Upgrading to full frame

<p>Sorry guys, I lied...I said I gonna wait, but I made the order for a D700. D700 is pretty good deal at $2399 now. I figure I shouldn't lose too much if I decided to sell it later for an upgrade, but being able to start shooting, relearning all my lens on FX is big(average 25K shots a year) so a few months wait is worth a few thousand pics already.</p>

<p>I agree that there are always more lens to get, a 80-400 replacement is definitely high on my list. A PC-E lens used to be what I want to get, but I am taking less landscape shot these days and experimenting environmental portrait and documentary, I will wait and see on the 24mm lens.</p>

<p>William, if it helps, your current body was depreciating while you waited and if you wait too long, it makes a mad dash to 0. Also, if you shoot 25k shots/yr in 4 yrs that is 100,000K x 8 cents per print inc processing or 8k. Think of it as buying a sensor and computer instead of film. If you sell it in 2 years, it will still have some value as an offset as well. No one said it was an inexpensive hobby. And we Nikonians pay a premium. But when that body is in my hands, it is worth every penny. Be sure you file for the Nikon bail out. You should receive a Ferrari and supermodel soon. You did you homework on the lenses and knew the body. Now just shoot and enjoy.</p>

<p>You can never have too many lenses!</p>

<p>i dont think the d700 will be any less obsolete than the D3s in a few years time. i dont really see a compelling reason to get a d3s unless you really really need that extra stop of ISO...which you could also get by spending the same amount of cash, roughly, on the 24/1.4, which will also work great on whatever replaces both bodies.</p>

<p>edit: oh,i see you just ordered the d700. well, it's good you took my advice before i even posted it. :)</p>

<p>oh man...don't mention the 24/1.4. I know I don't need it, but that lens is sweet....at least from the sample images. I am telling myself to learn all my lens again in FX, and not to buy anything new until I know them. It's not easy, but I am trying.</p>

<p>William, not that there is something inherently wrong wit it, but it sounds like you are more interested in equipment than photography. If you indeed mainly shoot landscape and travel, all of those f1.4 lenses and f2.8 zooms are more like a hindrance.</p>

<p>I shoot landscapes and nature and purchased a D300s this year and will upgrade to a D700 something but as one poster noted "Personally I would sit tight and wait for a D700x or whatever is up next".</p>

<p>Shun, While I am interested in landscape and travel photo, I do shoot many different things than just these two areas. I shot macro, shot events for my church, kids and family portrait, wedding for my friends, studio still life. For example, my personal project for the next three months include one for night photography, one with document a family with photo/sound/movie clip, and flower abstract macro. While I know a good photographer tends to specialize in one area and excel at it, I am in general just like to take pics, that's why I got the 2.8 lens that is can fits more needs in different areas. I did a 365 project last year on the DX 35mm f1.8 only so I do know how easier you can bring a small setup around. I am not saying I don't like new gear, I think many of us do, but i can see there is a use for a 24 f1.4 lens, for example a photo walk at night, able to hand hold a shot rather than bring out a tripod in the middle of the street makes a big different. Of course, if a lens can justify its cost is another issue :p. I went into Lightroom and check my pictures I took this year and last year, about 16% are at iso 3200, and 28% are f 2 or under. That is why I want to see a camera with better iso performance can open up.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>William, not that there is something inherently wrong wit it, but it sounds like you are more interested in equipment than photography. If you indeed mainly shoot landscape and travel, all of those f1.4 lenses and f2.8 zooms are more like a hindrance.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I couldn't resist pointing out that mathematical evidence right on the PN front page suggests everyone on the internet is more interested in equipment than photography :) Right now there are 1,111 new posts listed for the Nikon forum, a similar number in Canon, but none of the photography practice forums have more than half that amount, and 7/10 only have around 100 or fewer new posts listed! Other notable forums (dpreview) don't even HAVE practice forums, it's all just gear.</p>

<p>Steve,<br>

You don't have to look for statistics. It is well known that men loves toys! So we play with gear... but BTW enjoying to play with it we get more knowledge how to do better pictures. That's normal. When you know better your tools you have much better results. So nothing to worry about! Everyone is happy! Excepting some wives...</p>

<p>Steve, the most popular thread in this forum, Nikon, is our recurring Wednesday thread with like 200 posts weekly. It is all about images.</p>

<p>And image critique is a big part of photo.net outside of the forums. You can't believe how serious and angry people get when they receive a 1, 2, or 3 out of 7 rating.</p>

<p>Well, actually, Shun, I looked at the number of posts on the so-called critique thread and suspected you might respond with that, but you've also already made the counter point I had in mind. Namely, that thread is no more about the craft of photography than this gear thread. In reality, little real critiquing happens on the web (or even in college classes anymore...not sure it ever really did). No, what those threads are all about is people posting their very best images in expectation of being showered in praise. Nice try, though.</p>

<p>Mihai, no argument from me. There is definitely satisfaction in looking at, talking about, and using nice gear. But, as long as the subject came up (rather eloquently in Shun's post above, I thought), I couldn't resist the comment. Hey, digital photography has firmly planted us in the gear lust zone, and gear lust is a far larger pastime than photography probably ever could be IMO. And, in some ways I'm glad because it means Nikon makes bigger sales numbers which keeps them in business to produce the really good stuff sold in small volume.</p>

<p>Ultimately, though, I am disappointed at the general lack of discussion about actual photo technique this millennium. I recall things on this forum being different in the 90s. Gear lust, sure, but a lot more actual technique was discussed, I thought. </p>