Buy now or hold tuff

[BananaRepublic]

I am looking at a Nikon 200-500 5.6 and wonder do I buy or wait considering that mirroless tech is advancing. I don't have any mirrorless gear at the moment and realise that even when a larger range of optics comes on stream they will be out of my price range anyway for some time.

In summary my question is do I save my money for the shiny metal upgrade or buy as and when.

This is the link to the store that with the 200 - 500.
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200–500mm f/5.6E ED VR

Follow ups/concerns based on the link,
I know that there is possibly better value out there but the store is near me.
If something went wrong the only Nikon service centre is in another country, where as theres a sigma centre within 100 miles.

 

[Original katomi]

If its any help look for the best deal in your camera shop
I was looking at the canon 6d mk2 and a 5 d mk4 came up near new low shutter count for less than half of the new 6dmk2
by the time I had traded in old 7d some older EF non l series glass a small amount of EFS lenses I had paid a little more for the 5d mk4 two l series lenses and a battery grip than the new price of the 6d mk2

 

[RVT1K]

Well...do you plan to upgrade to a mirrorless body? If not then go for it. If so, then wait.

As a hobbyist, I don't have a need to upgrade even if I would love to get the latest mirrorless offer from Nikon. But I know it won't be happening unless I hit the lottery.

And I would second the recommendation to consider looking at used equipment.

 

[Strodav]

I'm holding on to my dslrs and glass for now to wait for the mirrorless wars to settle a bit. Right now the battle is between the Sony A1, Canon R3, and Nikon Z9. The Sony is priced at $6500 and some guess the other two (still in development) will be in that $$ ballpark. As is customary, the big 3 are building professional versions for the 2020 Olympics in Japan starting in July. Most of us are hoping that the enthusiast versions of there cameras will be ready in time for Christmas at more reasonable prices. Most of the gurus I've listened to are saying the 3 will be very similar in capability and it will come down to brand loyalty as usual.

 

[stapo49]

I guess it would depend on your time frames, budget and how mad keen you are to purchase and use the 200-500. If you are not in a position to upgrade to mirrorless anytime soon and as you said the equivalent Z mount lenses (whenever they may appear) may be to pricey to start, I say go for it. I am assuming you are not considering jumping ship to Sony or Canon mirrorless?

 

[BananaRepublic]

I guess it would depend on your time frames, budget and how mad keen you are to purchase and use the 200-500. If you are not in a position to upgrade to mirrorless anytime soon and as you said the equivalent Z mount lenses (whenever they may appear) may be to pricey to start, I say go for it. I am assuming you are not considering jumping ship to Sony or Canon mirrorless?

I don't think id be going brand shopping unless there was significant savings. Im not in a big rush to buy that particular lens, I just happened to see the shop were offering a discount and it lead me to wondering about what I want to do next. Similarly unless my car suddenly burns down I don't intend buying another ICE car and Id hope to be going electric whenever that bridge arrives.

 

[photoflyer]

I confess I don't know the issues with lenses on Nikon and Nikon mirrorless but I have Canon DSLR bodies and a mirrorless body and I can use my EF glass on both. In fact, I can put the two EF/S lenses I still have on the mirrorless with the adpater.

Eventually, the likelihood is that you will go mirrorless. No matter the brand, the technology has so many benefits. But, when you do, you can still keep your DSLR. Having two bodies is great. If you like your current body and the lens you describe and you are willing to hold on to it for many many years to come, get it. You don't have to get rid of them just because five years from now you get a mirrorless body.