comparison is with a controlled set of comparison photos.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:23
I think it would be highly unlikely in a community with only as many active users as are here to find anyone presently shooting with both a D70 and D700. One is a 2004 APS-C/DX model. The other is a 2008 FF/FX model. The chances of one person here still using those two bodies in 2019 is statistically nil.
– Michael C
Jun 9 at 2:57
add a comment |
I currently have a Nikon D70 that I purchased back when it was the "bees knees" and it has served me well for a long time. I get some great shots from it, but I really struggle in low-light situations. I hesitate to push it past 1000 ISO due to excessive graininess, but then need to fight with excessive flash (the cave effect), low shutter speeds, or unforgiving DoF. I think it may be time to upgrade...on a budget, of course.
I've been considering a D700, since it seems to be the cheapest way to upgrade to a solid camera with a larger sensor (and compatible lens mount). I feel like this will help me where I need it most; low-noise low-light imagery. However, even used it's a big purchase for me. Especially since my zoom lens is DX so I'll need a new one. I'm having trouble justifying the purchase unless I can really be sure of a substantial improvement.
I have seen a lot of comparisons online from automated camera database sites. What I'd really like to know is how these two cameras compare in sharpness and noise in low-light situations, though. This would be best seen through comparison photos (photos of the same subject taken with both cameras), especially with comparison crops, but surprisingly Google has failed to show me any...I guess because the D70 was more often compared to the D7000.
Can someone provide comparison photos with full resolution crops between these two cameras?
comparison nikon-d700 nikon-d70
New contributor
I currently have a Nikon D70 that I purchased back when it was the "bees knees" and it has served me well for a long time. I get some great shots from it, but I really struggle in low-light situations. I hesitate to push it past 1000 ISO due to excessive graininess, but then need to fight with excessive flash (the cave effect), low shutter speeds, or unforgiving DoF. I think it may be time to upgrade...on a budget, of course.
I've been considering a D700, since it seems to be the cheapest way to upgrade to a solid camera with a larger sensor (and compatible lens mount). I feel like this will help me where I need it most; low-noise low-light imagery. However, even used it's a big purchase for me. Especially since my zoom lens is DX so I'll need a new one. I'm having trouble justifying the purchase unless I can really be sure of a substantial improvement.
I have seen a lot of comparisons online from automated camera database sites. What I'd really like to know is how these two cameras compare in sharpness and noise in low-light situations, though. This would be best seen through comparison photos (photos of the same subject taken with both cameras), especially with comparison crops, but surprisingly Google has failed to show me any...I guess because the D70 was more often compared to the D7000.
Can someone provide comparison photos with full resolution crops between these two cameras?
comparison nikon-d700 nikon-d70
comparison nikon-d700 nikon-d70
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked Jun 7 at 16:11
NicholasNicholas
207124
207124
New contributor
New contributor
Have you searched Flickr for photos taken by each camera? It's pretty easy to do.
– Michael C
Jun 7 at 19:23
@MichaelC I've done a little searching, but even if I find two photos with similar camera settings, different subjects and different lighting conditions create vastly different results, especially in regards to noise. The only way to get near an accurate comparison is with a controlled set of comparison photos.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:23
I think it would be highly unlikely in a community with only as many active users as are here to find anyone presently shooting with both a D70 and D700. One is a 2004 APS-C/DX model. The other is a 2008 FF/FX model. The chances of one person here still using those two bodies in 2019 is statistically nil.
– Michael C
Jun 9 at 2:57
add a comment |
Have you searched Flickr for photos taken by each camera? It's pretty easy to do.
– Michael C
Jun 7 at 19:23
@MichaelC I've done a little searching, but even if I find two photos with similar camera settings, different subjects and different lighting conditions create vastly different results, especially in regards to noise. The only way to get near an accurate comparison is with a controlled set of comparison photos.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:23
I think it would be highly unlikely in a community with only as many active users as are here to find anyone presently shooting with both a D70 and D700. One is a 2004 APS-C/DX model. The other is a 2008 FF/FX model. The chances of one person here still using those two bodies in 2019 is statistically nil.
– Michael C
Jun 9 at 2:57
Have you searched Flickr for photos taken by each camera? It's pretty easy to do.
