A few ideas / A few questions / $2000-$2500

[janet_biersack]

<p>I'll preface this by saying I live in Japan, so while 99.9% of all things are more expensive here than in the USA (including things made here), recently there have been some decent pricing on Canon, Nikon and FujiFilm gear.<br>

That being said, I'm in the market for a new camera/prime lens. I have no brand loyalty, but have done a healthy amount of research on makes/models of interest. But I'm caught in a hole at the moment and really need some insight from those who have come before me.<br>

My current/primary interest is street/travel photography. Sometimes it's people, sometimes landscape/travel stuff, architecture, inanimate objects. I like portraits, too. I think fashion and advertising photography are cool, too - but if I had a new camera tomorrow, the thing I will most use it for is street and travel photography.<br>

I'm interested in the FujiFilm XPro1 and the Nikon D600/D7100.<br>

The issues I see are these:<br>

FUJI XPRO1<br>

- With the release and improvements on the X100s, I feel like it would be a waste to buy the XPro1 now, as the next version of that (XPro1s/2) will certainly be a major advantage to the current issues it has.<br>

- I worry if the XPro1 is too limited outside of street/travel photography, and if I wanted to grow in other avenues, I'd be in need of another camera at that point.<br>

- Who knows when the XPro1s/2 will arrive - I could be waiting into 2014.</p>

<p>NIKON D600/D7100<br>

- They both have trade-offs against each other. Not sure if full frame alone is worth going with the D600.<br>

- I know for street/travel, the DSLR will be heavy compared to a mirrorless. But more concerned if the D600 would be a good fit for the above mentioned photo types.</p>

<p>Really, just looking for a what you would do and why and how these two avenues might look for the future. With the D600, I know it's the quality of lens that will stand over time, and can always change out bodies as years/prices change. With the Fuji, I guess my only fear is in a few years they decide to flush the whole X line and I'm left with a bag of garbage. </p>

<p> </p>

[leslie_cheung]

<blockquote>

<p>With the Fuji, I guess my only fear is in a few years they decide to flush the whole X line and I'm left with a bag of garbage.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How will discontinuation cause them to become garbage? Mirrorless (Xpro1) and dslr both have their advantages and negatives, of course. </p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Choosing between the Fuji or the Nikons.... only you can really do that. The X-Pro looks a great product to me, which can do pretty much everything you indicate. Unless you want to shoot sports or wildlife.... Otherwise, agree with Leslie. Your photos won't go garbage if Fuji pulls the plug.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Not sure if full frame alone is worth going with the D600.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you're not sure, then probably it isn't. If you know the advantages of a full frame camera, and do not see those advantages pay themselves back in your photography, then DX is a sound choice. There is one major "IF", though. At the wide end, primes for DX cameras are completely lacking. The 35 f/1.8DX lens is very nice, but wider than that, there are only FX lenses which aren't always as great on DX. If you need more ideas specifically on that, it would help to know which focal lengths you're interested in.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>If Fuji sticks to their lens road map http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n120626.html and indeed releases those lenses in 2013, then I don't see the system lacking for street/travel photography and the choice between a X-Pro 1 and a D7100 becomes a matter of preference. Would certainly wait for a X-Pro 2 though. With Fuji you get the primes lenses that Nikon is lacking for DX.<br>

<br /> D600 vs D7100 - what Wouter says. Though I am not sure what he means by "FX lenses which aren't always as great on DX"; I assume he is talking about non-DX optimized focal lengths rather than optical quality. Utilizing the DX crop of the center portion of an FX lens image circle eliminates the weaker outer regions that contribute to the FX image only.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Dieter, you're right, my writing's not too clear - indeed the point is non-DX optimised focal lengths, and when there is a proper choice (24mm, which on DX is a really nice length), the choice between either very good, very expensive and big (like the 24 f/1.4), or affordable, small but not particularly nice nor very fast (24 f/2.8). Next to that, the big missing length is 16mm (or 18mm).<br>

By the looks of it, Fuji will cater better for those needs. As does Pentax - a K5-II with their primes is a very nice piece of kit too.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Not sure if full frame alone is worth going with the D600.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you have to asked, you don't need it. I'd also look at Canon, Pentax, Nex and M4/3rd...</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Wouter, not only does Fuji cater better for those needing/wanting DX primes; Sony seems to be on its way there too. The one question that remains for me though is the following - eventually, there will be FX mirrorless cameras from both Fuji and Sony - and with them the need for another set of lenses. I have quite a few Nikon DX lenses (and currently no intention to move to FX); but I am not going to repeat the "mistake" of investing into a format whose days and/or scope appear limited. I just purchased a Sony NEX 6 to use with some Leica glass I inherited - but I won't be buying any Sony (or third party) lenses for it.</p>

