# Nikon D400 or D700??



## nickelbn1

Ok Nikon users, so the new D400 is about to be announced next month they say and its supposed to be amazing.  A new sensor with 26.1MP, 1080p video and dramatically improved low light abilities over the D300s.  There is no price announced yet, but I am guessing it will be around $1999 since the D300s is $1599.  So, I am looking to upgrade from my old D80 and am looking into doing school sports photography, high school on down. So, I see I can get a used D700 for around $2300, however, its going out of date and is about to be replaced with the D800 very soon.  My question is, would the better choice be to get the new D400 or spend $300 more and get the older D700 simply because its a full frame camera.  Its only 12.1MP and no video at all.  I am betting the new D400 will be pretty close to the D700 in quality and ability.  Thoughts?


----------



## KmH

Any info about the D400 is just speculation at this point. There are inherent technical Issues related to both lens resolution and high ISO performance if 26.1 MP are crammed onto an APS-C size image sensor.

Canon is up against the wall at 18 MP on an APS-C image sensor.

Note that the 25.5 MP D3X has substantially lower high ISO performance than the 12.1 MP D3x does.


----------



## Kerbouchard

Like KmH noted, I think your specs are incorrect for the new D400, or at least I really hope so.  In any case, if, and it's a big if, a D400 gets released this month, and it is within a stop or so of the D700 in high ISO performance and has comparable autofocus, then it would probably make more sense for you to get the D400.  With sports, the crop factor is a bonus.

In reality, it's impossible to make a recommendation on one camera vs another since one doesn't happen to exist, yet.

For me, personally, I hope the D400 comes out around the price you suggested and that everybody thinks it is as good as the D700...It will let me up a D700 for a lot cheaper.


----------



## nickelbn1

This is the article I found giving that info on the MP for the sensor.  

Nikon D400 and D4 tipped for August, concept cameras shown | Electronista

I agree its hard to give any opinion when it technically does not exist, I was just asking based on the assumption that it will have a 24.1MP sensor, (I just saw that, I accidentally put 26MP earlier).  

Surprisingly, i was in a photography store the other day looking at getting the D300s and they told me they thought the new D7000 was actually the better camera overall, especially in low light conditions.  I was surprised to hear that, so I came home and did some research on that and sure enough, just about every one of the pro reviews and non pro reviews recommend the D7000 over the D300s. I like the feel of the D300s better, but of course performance is more important.  That is why I figured it would be worth waiting on the D400.  I am sure it will be a big step up from the D300s.


----------



## KmH

The D400 exists, but Nikon has released zero info about it's specifications.

As far as a D7000 being better than a D300s, it depends what features, functions, and capabilities are important to _*you*_.

The D7000 can only do 3 auto brackets while the D300s can do 9 of them. The D7000 doesn't have a full metal chassis, only a metal front and rear panel. The D7000 lacks a PC cable port (for lighting) and a 10-pin connector. And, that's just a short list of differences between the 2 camera models.

The D7000 is Nikon's newest top-of-the-line entry-level camera. The D300s is Nikon's, Prosumer APS-C image sensor sized camera, but the D300s was only a slight upgrade to the D300 which was released several years back.


----------



## MJSfoto1956

KmH said:


> The D400 exists, but Nikon has released zero info about it's specifications



Which is why I'm convinced that it will only be 16Mp. If any of you think you will be disappointed think again -- DxO ratings for the D7000 already show that there are diminishing returns on increasing pixel count. To wit: based on their data, the D7000 has 60% more pixels than a D200 but only 25% better IQ. Demonstrating that A.) the D200 is still a damn good camera and B.) while the d7000 is at the top of the heap of cropped-sensor cameras, we are getting to the point of nit-picking with today's modern technology. 

I predict Nikon will eschew high megapixels (a la Canon and now Sony) and stick to their conservative roots: IQ and Speed are what are important to Nikon shooters, not megapixels.


----------



## Patrice

You so should go put a deposit down on the D400. Someone will surely step up and hold your deposit. 

A d400 or any new d??? of any kind has not been announced. Why waste your time obsessing on it?


----------



## molested_cow

My choice will be the D400. I got the D700 only because I had some older lens that I don't want to compromise with. If you don't have that issue, I think a cropped sensor with high resolution is more economical in the long run. ISO performance wise, I won't be too worried. The D700 is really good and I cannot imagine any newer model to be less than the D700.

Plus, the lack of video on the D700 kinda sucks.


----------



## KmH

1year old thread. 

Likely dug up by a SPAMMER that has since been banned and had all their spam deleted.


----------