– Michael C
Jun 7 at 19:23
Have you searched Flickr for photos taken by each camera? It's pretty easy to do.
– Michael C
Jun 7 at 19:23
@MichaelC I've done a little searching, but even if I find two photos with similar camera settings, different subjects and different lighting conditions create vastly different results, especially in regards to noise. The only way to get near an accurate comparison is with a controlled set of comparison photos.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:23
@MichaelC I've done a little searching, but even if I find two photos with similar camera settings, different subjects and different lighting conditions create vastly different results, especially in regards to noise. The only way to get near an accurate comparison is with a controlled set of comparison photos.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:23
I think it would be highly unlikely in a community with only as many active users as are here to find anyone presently shooting with both a D70 and D700. One is a 2004 APS-C/DX model. The other is a 2008 FF/FX model. The chances of one person here still using those two bodies in 2019 is statistically nil.
– Michael C
Jun 9 at 2:57
I think it would be highly unlikely in a community with only as many active users as are here to find anyone presently shooting with both a D70 and D700. One is a 2004 APS-C/DX model. The other is a 2008 FF/FX model. The chances of one person here still using those two bodies in 2019 is statistically nil.
– Michael C
Jun 9 at 2:57
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
This may end up being closed as 'opinion-based' but before that, my own opinion.
Unless you're picking it up for pence, I wouldn't trade up from a DX 6mp camera from 2004 to a 12mp camera from 2008.
10 years is a long time in electronics.
I'd be looking at a 24mp camera - the 3xxx or 5xxx - where focus speed & low light performance will literally be years ahead.
Both also DX so you can bring your lenses with you.
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
add a comment |
In my opinion, the best tool to do such a comparison is DpReview.com. Here is a link for the tool, you need to invest some time to find similar cameras.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7500-review-speed-and-capability/8
If you want to see the specs, use this other comparison page
https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras
The problem is that the D70 is too old for these tests. But you probably can dig in to find the old comparison test page.
For your specific case, you need to take into account if you really need or want to go for a larger sensor, because any DX lens you have will not be usable on an FX format.
If you only have one DX lens, there is not much to lose there.
But I would not go for an oldie full frame camera, in my opinion, a newer DX camera will have better features. You probably do not think you want or need video, or better battery performance or more megapixels.
I love Nikon, my first camera was an FM2. But as you seem not having a lot of already purchased Nikon gear (lenses) you might consider other brands to suit your specific needs. Canon, Sony, Fuji?
Reading the comments you posted, probably the real issue is low light performance. Remember that you can go for a faster lens, a noise reduction software. But in any case, still, a newer sensor will perform better in low light than an old one.
In some other cases, having a 24 Mpx image with good enough low noise will be a heck more smooth if you resample to your mentioned 6Mpx. This way, with a 24Mpx sensor you can push your maximum ISO you are normally willing to accept.
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
add a comment |
The fact that the camera with the significantly larger (2.25X) sensor and higher resolution (2X) is also five years newer and from the same manufacturer at a time when digital sensors were improving rapidly should be all you need to know, especially since the individual photosites ("pixel wells") of the larger, higher resolution sensor are still slightly larger than those of the older, smaller, and lower resolution sensor.
It shouldn't even be close.
Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down
There you are. The original D3¹ had the same sensor as the D700. Just pull the trigger if sensor performance is the only criteria not being met by your current D70. Current DX models offer a lot more bells and whistles, video, better AF performance, etc., but high ISO performance is not an area where they have exceeded the D3/700D yet.
¹ Not to be confused with the D3s - which had a completely different sensor with even better high ISO performance that just happened to have the same resolution as the D3 sensor
But, as always, a better camera will not make anyone a better photographer. A better photographer can take better advantage of better gear.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Nicholas is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f108778%2fhow-do-photos-of-the-same-subject-compare-between-the-nikon-d700-and-d70%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This may end up being closed as 'opinion-based' but before that, my own opinion.
Unless you're picking it up for pence, I wouldn't trade up from a DX 6mp camera from 2004 to a 12mp camera from 2008.
10 years is a long time in electronics.