<p>You are also correct about Pentax - the most "complete" DX lens system out there.</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Why does she need primes? She articulated the kinds of photography for which zoom lenses will do just fine. So let's not turn our friend Janet into a gear head quite yet.</p>

<p>I think there is a clear winner here. It is the D7100. I am going to eliminate the X-Pro 1. It is cute and quirky but to limiting. With the body and two basic lenses she will be over budget already. She is betting on the come line that new lenses are going to happen and there is no used market from which to supplement.</p>

<p>As I am reluctant to participate in any discussion of cameras that does not include at least a wink at price, and since she mentioned a price limit I think we should honor that and stay under $2500.00. (US Prices I admit but it is the reference we have.) For that she can get:</p>

<p>The D600 at $2000.00 leaves her but $500.00 for lenses. Just enough for one zoom on the new market. The D600 kit with the 24 - 85 hits the top of her budget exactly. This is a nice rig and would do much of what she wants.</p>

<p>With the D7100 she can get a pretty nice kit. The Camera with the 18-105 Vr AFS is is $1500.00 This is an acceptable quality lens that will be perfect for walking around. That leaves her $1000 for lenses and accessories. For that she can get the 70-300 AFS VR for $600. So that the prime fanatics here won't foam at the mouth she can add a 50mm F1.8D for $120.00 leaving more than the $326.00 she needs for a critically important purchase she forgot to mention. That is an SB-700 flash.</p>

<p>Flash rant: I wish that whenever we give advice about new kits that someone would mention a good flash. The one on the camera is OK in an absolute pinch but it is in no way a substitute for a great flash. Neither is any lens for that matter. When I look at her list of stuff she wants to do with the camera, the flash is not a nice to have thing, it is a necessity. If she takes the time to understand that mastering flash (and particularly off camera flash) it will take her photography to a whole new place. She will see portraiture in a new way. Be able to shoot in harsh light better. Go inside and indirect for great travel shots. I mean the world is just better when you can control the light properly. The real deal is that to tell the professionals from the amateurs you don't look for a fancy camera or a Domke vest. You look for how and when they are using flash. End of rant.</p>

<p>So for my money it is the D7100 Kit. The 50 MM F/1.8 for portraits and fun. The 70-300 Afs VR for going long in landscape, travel and such. And the great flash to make the whole kit about twice as effective.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Rick,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Why does she need primes? She articulated the kinds of photography for which zoom lenses will do just fine. So let's not turn our friend Janet into a gear head quite yet.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Because the OP stated:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm in the market for a new camera/prime lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I fail to see what using primes has got to do with gearheadedness. It's a preference some people have - does not make them gearheads. It just makes their approach to taking photos a bit different than yours might be.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<blockquote>

<p>FUJI XPRO1<br /> - With the release and improvements on the X100s, I feel like it would be a waste to buy the XPro1 now, as the next version of that (XPro1s/2) will certainly be a major advantage to the current issues it has.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The x100s is a fixed lens camera and the xpro1 is lens interchangeable...They are different.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /> - I worry if the XPro1 is too limited outside of street/travel photography, and if I wanted to grow in other avenues, I'd be in need of another camera at that point.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>While dslrs are pretty versatile, all cameras are limiting in some ways...it's nature of the beast. </p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />- Who knows when the XPro1s/2 will arrive - I could be waiting into 2014.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Again, a new camera does not make the xpro1 obsolete. Focus on the pictures, instead of cameras used.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>NIKON D600/D7100<br /> - They both have trade-offs against each other. Not sure if full frame alone is worth going with the D600.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you have to asked, full frame isn't worth it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /> - I know for street/travel, the DSLR will be heavy compared to a mirrorless. But more concerned if the D600 would be a good fit for the above mentioned photo types.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dslr are pretty versatile, so in all likely hood, yes.</p>

 

[janet_biersack]

<p>After thinking heavily on the matter, I came to the following conclusions:<br>

I wanted an XPro1. I enjoy everything about the camera. However, being that it`s due for an update (based on all the rumor websites and the X100S upgrades), I felt it would be silly to buy that camera now. But I don`t want to sit on my hands waiting for an XPro2.<br>

So I got a Nikon D600. So I`m in the full frame game and a full body DSLR.<br>

Thanks for everyone`s comments and help.</p>