New to Digital and Looking for an FX

[nick_baker]

<p>Nobody seems to have pointed out that the bodies you are discussing handle differently regarding the external controls and menus. Some people find switching between these styles a bigger issue than switching between DX/FX. D300/D700/D800 have a similar design. D7000/D7100/D600 have another similar design. You might prefer one style over another, and you also might find that once used to one style or another you find it hard to change.</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>You know folks, this thread is going the way that most of these do. We tend to list what WE have and tell Sam he ought to buy it.</p>

<p>Without a doubt the best camera for Sam is the Nikon D4. It is great in low light. It is fast for his hockey. He will have the "viewfinder experience" that he gets with his F3, it is great for airshows and in a pinch he can use it to chalk cars on a hill. Of course shooting his Hockey from the stands he needs the 300 F2.8. He also needs the 24 - 70 AFS F/2.8 because, as one of us told him, look at what the pros are using. Following that line he also needs the 70-200 AFS VR II for his midrange shots and for when he sits closer at the Hockey. Besides, simply all the pros have one. I have two. Version 1 and 2 because everyone knows that version one is a tiny bit soft on the very edges so I only use it for DX. While we are at it, since telling him what pro's do seems to be the order of the day, he needs an SB-900 series flash. Tell me that there is any pro here who would even take the trash out without one at least in his pocket. And he needs a lot of cards. So there you have it Sam. About $20,000.00 and you have what you need until the D5 comes out. Of course the D4 is a little light on pixels and the D800E will make your low light pics have a bit less noise......</p>

<p>We are all entitled to our opinion. There are merits to all of them. But can we remember that this is Ray's first digital camera? And that Ray does not have a $20000.00 budget. I usually agree with Shun but in regard to the autofocus I strongly disagree. We all made the transition to autofocus. Most of us in the days when it wasn't all that good. Now it is very good. He will come to like it very much and very quickly. I know there are some here who doggedly stick to manual focus by choice but they are eccentrics and not in the mainstream. <br>

The D700 is a great camera. I had one. It feels really nice in the hand. But lets really compare it to the D600: <br>

It has half the resolution.<br>

It has worse low light performance by about half a stop.<br>

It has two full stops lower dynamic range. (Think is hockey pics on the ice.)<br>

Its viewing screen is smaller<br>

It has less color depth<br>

It has no video compared to really good video<br>

It does not have HDR in camera<br>

It has a slower frame rate at FX.<br>

Its image quality is not as good.</p>

<p>Those are the facts. Other than a slightly more robust body the D700 is simply not even close to the D600 in technology. Compared to the D7100 it has the "advantage" of full frame and that is about it. He will be buying it Used. Anyway you cut it that means no warranty. If he buys it refurbished it will cost him $2200.00 and that is only $200.00 less than a refurbished D800. And that throws a whole new wrinkle on it doesn't it? </p>

<p>Here is what happens when people don't think about the equipment as a whole rather than as a piece of the pie. Some here said that the 70-300 is too slow for your Hockey on the D7100. I disagree. Partially because they are not considering what the camera can do. At 70mm the lens is F4.5 until about 125mm. Using the 2X crop that is 250 mm f4.5 so there is 1/2 half stop better right away. Shun's excellent review of the D7100 said he is comfortable at ISO 3200. That is very fast. And what exactly did they propose as a substitute? Your 50mm F1.4? Well let's look at that choice. On the D700 it is...well...a 50 mm F1.4. You can put it in crop mode and hit 75mm. It will have to be cropped and you have less than 6 MP to do it in crop mode and 12 in FX. (Assuming you can get the focus right on the fly manually). What is that lens on the D7100? It is a 100mm F/1.4 with 18 MP that you can crop, shooting at 7 FPS. This is why it is important to really think out your equipment.</p>

<p>If Ray has the money for lenses over his $2K budget then the D600 wins in full frame. If money is a factor as he said it was, then the D7100 wins hands down. The D700 would be an old technology poor choice unless, perhaps, he could get a really nice used one really cheap. But it would have to be in the $1200-$1300 range and then the decision would not be made on the body but on the money left over for lenses......</p>

<p>Ray. Don't buy your new camera in DX with the idea that you will go to FX anytime soon. (Though I have no problem with the lens choice you proposed even if it does leave you a little tighter than you need to be on the wide end.) If you don't want DX then buy FX. I use both everyday and I believe the differences are not that great. You are a clean slate as you are going from a primitive camera to one with a load of new features for you to learn. Whichever way you go you will be entering a whole new world. Whichever way you go don't compromise on your features. Get the best feature set you can.</p>