I'd be looking at a 24mp camera - the 3xxx or 5xxx - where focus speed & low light performance will literally be years ahead.
Both also DX so you can bring your lenses with you.
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
add a comment |
This may end up being closed as 'opinion-based' but before that, my own opinion.
Unless you're picking it up for pence, I wouldn't trade up from a DX 6mp camera from 2004 to a 12mp camera from 2008.
10 years is a long time in electronics.
I'd be looking at a 24mp camera - the 3xxx or 5xxx - where focus speed & low light performance will literally be years ahead.
Both also DX so you can bring your lenses with you.
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
add a comment |
This may end up being closed as 'opinion-based' but before that, my own opinion.
Unless you're picking it up for pence, I wouldn't trade up from a DX 6mp camera from 2004 to a 12mp camera from 2008.
10 years is a long time in electronics.
I'd be looking at a 24mp camera - the 3xxx or 5xxx - where focus speed & low light performance will literally be years ahead.
Both also DX so you can bring your lenses with you.
This may end up being closed as 'opinion-based' but before that, my own opinion.
Unless you're picking it up for pence, I wouldn't trade up from a DX 6mp camera from 2004 to a 12mp camera from 2008.
10 years is a long time in electronics.
I'd be looking at a 24mp camera - the 3xxx or 5xxx - where focus speed & low light performance will literally be years ahead.
Both also DX so you can bring your lenses with you.
answered Jun 7 at 16:19
TetsujinTetsujin
8,80122253
8,80122253
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
add a comment |
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
Thank you. I considered that, but I've seen comparisons showing a FX 2008 camera performing better in low-light vs a 2018 DX camera. Electronics can only go so far against the gains that all that extra incoming light gets you. I'm not so worried about sharpness; in my experience anything beyond 6MP is invisible at any size print on a properly taken photo anyway.
– Nicholas
Jun 7 at 16:38
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas, Can you post some links to that comparation? To take a look and see how valid the claim is.
– Rafael
Jun 7 at 17:56
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Nicholas electronics have actually come a long, long way. My 5Dmk2 is great compared to even my 60D, but I’d guess that it can’t hold a candle to an 80D...
– Hueco
Jun 7 at 19:27
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
@Rafael I've closed most of the tabs that had them, but here is one good one: dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/… . If you look at the SNR graph it shows the D700 ahead by a generous margin. The only area where the D5500 stands a chance is in dynamic range. The D5500 is a bit older, but tests very similarly to the D5600.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:28
add a comment |
In my opinion, the best tool to do such a comparison is DpReview.com. Here is a link for the tool, you need to invest some time to find similar cameras.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7500-review-speed-and-capability/8
If you want to see the specs, use this other comparison page
https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras
The problem is that the D70 is too old for these tests. But you probably can dig in to find the old comparison test page.
For your specific case, you need to take into account if you really need or want to go for a larger sensor, because any DX lens you have will not be usable on an FX format.
If you only have one DX lens, there is not much to lose there.
But I would not go for an oldie full frame camera, in my opinion, a newer DX camera will have better features. You probably do not think you want or need video, or better battery performance or more megapixels.
I love Nikon, my first camera was an FM2. But as you seem not having a lot of already purchased Nikon gear (lenses) you might consider other brands to suit your specific needs. Canon, Sony, Fuji?
Reading the comments you posted, probably the real issue is low light performance. Remember that you can go for a faster lens, a noise reduction software. But in any case, still, a newer sensor will perform better in low light than an old one.
In some other cases, having a 24 Mpx image with good enough low noise will be a heck more smooth if you resample to your mentioned 6Mpx. This way, with a 24Mpx sensor you can push your maximum ISO you are normally willing to accept.
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
add a comment |
In my opinion, the best tool to do such a comparison is DpReview.com. Here is a link for the tool, you need to invest some time to find similar cameras.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7500-review-speed-and-capability/8
If you want to see the specs, use this other comparison page
https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras
The problem is that the D70 is too old for these tests. But you probably can dig in to find the old comparison test page.
For your specific case, you need to take into account if you really need or want to go for a larger sensor, because any DX lens you have will not be usable on an FX format.
If you only have one DX lens, there is not much to lose there.
