What do people think of the Nikon D800e replacement for Nikon's D700?
 

Just today I learned that a new DSLR camera (the D800e) in FX Mode and bearing the usual stamp of a Professional Camera in a Magnesium/Aluminium casing was being pre-ordered from a number of shops in the UK, in readiness for its arrival in April 2012. What do other readers think of this new camera which has a 36.3 megapixel range and costs approximately half the cost of the D3X? Will readers continue to buy up stocks of the D700 which has been discontinued to be manufactured, or will they move to the new D800e instead?:cool:

[QUOTE=northumbrian1;73855]Just today I learned that a new DSLR camera (the D800e) in FX Mode and bearing the usual stamp of a Professional Camera in a Magnesium/Aluminium casing was being pre-ordered from a number of shops in the UK, in readiness for its arrival in April 2012. What do other readers think of this new camera which has a 36.3 megapixel range and costs approximately half the cost of the D3X? Will readers continue to buy up stocks of the D700 which has been discontinued to be manufactured, or will they move to the new D800e instead?:cool:[/QUOTE]

Just to correct one point, the D800e is a special variant for high-resolution studio photography. I think the model you're referring to is the regular D800. Nikon (officially) says the D700 and D3x are continuing, but the D800 certainly looks more attractive than both. RL

I realise that possessing a very high resolution camera such as the D800, does not force one to use it at the 36mp plus capture rate, however doing so requires the additional expenditure of a new computer plus storage capacity on a huge almost industrial scale - something only really worth it for specialist pros and film makers.

That alone puts me off this camera though I'm sure that thousands of "Dealer's Delights" will get it. My D7000's resolution is taxing my computer as it is and the 16mp it produces, even with severely cropped images, is excellent for giant prints of high quality bettering 35mm film. I can't ask for more nor can I afford it.

In truth I cant afford one. Either D800 or the D700. BUT. I briefly used a D700 ( I normaly use a D90) and was amazed at the joy of using it. Your average Nikon since 1959 has been comfortable to use. Everything seems to be logicaly placed. The D700 was exceptional. When I saw the results printed, they were awesome. The quality even made my images look good. I cant see how anyone could expect "better" than this. Maybe print larger, I would like to see a low, yes low, ISO. Lower than 50 would be grand.

One thing to be said though, a jump of 24mp is quite substantial in anyones books. A bit more than a revamp. I was surprised that the price was less than the D3 models.

Maybe the D700 will drop in price significantly. I can hope, and dream.

Have Nikon taken the rule book, poured petrol on it, set it afire and lobbed it into Canon's backyard? Has the Pixel Armada fleet been refloated?

[QUOTE=Rod Lawton;73919]Just to correct one point, the D800e is a special variant for high-resolution studio photography. I think the model you're referring to is the regular D800. Nikon (officially) says the D700 and D3x are continuing, but the D800 certainly looks more attractive than both. RL[/QUOTE]

I read an article in the last edition of AP which has an interview with the director and managing director of Nikon and they said the D700 will continue as long as there is a demand for it they are going to focus on current models and develop the A1 further . Time will tell whether this will change but the 700 looks safe for now :)