Going Full Frame

[JDFlood]

Personally I would get the d600 and a new Nikkor 50mm 1.8 ( or better yet a 35mm) The step up in all respects is enormous. A lot can be said for concentrating on one prime lens. You current lens will work and still best the 3100. The D600 is a camera you will be happy with for 10 years. The recent 3-4 cycle was an infancy thing with digital... It has now surpassed analog... The next generation is not going to be as giant as previous. JD

 

[djacobox372]

The new 50 1.8 is much better than the ancient 1.2. The 1.2 is only worth considering if u want a bloomy soft, low contrast style for portraits, because that's what it looks like below f2.

 

[Dominik]

buy the good lenses now.. body later.

I agree, but to put a little more framing around this...

I struggled with this same question around about when the D700 was out. I ultimately decided it didn't make sense to buy a better camera and gimp it, so I bought the higher quality FX lenses first, and then bought the D800. It was a tough thing to make myself do, but it was well worth it in the end.

Thank you so much! Very good explanation and it helped me a lot This wait is killing me already, but I want the best I can get my hands on... Would you recommend the nikon 50 1.2 or 1.4 or even the 1.8? Cost is not an issue among these

 

[manaheim]

My pleasure. I can't comment too much on the 50mm other than to say when I purchased mine I went with the 1.8 because it was the least expensive of them and (at the time) my conclusion was that the difference in quality didn't justify the additional expense, and the 1.8 is a BEAUTIFUL lens. Other folks may have more input.

 

[goodguy]

My pleasure. I can't comment too much on the 50mm other than to say when I purchased mine I went with the 1.8 because it was the least expensive of them and (at the time) my conclusion was that the difference in quality didn't justify the additional expense, and the 1.8 is a BEAUTIFUL lens. Other folks may have more input.

From what I read and saw on YouTube the 50mm 1.8G is actually considered the sharper and better picture quality lens and the recommendation is that if you don't need that extra stop from 1.8- to 1.4 then better go with the 1.8G

 

[cosmonaut]

I am stepping up from the Nikon d3100 and I want a FX body, but I have a big problem the only actual FX lens I have is my Tamron 90mm.. I always see that if I have a FX body with DX lenses then I am not using the FX body to its full potential! I have the money for a d600, but no money for any FX lenses... So what I plan on doing is just buying the:
Nikkor 50mm 1.2 (used)
Sigma 120-400mm 4.5 - 5.6 (used or new)

Which is roughly around the cost of a refurbished d600 and then use them on my d3100! And slowly build my way up to get a Tokina 16 - 28mm 2.8! Once this is obtained and I have enough money I plan on getting on whatever FX body is out there.

Do you think this is a good idea or no? If not please tell me why...

Take into consideration as well that I am just going to college after this summer and haven't officially got a part time job yet (I'm trying really hard right now!)

STAY ON TOPIC PLEASE I NEED AS MUCH INCITE AS POSSIBLE! IT ALL MEANS A LOT TO ME!!

I had rather have a full frame camera and a couple of cheap primes than an APC-S camera and a bag full of lenses. The color depth, dynamic range and shallower DOF mean that much. IMO of course. You'll never look back.

 

[bigal1000]

Get good glass before you go FF you'll need it and whats wrong with buying Nikon lenses? Why 3rd party stuff? FF is not for the faint of heart on a beer budget,you'll get better results sticking with APS-C,theres nothing worse than putting a cheap lens on on a quality FF body,only my opinion.

 

[ELS]

I had rather have a full frame camera and a couple of cheap primes than an APC-S camera and a bag full of lenses. The color depth, dynamic range and shallower DOF mean that much. IMO of course. You'll never look back.

Definitely agree 100% with you on that cosmonaut...

 

[Buck777]

I just moved to a FX myself (D700) from a D200. I have a 50mm 1.8, a 28-300, and a sigma 12-24. Tbh it's blown everything I thought I knew about photography out the window. I feel like I've jumped into a Ferrari after driving a ford. Most times I go out and get a shot that just wasn't possible with my previous DX. Then, just as I'm getting cocky, I have a shocker day like this morning, where it was overcast, slight glare, and with my 50mm prime just over exposed to heck. Even a test shot from my iPhone was close. But, that makes me sit down and sort my crap out as to what I'm doing. I wouldn't go back to DX, but its sure been a learning curve in this first month of FX shooting. I've sat down and began reading David Busch's book on the D700 from page 1, convinced that I'm not as good as I thought I was lol.