[dgaies]

I paid $2200 for mine last year. What do you think is a good price to list it for? I'm going to throw in a 50mm 1.4 and 35mm F2.0. Any help would be appreciated. I'm not in a hurry because I don't know when the D800 is shipping.

From what I've see so far, the price of used D700 bodies hasn't changed all that much at this point. That is to say, they still seem to be selling in the $1800-2200 range depending on age and condition. You'll occasionally see one for a little under $1800, but typically it either has a high shutter count or it sells very quickly

Now, whether prices will drop quickly as more and more D800 bodies are purchased is an unknown at this point. My best guess is that at most you'll see a 20% reduction in the price of a used D700 by the end of the year. So my best guess is that the price range will drop to somewhere around $1500-1800 by the end of the year. It's just a guess, I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

So the shorter answer to your question is that right now is probably not a bad time to sell it if you're ready to part with it and you probably won't lose much on the sale. If you wait a bit, you probably won't get as much, but I don't see it losing massive value over the next 12 months either.

As for the 50/1.4 and 35/2, assuming we're talking about the 50/1.4D, they're worth about $250, give or take, depending on condition. Maybe a little more if you sold them seperately, maybe a little less if you put them together as a single package.

[Pål Jensen]

You must, of course, compare equivalent lenses.
30/1.4 APSC, 50/2 FF, 75/2.8 MF
And the price decreases with increasing format indeed. MF however has other market forces driven by body prices which are 5-digit $. Even Pentax MF lenses would be cheaper if sold in FF or APSC quantity.

You keep repeating this but it is wrong. These lenses are not equivalent because DOF is not equivalent between formats. No one buy lenses for various format in order to have exactly the same DOF, say, three stops from wide open. Photographer compare lenses in order to get the same exposure at a certain magnification and aperture.

[RonHendriks1966]

Photographer compare lenses in order to get the same exposure at a certain magnification and aperture.

Boy is my life simple. I really don't care about camera's that are not in my hands and make pictures with what ever is in my hands or reach.

[falconeye]

You keep repeating this but it is wrong.

Please, do an effort and try to learn something.

[Clavius]

Boy is my life simple. I really don't care about camera's that are not in my hands and make pictures with what ever is in my hands or reach.

Wonderful reply! I'm still learning to do that.

This forum always gets met frustrated with all the topics about technology that doesn't even exist yet. Going out shooting always helps a lot, but I have to learn to do that before I get frustrated.

[eurostar]

Suddenly everyone will stop wanting OVF's?
Suddenly nobody shoots moving things anymore?
Suddenly everybody starts shooting at arms lenght?
And agree with staring down a tiny little laggy pixelized screen wich doesn't look anything like the real image in front of the lens?

Well, in the first books I read about photography, "real image" was considered the one from rangefinder, opposed to a "false" one in the reflex mirror, because you weren't actually see the picture you were shooting, because the viewfinder was obscured in the instant the mirror flipped up. And because the viewfinder went dark when closing diaphragm, or, if it was automatic, you weren't seeing the triue dept of field.

Sure, many confused statement, but a bottom of truth there was: the only kind of viewfinder that let you see "the real image" is no viewfinder at all, while every one else, from ground glass to the one in Italy we called a "sport frame" has some kind of medium between the photographer and the "image". Just like once upon a time the mirror flipped up shooting the picture and then stayed there, up, obscuring the viewfinder, the lag of today EVF is a contingency of the present, but not the way things have to stay forever. I don0't know if people, all of the people, will not want an OVF. But like most have preferred a reflex viewfinder to a rangefinder one, but still some prefers the latter, I guess most will prefer the EVF to the OVF, And like today we still have a single, expensive rangefinder still in production, I am sure in a few years we'll have at least a reflex around, I would like to think it will be a Pentax, but probably it will be a Nikon.
Shooting moving things with an EVF will not be a problem, and EVF are just like OVF, the camera stay at the eye and not at arms length. And, as of today, I find the image in the monitor of my K-5 much more similar, in DR and color and dof to the final image than the slice of world on the other side of my lens.

[stanleyk]

From what I've see so far, the price of used D700 bodies hasn't changed all that much at this point. That is to say, they still seem to be selling in the $1800-2200 range depending on age and condition. You'll occasionally see one for a little under $1800, but typically it either has a high shutter count or it sells very quickly

Now, whether prices will drop quickly as more and more D800 bodies are purchased is an unknown at this point. My best guess is that at most you'll see a 20% reduction in the price of a used D700 by the end of the year. So my best guess is that the price range will drop to somewhere around $1500-1800 by the end of the year. It's just a guess, I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

So the shorter answer to your question is that right now is probably not a bad time to sell it if you're ready to part with it and you probably won't lose much on the sale. If you wait a bit, you probably won't get as much, but I don't see it losing massive value over the next 12 months either.

As for the 50/1.4 and 35/2, assuming we're talking about the 50/1.4D, they're worth about $250, give or take, depending on condition. Maybe a little more if you sold them seperately, maybe a little less if you put them together as a single package.

