Multi DX Fomat owners

Now that the D700 has been out for a short bit, i'm curious to know whether the owners of Multi-DX format camera

will opt out of one of them, and add a FX sensor camera to your arsenal.

 

For example, to those photographers who own a D200 and a D300, or 2 D300's,will you end up selling one of your

300's or your 200, and add a 700?

 

Inquiring minds want to know....

No way for my wildlife hobby, and not necessary for my commercial work. Solved the DX wide angle problem some time ago and am quite satisfied with the DX results. And the DX bodies will get better!

Don

how did you solve your wide angle problem, as I cannot find out how to do that.

Please tell us, as I assume I am not the only one.

John,

 

I have a D200 & a D300. I shoot predominantly wildlife & the 300-800mm Sigmonster is my most used lens. ON my DX bodies it's a 450-1200mm & I still have to crop at times.

 

If I chose to go to a D700 then I'd have to crop even more.

 

This said/written. I have an online friend named Roman Johnston (you can see his work here http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos ). Roman went from a D2X (or D2Xs) to the D300. His comment to me was - - "There's something to be said for pixel density". Roman shoots landscapes.

 

So, I have no need for an FX camera. If I'd get one it would be for when I need very low light. Trying to photograph an Opossum baby in a tree the other night in pitch dark was one of those times. Flash shots resulted in harsh shadows...

 

What I need is reach.

 

As for getting wide enough. That's not all that hard. I have the Nikon 10,5mm DX Fisheye and the 14-24mm f/2.8. I may get the 11-16mm Tokina one day, but I feel well covered at this point.

 

Lil :-)

Erik.... I solved it by putting a 10-20mm Sigma in my bag. FX will be nice someday, but 14-15mm is pricey on the

also-pricey FX bodies.

Erik, Nikkors 12-24 and 10.5 fisheyes did it for me..

Lil,

 

Wildlife and sports make up the majority of my photographic interest, so the reach is an important factor for me also.

But i'm just wondering, for those with 2 dx bodies, whether they would part with one so that pixel size (as opposed to

pixel density) can be realized also. Kind of having the best of both worlds?

btw....i'm kinda on the fence about this. I love the image quality i get out of my D200, and even better, my D300, But kinda makes me think how much better (if at all) my landscapes would come out if i were to use a DX sensor camera.

I recently sold my D200 and Tokina 12-24 and put the $ towards the D700. I already had a D300, the 14-24 and 17-35 and 5

other pro lenses. Now, I feel ready for anything and have zero gear lust for the first time ever.

 

Everyone's needs are different.

John,

 

I see your point. But again, Roman knows I shoot wildlife most of the time. His comment to me was "Don't give up the crop factor". I trust Roman, but have to admit, it would be nice to try the D700 as I can't afford the D3. I've seen amazing shots out of the D3.

 

For sports, the D700 would probably be a good second camera as you'll have high ISO & gain speed.

 

One of each would probably not be a bad thing.

 

Lil :-)

I have a D80 and, currently, no DX lenses, but a whole series of primes and zooms from film days. It is going to take

some time, but my next purchase is D700 - it brings all those primes back to life and wide is wide again, without having to

resort to large zooms with 77 mm filters.

I own D2X D200 D100. Just purchased D700. Most of my lenses, not all, are NOT DX. I use all these bodies. I owned a D2H and wore it out.... 100,000 pics. When it failed, repair, from Nikon, $500, so I just threw it away.

 

I have had the D700 about 2 weeks.... so far good purchase.

 

A. L. Shaw