Quote (Canadian_Man @ 10 Dec 2014 08:30)
Very bad idea. Very very very bad idea. The D700 is way old tech, the dynamic range is very subpar now, croppability is much worse due to the lower pixel count, etc. Just a terrible camera to buy in this day and age. That camera was released in 2008... it's just about 2015 now. It's really overpriced on resale too, due to misinformed buyers who think it's still worth a fairly inflated price.
The D610 can be had for $1600 direct from Nikon, the D600 can be had refurbished for $1350 direct from Nikon, and the D7100 can be had on sale for $900 or even less new.
In my opinion, Vetsu, $1000 is an awkward budget to set. You have to load up on lenses as well. I would honestly recommend spending $2000.
Please do post about what you are looking for in the camera. What do you plan to take photos of? Do you want to progressively buy more lenses? Do you want just one purchase right out of the box? Are you willing to learn how to use Adobe Lightroom & buy that as well?
d700 has a full frame sensor with a proper viewfinder, d7100 has a crop sensor with a small viewfinder. Sensor size is the most important aspect of it. Personally i would even take 1ds mkII or 5d mkI over any crop camera, just because the sensor size.
d700 has more focus points, which is also pretty important.
d7100 doesent have anti-aliasing filter.
Sure d7100 has slightly higher dynamic range, but the difference is minimal, full frame is more important(again if not shooting macro or telephoto).
Resolution doesent really matter unless you cant frame your shots well and unless you are using some high end lenses(d7100's resolution is a overkill for most lenses), there is no benefit from higher resolution, its just that the camera buffer gets full faster, card gets full faster and files are larger(more space on hard drive and low end computers has harder time processing them on photoshop).
d700 and d7100 has similar noise levels, or well sample shots look similar, but DXO mark for example says that d700 is much better at this. Maybe the DXO mark doesent take resolution into consideration and only looks at 100% crops and thats why it gives better results to d700 or something like that.
d700 has slightly better tonal range and color sensitivity.
d700 has higher measured iso(real sensitivity, not what the manufacturer says = iso 6400 for example gives more light on d700 than d7100)
d700 seems to have more accurate white balance.
Heres a sample with high iso, 25600, which is the max for both cameras(@op in case you are not familiar with this sort of tests, the d700 is cropped to full resolution and d7100 is cropped to same size than d700 and because of its higher resolution, that same size is at 66.7% instead of 100%):
Heres another bit lower iso sample(1600), you can see the same ugly green tint on d7100 with this iso too:
@op fyi you will never be cropping this much. And as you can see, there is no point of more pixels of d7100 since you wont be pulling out any more details because noise and other stuff gets in your way before the resolution does.
d700 is by no means too old tech and its definitely not a terrible camera to buy these days, pixel count doesent matter, dynamic range difference is minimal and im sure people wouldnt even notice the difference unless its some studio shot with identical frames and perfect shot for testing dynamic range(not "very sub par").
Here is a good video on megapixels
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVKveHZGnNYAnyways after reading a lot of comparisons about the cameras, people who have both pretty much all say that what is better depends on what you use it for. Like i mentioned, crop(d7100) for macro and telephoto and full frame(d700) for the rest.
Also it should be noted that d700 doesent shoot video.
What comes to the rest of the cameras you posted, they are outside of his price range.
This post was edited by Antichrist- on Dec 10 2014 05:36am