Macro D700 or D300/s

[rawpaw18]

Been weighing options, pro and con of D700 vs. D300/s for sometime now.
Next body will be a longer term investment.

One thing I have not been able to really figure out is if there is any significant
difference in the DOF that FX gives you vs DX format? I know aperture obviously is the major determining factor. But using extension tubes or even a macro lens the dof is sometimes razor thin, so is there an advantage of one over the other in this regard?

If it is a completely stupid question I will deny that I ever asked it:rolleyes:

[erichlund]

The depth of field of the DX format is a bit deeper than FX. This would be an advantage to macro shooters. It may not be a hugely significant advantage. Perhaps Rooz is the one to answer that, since he's owned both.

I'm guessing that your other photographic needs will be a much greater determinant of what format you should buy. You only have one lens that will need replacement if you switch to FX, which is a good thing.

[r3g]

If low light/high ISO performance isn't high on your priority list than I'd stick with DX. If you plan on using very high ISO levels then you'd benefit more from FX

[RichNY]

For macro the smaller the sensor the better in terms of DOF; a point and shoot has a significant advantage over DSLRs in this area.

On the other hand, when shooting macro your viewfinder will be brighter with on an FX camera which makes for easier focusing if you are reversing or stacking lenses to get greater than 1:1 magnification.

[XaiLo]

There's a lot to consider Rich, least of which is bulk compared to the D50. What's your thought process so far. But from what you've shared, I'd be inclined to go for the D700. It'll put you in the no regret zone. :)

[K1W1]

Buy both bodies.

Was that helpful? :D

[rawpaw18]

The depth of field of the DX format is a bit deeper than FX. This would be an advantage to macro shooters. It may not be a hugely significant advantage. Perhaps Rooz is the one to answer that, since he's owned both.



That is interesting, not knowing I was thinking the reverse.


If low light/high ISO performance isn't high on your priority list than I'd stick with DX. If you plan on using very high ISO levels then you'd benefit more from FX

High iso is something I would love to have but do not use it often, some of the macro work with tubes robs a lot of available light. Slower ss and macro not a good combination. If a new version of FF allowed for more res then the d700 in DX I think it would be a winner. Many of my other shots I am looking for reach and would hate to give that up.


For macro the smaller the sensor the better in terms of DOF; a point and shoot has a significant advantage over DSLRs in this area.

On the other hand, when shooting macro your viewfinder will be brighter with on an FX camera which makes for easier focusing if you are reversing or stacking lenses to get greater than 1:1 magnification.

New view finders are signifcantly better than my d50 as well as the screen. Thanks for the info


There's a lot to consider Rich, least of which is bulk compared to the D50. What's your thought process so far. But from what you've shared, I'd be inclined to go for the D700. It'll put you in the no regret zone. :)

Bulk not really an issue, go ahead and stick three tubes on your 70-200vr you will see what I mean, not exactly easily wielded.
Handled both bodies in B&H one day, should not be an issue



Buy both bodies.

Was that helpful? :D

Always helpful, spend a few hours with Rooz and skies the limit with you now:D

Thanks for the information guys, not as stupid question as I thought

[achuang]

If your priority is macro then a DX body would serve you better as it has greater DOF as well as can shoot smaller objects since at the same macro distance a DX body is cropping the centre of the image compared to FX. One other benefit that you may or may not appreciate is the 51 AF points in a D300/s cover the whole frame compared with the same number of points in a D700 but don't cover as much of the frame. This may help with macro shooting as focus is critical where focus recomposing just won't work.

[K1W1]

Always helpful, spend a few hours with Rooz and skies the limit with you now:D


It's 4 years this month since I purchased my D50. Then the Nikon line up was D50, D70s and D100 and the D50 was the latest and in some ways greatest of those three cameras. With the way technology is moving I'm thinking that a D300s today used for the next 3-5 years with that time being spent slowly accumulating really good glass will mean that you would be in a position to buy a D900 (?) FF that will blow the socks off the D700.

Now are you going to be the first D300s owner here? I see that there are people in the USA who have received theirs already on other forums.

[RichNY]

Bulk not really an issue, go ahead and stick three tubes on your 70-200vr you will see what I mean, not exactly easily wielded.
Handled both bodies in B&H one day, should not be an issue


You might consider using the Canon 500D on the 70-200 rather than extension tubes. I'm no macro expert by a long shot but it seems that the 500D works better on long lenses and extension tubes are more practical with shorter focal length lenses.

[Rooz]

this is a really tough question rich,. i get the impression that focal length is very high on your priority list, in which case the d300s is the right body. i struggle to recommend it though cos the d700 is that good. but i have to admit i really miss that 1.5 crop especially for macro where my 105 is pitifully short on fx.

i'd be considering bearing with what you have a little longer and waiting out for a d700x. put it on your xmas list. the worst that can happen is you get a d700 or d300s at a cheaper price.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Rich,

Here's an old thread where I asked about DOF
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38724&highlight=depth

Here's the usefull link itself if you don't want to read the thread
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field#Depth_of_field_formulas

[rawpaw18]

Thanks DPR, that is a bit of info to try and soak in.

Rich, I have looked into the 500D it might do the trick. When I use the 70-200
w/ tubes and shooting a greater distance from the subject using the long ene dof is greater than when I move in closer using the short end. It has been a total trial and error thing for me.

Rooz, Waiting to see the D700x is what I am likely to do. I am not in a hurry and I am trying to make the right decision on which way to go.

Seriously, this forum is the best. thanks