rick_m.

<p>Another vote for Shun. It doesn't sound like you need anything at this point. </p>

<p>I wouldn't worry about leaving the lens on at all. I think the mount is easily strong enough to handle it. </p> <p>I have the non-afs version as well and it is a truly beautiful lens. </p>

<blockquote> <p>Ideally, my logic is to avoid EF-S lenses and stick to 'regular' lenses as I don't mind investing in good glass now and keeping it and hopefully consider a better full frame body in the future, as prices of FF bodies seem to be falling</p> </blockquote> <p>How much do they have to fall? You can already get a 6D refurbished from Canon with a one year factory warranty for $1500.00. The 1D mkII for a bit more. Your 50 F/1.8 will fit on them just fine I imagine. Maybe you should pull the trigger now. </p> <p>You have yet to articulate what it is that you expect a full frame camera to do that your current camera does not. Why don't you tell us? Then compare what you want it to do with what a much better crop sensor camera will do for you at a fraction of the cost. </p>

<p>Well you have decided to fix it so I suppose it is a moot point but for what it is worth, I would spring for the D7100 if I were you. <br> A couple of years ago you posted a question here about whether to get a camcorder or a new camera. The D7100 would answer that question in a whole new way. Its video is light years ahead of the D90. </p> <p>Resolution, dynamic range, viewing screen, low-light capability all in a whole new league. Since you alluded to the fact that the upgrade is affordable, now may be the time. </p>

<p>I found one of these and no longer have the flash. If you want it you can have it. I will gladly send it to someone who can use it. Please be in the US.</p> <p>Thanks</p>

<p>It seems to me that you would be the perfect candidate for the a kit like one B & H sells. I am no fan of needlessly upgrading bodies but yours I a little long in the tooth. For less than the cost of the Tamron lens you can get a great kit. Here is the kit:</p> <p>Canon Rebel T3I<br> 18MP APS-C CMOS Sensor</p> <ul> <li >EF-S 18-55mm IS & EF 75-300mm Lenses</li> <li >DIGIC 4 Imaging Processor</li> <li >3.0" Clear View Vari-Angle LCD</li> <li >Full HD 1080p Video with Manual Exposure</li> </ul> <ul data-selenium="highlightList"> <li >100-6400 ISO; Extended Mode to 12800</li> <li >SD/SDHC/SDXC Memory Card Slot</li> <li >Compatible with Canon EF and EF-S Lenses</li> <li >63 Zone Dual-Layer Metering/ 9-Point AF</li> <li >Live View & Intelligent Auto Scene Mode</li> </ul> <p>This kit, with the addition of your 50 mm f1.8 will do everything you want to do and much much more. Before you morn the loss of the F2.8 lens consider that the increased low-light performance of the 3TI will more than compensate. Frankly spoken, there is absolutely nothing that this kit does not do MUCH better than what you have now. This kit costs $599.00.</p> <p>For $200.00 more you could go to the T5i and do even better with essentially the same lenses. </p> <p>No doubt there will be a variety of opinions on this but these kits are put together to focus on a particular market. You seem to be right in the middle of that market. It should also be said however that these bodies are very capable indeed and provide you room to add to your system once you have seen whether you really need to.</p>

<p>Not nearly enough money. I would pass. That offer borders on the insulting.</p>

<p>It is possible that there is something wrong with your lens. I think not. The 24-70 is notable for its sharpness even at F-2.8.</p> <p>You are shooting at 1/200 sec and the 35mm equivalent of 100 mm. As you zoom in you will find that steady hold techniques become more and more important. 1/200 should be fine for your hand-holding but you are shooting a child who wiggles. You will want to keep your shutter speed up for that. Try 1/500 sec to be sure to freeze action. </p> <p>Next look a what your actual focus point is. Often while watching the composition, we forget this fundamental choice. At F-4, as you can see, your depth of field is pretty shallow. Focus on your subject's eye perhaps? </p> <p>How are you holding your camera? You are chasing a moving target. That makes it very difficult to hold steady through the shot. I don't know how many times I have seen this. When a photographer becomes absorbed in shooting a subject like a kid it is easy to begin to waive the camera around try to chase the child's movement. Then in a moment of decision mash his finger down on the button, jarring the camera a the moment of exposure. This camera shake softens the image a bunch. Couple that with he child's movements and you get soft results most every time. You can see if this is happening by putting your camera on a tripod and shooting a still subject. Then tell us how those images are working out. <br> Steady, hold, breathe. Keep repeating that. Keep your breath under control, your shutter speeds up, and your subjects as still as possible and see what happens. </p> <p>One more recommendation. Make sure you practice with your new flash before you use it on assignment. There is a learning curve. Of you are not really up to snuff on flash then study like crazy to master the flash. It is not plug-and-play.</p> <p>Someone is going to pipe in here with the assertion that your 85 is a prime and there for supposed to be sharper. That is not how the real world works. For all practical purposes the 24-70 AFS F/2.8 is really sharp. Sharp enough that there should be no appreciable difference. </p> <p>Stead does it. Good luck</p> <p>Rick</p>

