Thanks for the heads-up, Weldon. I just ordered my D700 and will have it on Monday.

Unfortunately it's only a 90% viewfinder in the D700... very lame on Nikon's part (and clever marketing to hide this detail). 95% horizontal and 95% vertical = 90% view coverage, though it should be centered. I'll definitely look to make sure it is accurate. The D3 isn't worth the difference over the D700 just for the 100% view (since I don't need the faster FPS), as much as I loved the 100% view in my D2x.

For those who are curious, the viewfinder coverage is reduced because with the sensor-cleaning technology and the built-in flash, there just wasn't enough room to make this all fit inside the prism area.

Scott--I do think that you've pointed out of those "little things" that separate different classes of camera. The trade-off between 100% and sensor cleaning & pop-up flash is an excellent example. Too often people see the resolution and maybe fps on a camera and don't look past that so they can't understand why more expensive cameras are in fact more expensive:-)

FWIW, for me too if I do spend my own pennies on a full frame it'll be the D700 for the same reasons you list.

One nice surprise about the D300 for me has been that with the vertical grip the 8fps I get makes me feel pretty good. (I don't recall whether it is the same on the D700). Sure I miss the 9+ fps of the D3 but realistically the difference is small enough for what I do (no one is paying me the huge bucks to capture the perfect moment at an NBA game:-) that I'm just fine with my "8".

--David

Now I have learned something again on this forum. I was prepared to buy the D700 after many months of saving my pennies but the thread in this posting regarding frame rate and viewfinder view has thrown me back to the savings department for a D3.

Another factor involved is the shutter expectancy life with the D3. I have been awarded the position of authorized photographer at a new, very large, very popular motorsports raceway. My frames per day has increased to about 2000 and my days a week have increased from 3 to 5. That is roughly 10,000 frames a week. My previous count was 10,000 a month.

Wish me luck on this new venture. My web statistics show a 5 fold increase in unique visitors after the first weekend at the new venue. Looks like I have a lot of new clients to gear my marketing towards.

Anyone shooting the D3 in dusty conditions? I sure wish Nikon made lenses that were more airtight. My lens internal clean and lube bills are getting stupid.

Rick--First, congratulations on your new role. That sounds like a real boost for your business!

Second, I shot with the D3 for a month on safari in Africa and for a month in Southeast Asia during the dry season. I was actually very surprised how little trouble I had with dust either time. I didn't change lenses a ton (200-400 stayed on most of the time in Africa and 24-70 in Asia), but I was still pretty happy. Don't know what to attribute it to.--David

I've been playing around with the D700 now -- haven't had a client shoot. But here's my thought... I'm most likely going to return it and pick up a D3. Why?

1. Viewfinder. I can't go back from 100% coverage to 90%. For studio work it's not a real issue, but for my scenic fine art stuff, you're basically framing a shot looking at a 10.89 MP scene and hoping that maybe you have nice stuff in the remaining 1.21 MP of space. Why throw away those pixels? Since I had a D2x and D1x before, I am perfectly comfortably using sensor swabs to clean my sensor... sure the self-cleaning is nice, but not essential. Also, those pro-series viewfinders are LARGER and BRIGHTER. The D700 viewfinder is larger than the D300 was, but I think it's dimmer.

2. With my MB-D10 grip on the D700, it's roughly the same weight as the D3 but a little taller.

There are a handful of tiny extras that the D3 adds that aren't really essential to me, but the battery is of course much better, and being able to load two CF cards in the camera is nice for a long trip/big shoot.

Yes, there's a price tag difference... so I'll just do a few extra shoots to cover it.

Scott--I concur on the viewfinder. I don't find the one on the D700 as bright as I remember the one on the D3 being.

Interesting on the 90% though. There is actually one potential advantage of the 90% which is that with VR (especially Active VR) it is hard to control the precise framing of the scene so instead of having to remember to frame loosely the camera more or less does it for you. But of course I'd rather have my 100% back for sure.

Similarly the battery is a pro/con issue for me. Now that my "other" camera is a D300 I like having the same battery in both cameras. If I tried to use a D3+D300 I'd need both battery systems & both chargers (or I could do what some friends do and rely on the D3 batteries in the D300 vertical grip).

I also like that I can use the D700 without the vertical grip for travel photography when it is convenient.

I think I'd feel the same way you do though if I had your client base & shooting situations. Nice that Nikon offers so many alternatives!--David

I thought the D700 would make more sense for the backpack, but those are the locations where I really need the 100% coverage more than in my studio, plus that's where you'd want the better battery life :-p.

My first thought with the D700 was that I received a broken one, the viewfinder was so dark compared to the D300 or D3. Maybe it is!

Vignetting is a problem I'm definitely seeing. Forget about a lens hood on my 35-70 2.8 -- not happening :-p. But I had almost forgotten what a "normal" perspective looked like through a camera. It's more than just a crop factor, you know :-).

I'm certainly conflicted on this. Basically, Nikon's charging way too much for the D3 given that there is a D700. It should only be $1k more new -- not $2k. Or really, they should have given the D700 a 100% view and left out the sensor cleaning or the pop-up flash. I used to be really excited about that flash for my D300, but with the 700, high ISO is so good that for times you leave a flash home, you can just shoot at 1600 and have nice results.

Scott,

Your most recent post regarding trading the d700 for the d3 only has solidified my previous thoughts and final decision that I would continue to save for the d3 over the d700.

Sorry you had to be the guinea pig but your trials have helped to eliminate my trepidations.

No problem. I'm still within the time period for returning the D700.

Scott--Funny you should mention about the D700 viewfinder being dark. When I first got mine I threw a lens on it before I even stuck a battery in. Then I looked through it and almost paniced. It was _really dark_.

It was so weird though that I figured maybe somehow the camera not having a battery had left/caused the lens to be partially closed (e.g. stopped down), and sure enough some fiddling & a battery got things back to normal.

What's interesting is that I don't remember ever having that happen before in all the times I've put lenses on cameras--I'm sure many times with no battery. Maybe it has something to do with LiveView?

In any case, no clue if what you might be seeing is in any way related, but it was _really dark_ when it happened!--David