Just switched to FX camera, need advice

[CR88]

Hello all,

I just picked up a D600 and I am seriously blown away by this camera; so much so that I don't plan on even keeping any DX cameras. I originally considered keeping my D200 as a backup, but not so much anymore. I am selling my D70 to my brother, and now the D200 will most likely be up for sale. Since I will no longer have a DX camera, is there any reason to keep my 18-200 f3.5-5.6 VR? I assume camera performance will be greatly reduced if I use it on my 600, even though the range would be nice. Given that it is practically like new I assume that I could still probably get $600-$650 out of it. Add that to what I get out of my D200 and I could put the extra money towards a nice wide angle or some other FX lenses.

All of that being said, the D200 has been a very good camera despite it's low light limitations. It actually seems a bit more durable and weather resistant than the D600 and would be a nice camera to carry hiking, or on trips where durability may be important.

I keep going back and forth on this one, so any input would be appreciated.

 

[Tailgunner]

I'm considering buying a D600 and everything I've read says you can use a 18-200 VR on a D600 (FX or DX mode) but the images leave a lot to desire. Check out this link for more info: Flickr: Discussing Nikon D600 and DX lenses in Nikon Digital

The range and compact size of the 18-200 is nice but I haven't seen anything close to it using FX. My advice is look into a 24-85mm kit lens or 28-70 2.8 Pro lens. Then pick up a 80-200 2.8 or 70-300mm. As for wide angle, I've been eye balling the 16-35mm Nikon.

As for ditching your DX all together, I'll probably never completely switch to FX should I buy an FX body in the future. The reason is my D3100 w/used 18-200mm is dirt cheap compared to an equivalent FX setup, easily replaced, and lighter than my D7100 w/28-70 mm 2.8 setup. I throw it in my floor board every time I run errands, hit the bike trails, or road trips. It's a lot easier monuvering family events as well. So I would consider keep the smaller of the DX bodies and the 18-200mm.

 

[Solarflare]

Um.

Input on what exactly ?

I recently got a D600, and I definitely keep my D5100 as a backup since its also a more lightweight camera (also because of more lightweight lenses) and a little smaller, too, and it has an uber useful flipscreen that I miss on the D600.

Lenses I myself got for the D600 are 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8 and 70-200mm f4 VR. Personally I dont really get why people buy a camera for 1600€ and then turn cheapscake on the lenses. The lenses is what you will keep for much longer than the camera.

 

[480sparky]

I wouldn't consider selling off your DX gear until you have enough FX to act as a back-up.

 

[MiFleur]

I own a D600, and bought some FX lenses, but I kept my D 90 as a back up, and for the price I could have for my 18-200 lens, (around $400) I decided that I had better keep it. It is useful for documenting things, when I want to sell a used product, if I want to travel with only one lens, for family snapshots etc.
I have used my old 18-200 lens with both of my cameras since I bought my D600. It is small, light weight and convenient. It does not take as good pictures as my 70-200 F2.8 VRII but It gives me the opportunity to carry only one lens when that is all I want.

Now my D600 is at Nikon for the dust on the sensor issue, and I am happy to have my D90 as a back up.
I shot my first wedding over a week ago and I was glad to have a second camera, just in case.

But really it depends on what you do with your pictures, and what your intentions are.
Good luck!

 

[pixmedic]

Hello all,

I just picked up a D600 and I am seriously blown away by this camera; so much so that I don't plan on even keeping any DX cameras. I originally considered keeping my D200 as a backup, but not so much anymore. I am selling my D70 to my brother, and now the D200 will most likely be up for sale. Since I will no longer have a DX camera, is there any reason to keep my 18-200 f3.5-5.6 VR? I assume camera performance will be greatly reduced if I use it on my 600, even though the range would be nice. Given that it is practically like new I assume that I could still probably get $600-$650 out of it. Add that to what I get out of my D200 and I could put the extra money towards a nice wide angle or some other FX lenses.

All of that being said, the D200 has been a very good camera despite it's low light limitations. It actually seems a bit more durable and weather resistant than the D600 and would be a nice camera to carry hiking, or on trips where durability may be important.

I keep going back and forth on this one, so any input would be appreciated.

even in EX+ condition, i dont think you are likely to get $600+ for that lens.
check craigslist in your area, but on ebay many are going in like new condition for around $400.
NIKON 18-200 VR | eBay

unless you are financing FX glass, i would keep that lens as long as you have a DX body to use it on.

 

[CR88]

I'm considering buying a D600 and everything I've read says you can use a 18-200 VR on a D600 (FX or DX mode) but the images leave a lot to desire. Check out this link for more info: Flickr: Discussing Nikon D600 and DX lenses in Nikon Digital

The range and compact size of the 18-200 is nice but I haven't seen anything close to it using FX. My advice is look into a 24-85mm kit lens or 28-70 2.8 Pro lens. Then pick up a 80-200 2.8 or 70-300mm. As for wide angle, I've been eye balling the 16-35mm Nikon.