<p>Sorry Dilip. Whenever someone mentions Canon and Nikon in the same room we get one of these food fights. It is embarrassing really. I come from a mixed marriage. I shoot Nikon and my wife shoots Canon. Now to your question:</p> <blockquote> <p>I guess what's puzzling me is how the D700 is still holding its value even after other FX models with higher specs have come out... one would expect it to fall like the Canon D5? But the D5 MkII seems to be around the same as the D700, although with higher pixels. There's a whole generation or mark time lag to Nikon's fall in value (to Nikon's advantage). Maybe pixels aren't evrything...</p> </blockquote> <p>The later first. Pixels are not everything you are quite right. More pixels are not necessarily better. Rather than go into pixel density and such, little of which means much as a practical matter, let me say this. You can easily print a 11X14 from a 7 MP camera. What about larger? When you make a larger print the viewer tends to stand well back from it. So that same 7 MP can make quite acceptable 20" X 30" prints. Your D7000 has far more than that. The main advantage to MP is the ability to crop. With either the 12 MP of the D700 and the 16.2 MP of your D7000 you can do some serious cropping. More from your camera than from the D700. So when do you want the full frame camera? Mostly if you are shooting in very very low light. If you are not doing that you probably don't need it. </p> <p>The D700 is a popular camera for a different reason. Its build and control layout is quite different from the D7000. Many people like the heavier and feature rich camera. But the real deal is this. You mentioned landscape. Based on that you will find the D7000 takes "prettier" and higher definition pictures. Its image quality is better than the D700 in all but the most extreme cases. How much better? For 90% or more of what you shoot the two would be virtually indistinguishable from each other. </p> <p>I hope you get a nice new lens and really enjoy your D7000. It is a fine camera and will do everything you seem to want to do with it and more. Ignore the brand fanboys. My two favorite photographers are Annie Leibovitz and Joe McNally can both shoot the wheels off of every camera made. They can afford any camera made. One shoots Canon and one shoots Nikon. If I had their undivided attention and could spend a day learning from them I absolutely guarantee you that I would not waste one precious moment of that time talking about which brand of camera to choose. </p> <p>So take your wonderful D7000 and get some great pictures. If and when it stops delivering the results you want then think about changing. </p> <p> </p>

<p>What Eric said.</p> <p>I use the Version one 70-200 every day. I also own the 80-200 F/2.8D. For sports the former is the hot ticket on DX. I have not used the Tamron or the Sigma. </p>

<p>tRodeo Joe is right. So is Peter. </p> <p>For you I would recommend staying with your D7000 and buying the good lens. For a landscape shooter, your D7000 has higher resolution and perhaps more importantly more than a stop better dynamic range. <br> I owned a D700 and still have a D3. They are marvelous cameras with a very nice sensor and autofocus. They are not better than your D7000 for about 95% of the shots you would want to make. </p> <p>There is a rush to FX that I think is mostly based upon misconceptions and wishful thinking. (I own two FX Nikons, the aforementioned D3 and the D4 and two DX the D2X and D7100.) It is the very rare shot where I can see the difference between even the D4 and my D7100. Indeed I am a huge fan of the D7100 and use it very frequently. It has about 1/2 stop better dynamic range than the D4 but does not do quite as well in low light. Then there Again though, these are at the edges of the envelope. In the middle there is essentially no difference at all. </p> <p>FOV aside, if you use a full frame lens on your D7000 you will be operating in the "sweet spot" of the lens. You will generally eliminate vignetting and be the sharpest area of the lens. Your D7000 will stand up to cropping much better than will the D700 for the obvious reasons. You should be able to print a larger crop from your DX than you could from the 12mp D700.</p> <p>It seems for you that the obvious choice is to get a really nice lens to do what you want and save until you can both go to a newer FX and purchase acceptable lenses to go with it. </p>