Thanks so much!!!!!!!! I don't know the exact shutter count but it's going to be low. I really don't use it all that much because it's just so big. I was going to include the two lenses. If I could get $2K for the body and lenses I'd be thrilled.

[Clavius]

Shooting moving things with an EVF will not be a problem, and EVF are just like OVF, the camera stay at the eye and not at arms length. And, as of today, I find the image in the monitor of my K-5 much more similar, in DR and color and dof to the final image than the slice of world on the other side of my lens.

You're trying to convince the wrong guy here. I've used a NEX5n and a Olympus thingy with EVF. I won both devices at photo contests last year. Compared to OVF, the lag in the viewfinder makes it IMPOSSIBLE to shoot moving subjects. Panning is out of the question. EVF's are fine for shooting buildings and landscapes, preferable on a tripod. I gave the Oly to a friend of mine and I sold the NEX5n. (Almost for peanuts, nobody seemed to want it.)

[dgaies]

Thanks so much!!!!!!!! I don't know the exact shutter count but it's going to be low. I really don't use it all that much because it's just so big. I was going to include the two lenses. If I could get $2K for the body and lenses I'd be thrilled.

You're welcome.

My guess about the 20% reduction was somewhat based on the fact that the price of a new body just dropped about that much ($2700 to $2200).

As for 2k for the body and lenses, I might just decide I need a second D700 body

[ElJamoquio]

You keep repeating this but it is wrong. These lenses are not equivalent because DOF is not equivalent between formats. No one buy lenses for various format in order to have exactly the same DOF, say, three stops from wide open. Photographer compare lenses in order to get the same exposure at a certain magnification and aperture.

Personally, I prefer to compare lenses that have

1) a given image noise levels at the shutter speeds I require (this is a function of both f-stop and sensor area)
2) a given level of DOF control (a function of both f-stop and sensor area)
3) a given level of image quality (varies with f-stop for each lens of course, and varies between lenses we're comparing (i.e. 31mm f/1.0 vs 50mm f/1.4)).

All three of those things are affected by the sensor area.

I'm not disagreeing with you that some photographers assume the same ISO for both a full frame and aps-c lens, and then assume that the two exposures made (APS-C: 100 ISO, f1.4, and FF: 100 ISO, f1.4) are equivalent.

However they're really not equivalent:
1) they don't have the same DOF (which I'm guessing you don't care about?)
2) and they don't have the same level of noise.

There's far more photons hitting the sensor in the case of the 50mm lens at f/1.4 on full frame than there would be on a 31mm lens at f/1.4, which makes the noise level on the ISO 100 for the full frame much lower.

[Pål Jensen]

However they're really not equivalent:
1) they don't have the same DOF (which I'm guessing you don't care about?)
2) and they don't have the same level of noise.
.

Spot on and that is the point; formats are not equal. Photographers choose one format over the other because they aren't equal and want to take advantage of one format over the other (whatever that advantage is). Treating cameras as laboratory equipment where the point is to calculate the size if the format from from a fixed DOF at a certain magnification and focus distance, maybe fun but have very little relevance for real life photography.
The only way to approach this from a photographic point of view is that larger format get better image quality from smaller one all else equal. However, DOF is different between formats at the same ISO and exposure.

[stanleyk]

Looks like the new 5D is going to start out at $3499........

Hot on the heels of the Nikon D800, The Canon 5D Mark III will hit tomorrow for $3499 | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

[jsherman999]

Thanks so much!!!!!!!! I don't know the exact shutter count but it's going to be low. I really don't use it all that much because it's just so big. I was going to include the two lenses. If I could get $2K for the body and lenses I'd be thrilled.

Stanley from what I gather, your D700 has a very low shutter count - you haven't had it that long and haven't shot much with it. And if you throw in the 50 1.4D and 35 f/2D, you really should be expecting a bit more than $2000 for that kit!

I'd say that if your D700 has less than 5K clicks... ask at least $2200 for the D700 + 35 f/2 + 50 1.4. The 35 & 50 combo alone could probably sell for $400 - $500 used on ebay (for both lenses,) if they're in good condition.

[stanleyk]

Stanley from what I gather, your D700 has a very low shutter count - you haven't had it that long and haven't shot much with it. And if you throw in the 50 1.4D and 35 f/2D, you really should be expecting a bit more than $2000 for that kit!

I'd say that if your D700 has less than 5K clicks... ask at least $2200 for the D700 + 35 f/2 + 50 1.4. The 35 & 50 combo alone could probably sell for $400 - $500 used on ebay (for both lenses,) if they're in good condition.

Thanks! I haven't checked the shutter count but it can't be too high. I did two portrait jobs with it in Nov/Dec and probably took about 35-50 shoots at each one. Then I did a dog portrait job which was about another 30 or so. Plus here and there. So well under 5000. I got the 50 and the 35 for a planned dog portrait thing just in case they decided to lick the lens.

I just can't afford to keep it and get the D800. I tried to figure out a way. It really is a great camera. I just wish I had waited. I figure the D800 will be like the D700, it will be a few years before they make a replacement. With my luck they will probably come out with something better next year.......

[stanleyk]

One thing that surprised me. People really like big prints of themselves. Oh well.