But I would not go for an oldie full frame camera, in my opinion, a newer DX camera will have better features. You probably do not think you want or need video, or better battery performance or more megapixels.
I love Nikon, my first camera was an FM2. But as you seem not having a lot of already purchased Nikon gear (lenses) you might consider other brands to suit your specific needs. Canon, Sony, Fuji?
Reading the comments you posted, probably the real issue is low light performance. Remember that you can go for a faster lens, a noise reduction software. But in any case, still, a newer sensor will perform better in low light than an old one.
In some other cases, having a 24 Mpx image with good enough low noise will be a heck more smooth if you resample to your mentioned 6Mpx. This way, with a 24Mpx sensor you can push your maximum ISO you are normally willing to accept.
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
add a comment |
In my opinion, the best tool to do such a comparison is DpReview.com. Here is a link for the tool, you need to invest some time to find similar cameras.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7500-review-speed-and-capability/8
If you want to see the specs, use this other comparison page
https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras
The problem is that the D70 is too old for these tests. But you probably can dig in to find the old comparison test page.
For your specific case, you need to take into account if you really need or want to go for a larger sensor, because any DX lens you have will not be usable on an FX format.
If you only have one DX lens, there is not much to lose there.
But I would not go for an oldie full frame camera, in my opinion, a newer DX camera will have better features. You probably do not think you want or need video, or better battery performance or more megapixels.
I love Nikon, my first camera was an FM2. But as you seem not having a lot of already purchased Nikon gear (lenses) you might consider other brands to suit your specific needs. Canon, Sony, Fuji?
Reading the comments you posted, probably the real issue is low light performance. Remember that you can go for a faster lens, a noise reduction software. But in any case, still, a newer sensor will perform better in low light than an old one.
In some other cases, having a 24 Mpx image with good enough low noise will be a heck more smooth if you resample to your mentioned 6Mpx. This way, with a 24Mpx sensor you can push your maximum ISO you are normally willing to accept.
In my opinion, the best tool to do such a comparison is DpReview.com. Here is a link for the tool, you need to invest some time to find similar cameras.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d7500-review-speed-and-capability/8
If you want to see the specs, use this other comparison page
https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras
The problem is that the D70 is too old for these tests. But you probably can dig in to find the old comparison test page.
For your specific case, you need to take into account if you really need or want to go for a larger sensor, because any DX lens you have will not be usable on an FX format.
If you only have one DX lens, there is not much to lose there.
But I would not go for an oldie full frame camera, in my opinion, a newer DX camera will have better features. You probably do not think you want or need video, or better battery performance or more megapixels.
I love Nikon, my first camera was an FM2. But as you seem not having a lot of already purchased Nikon gear (lenses) you might consider other brands to suit your specific needs. Canon, Sony, Fuji?
Reading the comments you posted, probably the real issue is low light performance. Remember that you can go for a faster lens, a noise reduction software. But in any case, still, a newer sensor will perform better in low light than an old one.
In some other cases, having a 24 Mpx image with good enough low noise will be a heck more smooth if you resample to your mentioned 6Mpx. This way, with a 24Mpx sensor you can push your maximum ISO you are normally willing to accept.
edited Jun 7 at 18:03
answered Jun 7 at 17:39
RafaelRafael
15.1k12448
15.1k12448
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
add a comment |
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
Thanks. I do actually have some gear, including a very expensive full frame 24-70 f/2.8 lens left over from my old wedding photography business, plus my SB-800 flash; starting over would be financially rough right now. I don't really need the additional features; just high performance in RAW. I do well with my D70, but f/2.8 makes focus unforgiving, and shutter speeds under 1/60 are tough with teenagers. The ability to push the ISO up several steps would be invaluable. Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down.
– Nicholas
Jun 8 at 23:09
add a comment |
The fact that the camera with the significantly larger (2.25X) sensor and higher resolution (2X) is also five years newer and from the same manufacturer at a time when digital sensors were improving rapidly should be all you need to know, especially since the individual photosites ("pixel wells") of the larger, higher resolution sensor are still slightly larger than those of the older, smaller, and lower resolution sensor.
It shouldn't even be close.
Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down
There you are. The original D3¹ had the same sensor as the D700. Just pull the trigger if sensor performance is the only criteria not being met by your current D70. Current DX models offer a lot more bells and whistles, video, better AF performance, etc., but high ISO performance is not an area where they have exceeded the D3/700D yet.
¹ Not to be confused with the D3s - which had a completely different sensor with even better high ISO performance that just happened to have the same resolution as the D3 sensor
But, as always, a better camera will not make anyone a better photographer. A better photographer can take better advantage of better gear.
add a comment |
The fact that the camera with the significantly larger (2.25X) sensor and higher resolution (2X) is also five years newer and from the same manufacturer at a time when digital sensors were improving rapidly should be all you need to know, especially since the individual photosites ("pixel wells") of the larger, higher resolution sensor are still slightly larger than those of the older, smaller, and lower resolution sensor.
It shouldn't even be close.
Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down
There you are. The original D3¹ had the same sensor as the D700. Just pull the trigger if sensor performance is the only criteria not being met by your current D70. Current DX models offer a lot more bells and whistles, video, better AF performance, etc., but high ISO performance is not an area where they have exceeded the D3/700D yet.
¹ Not to be confused with the D3s - which had a completely different sensor with even better high ISO performance that just happened to have the same resolution as the D3 sensor
But, as always, a better camera will not make anyone a better photographer. A better photographer can take better advantage of better gear.
add a comment |
The fact that the camera with the significantly larger (2.25X) sensor and higher resolution (2X) is also five years newer and from the same manufacturer at a time when digital sensors were improving rapidly should be all you need to know, especially since the individual photosites ("pixel wells") of the larger, higher resolution sensor are still slightly larger than those of the older, smaller, and lower resolution sensor.
It shouldn't even be close.
Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down
There you are. The original D3¹ had the same sensor as the D700. Just pull the trigger if sensor performance is the only criteria not being met by your current D70. Current DX models offer a lot more bells and whistles, video, better AF performance, etc., but high ISO performance is not an area where they have exceeded the D3/700D yet.
¹ Not to be confused with the D3s - which had a completely different sensor with even better high ISO performance that just happened to have the same resolution as the D3 sensor
But, as always, a better camera will not make anyone a better photographer. A better photographer can take better advantage of better gear.
The fact that the camera with the significantly larger (2.25X) sensor and higher resolution (2X) is also five years newer and from the same manufacturer at a time when digital sensors were improving rapidly should be all you need to know, especially since the individual photosites ("pixel wells") of the larger, higher resolution sensor are still slightly larger than those of the older, smaller, and lower resolution sensor.
It shouldn't even be close.
Every time I see discussions between owners of a D700/D3 who also have a new DX, they say the D3 wins in noise hands down
There you are. The original D3¹ had the same sensor as the D700. Just pull the trigger if sensor performance is the only criteria not being met by your current D70. Current DX models offer a lot more bells and whistles, video, better AF performance, etc., but high ISO performance is not an area where they have exceeded the D3/700D yet.
¹ Not to be confused with the D3s - which had a completely different sensor with even better high ISO performance that just happened to have the same resolution as the D3 sensor
But, as always, a better camera will not make anyone a better photographer. A better photographer can take better advantage of better gear.
edited Jun 9 at 3:18
answered Jun 9 at 3:07
Michael CMichael C
137k7156393
137k7156393
add a comment |
add a comment |
Nicholas is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Nicholas is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Nicholas is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Nicholas is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f108778%2fhow-do-photos-of-the-same-subject-compare-between-the-nikon-d700-and-d70%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Have you searched Flickr for photos taken by each camera? It's pretty easy to do.
– Michael C
Jun 7 at 19:23
@MichaelC I've done a little searching, but even if I find two photos with similar camera settings, different subjects and different lighting conditions create vastly different results, especially in regards to noise. The only way to get near an accurate comparison is with a controlled set of comparison photos.
– Nicholas
Jun 9 at 2:23
I think it would be highly unlikely in a community with only as many active users as are here to find anyone presently shooting with both a D70 and D700. One is a 2004 APS-C/DX model. The other is a 2008 FF/FX model. The chances of one person here still using those two bodies in 2019 is statistically nil.
– Michael C
Jun 9 at 2:57