<p>Today I am going on assignment to shoot a zoo. My kit is:</p>

<p>D4 with the 80-200 F2.8 hanging on it. D7100 with the 90mm macro hanging on it. In the pocket of my vest, the 50mm F/1.4 and a lightweight sigma 17-50 F/2.8. Flash on both bodies. Nothing in the trunk because it will be 105 here today. I can tell you exactly why I chose each one of those. My range of lenses includes 25mm at F2.8... 50, 75 and 100mm at F1.4..... 90mm macro... 70-200 at F2.8 and 10 FPS and 140-400 F2.8 at 7FPS. That is a pretty wide range. But check this out. If I left the D4 at home what would I lose? 3 FPS and my voice memo. That's it. Think about it. </p>

<p> </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>You know folks, this thread is going the way that most of these do. We tend to list what WE have and tell Sam he ought to buy it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is typically the case. However, my suggestion to him is the D600, which I don't own.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Without a doubt the best camera for Sam is the Nikon D4.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>First of all, his budget is $2000, and the D4, at $6000 new, is not even close. Additionally, Sam has mostly manual focus lenses. The D4's AF is completely meaningless to him, until he updates his lenses as well.</p>

<p>My suggestion is that Sam should go back and re-think the whole upgrade strategy. I wonder how he managed to shoot indoor hockey with manual focus film under low light.</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Shun read my whole post. You will see that that is exactly the point I am making.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Sam, IF you go for DX (and given your budget and the type of photos you want to shoot, I think that is the better choice over FX), do yourself a huge favour, and do not try to avoid DX lenses "because of something I might do later". You'll cut yourself short today, and maybe afterwards find you do so for reasons that never happen. You might end up disliking the camera basically because you have the wrong lens for it. Selling a camera second hand, you will see a far bigger deprication hit than you'll see selling a lens second hand.<br />So, on the short end, getting a DX zoom will give you a much more useful zoomrange, and hence a more useful package. The 24mm wide end of the 24-85VR isn't very wide on DX; a DX 17/18- ..xx.. zoom makes a lot more sense.<br>

And while I have and vastly enjoy a D700 (and would not want a D800 or D600 for myself), it would not be recommendation without a lot of "if, but, considering, however...". It might be the right choice, but most certainly not the most likely candidate.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>If we're talking about depreciation hits, I'd throw out that if you're thinking along the lines of buying DX now and later moving to FX, the thing to do is buy used DX lenses now so they're already depreciated. For example, right now you can have a used 16-85 DX lens for around $400. If you keep the lens in decent condition, in a couple of years you can sell it for around $400 and it costs you nothing to have the lens for 2 years. In the meantime, it's a much better lens for everyday use on DX than the 24-85 is, and later if you buy an FX camera you're free to decide that you don't like the 24-85 so much after all and want something else instead. That's not an unlikely scenario - the 24-85 VR lens looks great on a D700 but I don't like it at all on a high res camera.</p>

<p>(Meanwhile, if you bought a 24-85 lens now, at the discounted new price of $500, and later decided you didn't want it, you would lose at least $100 when you resell it. Since November when Nikon sold all those D600's with the lens for what they usually charge for body only, and eBay got flooded with 24-85 lenses being sold by people who bought the kit to sell the lens, the used market for that lens is colder than my ex girlfriend's shoulder.)</p>

[joseph_smith3]

<p>Hi Sam, lots of opinions here. I shoot with a D 300s, a D 700 and a D 600. My camera for action is the D 300s because of its fast frame rate, high capacity buffer, and its 1.5 crop sensor. I use it with the MB D10 battery pack to get a higher frame rate of 8 fps. My second action camera is my D 700 with the MB D10 when I do not need the magnification efect from the crop sensor. My thrid place action camera is my D 600. Its rated frame rate is only 5.5 fps, and I am not sure I am even getting that.<br>

My first place camera for landscapes is my D 600. All three will meter with Nikon manual focus or AF lenses. <a href="http://www.lensrental.com">www.lensrental.com</a> list the lenses they recommend for the D 800. This list might give you and idea as to what lenses will give you the best results with the D 600 if you decide to get this body.<br>

If you decide to shoot RAW, which I recommend, and if you shoot in Continuous mode to capture action shooting like ice hockey, then you need to pay very close attention to the buffer capacity of the Nikon bodies. In general, the greater the megapixels of the sensor, the lower the capacity of the buffer. The new D 7100's buffer holds only 7 RAW images--essentially one burst in Continuous mode, and this can be reduced depending on other camera settings.<br>

Thom Hogan's werb site has comparison charts for all of the Nikon bodies.<br>

Joe Smith</p>