<p>There have been a number of threads about Nikon refurbished products in the past. I want to share another experience so that people can draw their own conclusions. First let me say that I own four Nikon pro bodies. This is not my first rodeo. I have been a Nikon shooter since the early 70's.</p> <p>I saw an ad on Cameta camera offering a Nikon D3 refurbished for $2K. This comes with a one year warranty. I have had several Nikon refurbished products before including, two or three bodies. Because the D3 is right in the sweet spot for what I do (PJ and sports) I thought I would snag one of these. <br /> Cameta advertises these as "<strong>Have minimal to no use and are in mint or near-mint condition</strong>". <br /> The camera arrived and it indeed does look very nice. It seems to work fine. The thing is that it has 67,237 actuations on it according to Opanda. Further the battery does not test as new. It tests in the reduced life range. My opinion is that 67,237 is definitely not "minimal use". That is over 180 shots a day, every day for a year. That is 280+ shots a day during an average work year. As a working photojournalist I did not average that many doing newspaper work. Or perhaps about that. <br /> I called Cameta and they promptly agreed to take it back and refund my money. They also offered a new battery. I asked if they would check some of their other D3s out and see if they had one with 20K or less but they refused. The snarky comment that I ought to buy a new one was unnecessary. Since I have bought a number of things including pro cameras from them in the past, my decision, if I were them, would be to take care of the good customer. They thought this was too hard. They said they did not open the boxes from Nikon. I guess they made and exception in my case because my box was open when I got it. But in the end that is just a business decision on their part. I have not decided what to do at this point. I am aware that the shutter is "rated" at 300K and that this would be a backup camera for me so not a big issue. I might keep it. It is a smokin' deal. I am disappointed with Cameta. I had previously been a huge advocate for them and used to tell people I ran into at work to go to them for refurbished products. But as their customer service rep said, "we send out thousands of cameras a day" I guess they can afford to lose one now and then.</p> <p>The larger question is, what constitutes a refurbished product? I called Nikon support to see if I could ask them about it. As any of you who have tried to get any kind of support out of the Nikon call center know, this call center is clueless. They started by wanting proof of purchase. I sent the receipt to them by fax twice and email twice over two days. They couldn't find it until late today. This despite three or four calls on my part. I finally spoke to a "manager" at the call center after having been told frankly outlandish things by two of the three call center people (including a supervisor). Suffice it to say, these folks seem completely untrained. At least the "manager" finally admitted (after telling me that Nikon would never exchange a camera) that nobody at the call center was a decision maker anyway. Sigh...Those decision guys are apparently at Nikon. So I will not get any answers from Nikon because I would be willing to bet that the call center will stonewall this. Oddly I am not angry. Just very disappointed because I (and I am sure many of us here) remember when Nikon service was just fabulous.</p> <p>I would be curious to know what Mr. Posner and Ms. Oster have to say about this subject in general. They have both been super sources of information over the years.</p> <p>I hope we can avoid the "you shoudda bought" and technical discussions about "the right camera". I like the D3, have used them extensively, and they do absolutely everything I want them to do. The price point was fine and my experience with Cameta up to this point told me that I would not have a problem.</p> <p>I do not know who our regional Nikon rep is. Maybe we don't have one. Nikon used to have them. Here is the irony. I know who my local Canon rep is. I have her card in my wallet. Besides. They show up for tons of events in our area, sponsor several, in one of which I participate. I don't take switching brands lightly. I love my Nikons. They get out of the way and let me take pictures. But when you have a load of cameras and use them everyday, service is an issue. Nikon seems to be doing very poorly in that regard lately. They need to get out from behind their desks and go where people take photographs. If I could give the president of Nikon USA one piece of advice it would be this.....Call yourself on the phone.</p> <p> </p>