As for ditching your DX all together, I'll probably never completely switch to FX should I buy an FX body in the future. The reason is my D3100 w/used 18-200mm is dirt cheap compared to an equivalent FX setup, easily replaced, and lighter than my D7100 w/28-70 mm 2.8 setup. I throw it in my floor board every time I run errands, hit the bike trails, or road trips. It's a lot easier monuvering family events as well. So I would consider keep the smaller of the DX bodies and the 18-200mm.

Thanks for the link and the info. Some of the replies were what I was thinking, which is why this decisions has been difficult. I think if the 200 were better in low light, I would be more apt to keep it. If I do decide to keep both formats, I may even sell the 200 and look at a refurbished 7000 which is only going for around $700.

Um.

Input on what exactly ?

If it would be wise to unload all DX gear and put the money towards FX. I would prefer to have quality glass for my FX camera, and maintaining two formats just ends up spreading my resources thin. But, I do see the point of keeping a DX setup.

I wouldn't consider selling off your DX gear until you have enough FX to act as a back-up.

While I will be using this camera for production, I am not sure I will ever run into a situation where I couldn't be without it for a week or so. I could just reschedule the shoot. I don't do weddings or anything like that anymore. As it is now, I have been using my Leica D-Lux 5 as a backup when I don't want to carry anything heavy or don't have the 200 with me. We are are a printing company and since many of the shots are just for print media (brochures, cards, etc.), even the Leica has been sufficient SOME of the time. Where we were running into issues is when a client wants us to set up low light shoots for projects where I couldn't use a tripod and were for large format printing (vehicle wraps, trade show booths, posters, bill boards, etc.)

I own a D600, and bought some FX lenses, but I kept my D 90 as a back up, and for the price I could have for my 18-200 lens, (around $400) I decided that I had better keep it. It is useful for documenting things, when I want to sell a used product, if I want to travel with only one lens, for family snapshots etc.
I have used my old 18-200 lens with both of my cameras since I bought my D600. It is small, light weight and convenient. It does not take as good pictures as my 70-200 F2.8 VRII but It gives me the opportunity to carry only one lens when that is all I want.

Now my D600 is at Nikon for the dust on the sensor issue, and I am happy to have my D90 as a back up.
I shot my first wedding over a week ago and I was glad to have a second camera, just in case.

But really it depends on what you do with your pictures, and what your intentions are.
Good luck!

I would prefer not to have more than I need, so I could put money towards really nice glass. I did get a chance to shoot with my 50mm 1.4 and my 70-200 2.8 and was amazed at the quality. Even if I could only get $450-$500 out of my 18-200 DX lens, I could put that towards a Nikon 24-70 2.8 that has been on my wish list.

even in EX+ condition, i dont think you are likely to get $600+ for that lens.
check craigslist in your area, but on ebay many are going in like new condition for around $400.
NIKON 18-200 VR | eBay

unless you are financing FX glass, i would keep that lens as long as you have a DX body to use it on.

Actually we just checked on Amazon. I usually stay away from eBay unless I have to use them. One of my employees is an Amazon seller, used and new. He checked and said they were going for about $600 used if I still had all of the original packaging and documentation. I am not sure though, as I haven't really checked myself.

 

[cgipson1]

Actually we just checked on Amazon. I usually stay away from eBay unless I have to use them. One of my employees is an Amazon seller, used and new. He checked and said they were going for about $600 used if I still had all of the original packaging and documentation. I am not sure though, as I haven't really checked myself.

Here is a listing of actual SALES of USED lenses (Pix's link included new lenses)... not just listings... NIKON 18-200 VR | eBay

 

[CR88]

Actually we just checked on Amazon. I usually stay away from eBay unless I have to use them. One of my employees is an Amazon seller, used and new. He checked and said they were going for about $600 used if I still had all of the original packaging and documentation. I am not sure though, as I haven't really checked myself.

Here is a listing of actual SALES of USED lenses (Pix's link included new lenses)... not just listings... NIKON 18-200 VR | eBay

Thanks for the info. It looks like I may be better off keeping it then. I'm not really prepared to unload that lens for $400. It's been a good lens, just not for FX. I took it to Europe and the Grand Canyon and it performed nicely. Plus, it was fairly light, so it wasn't too bad lugging around towns or down the Bright Angel Trail. I am just trying to get into a 24-70 2.8 and thought that selling off my DX gear would help. I haven't seen nice 24-70's for less than $900-$1300 (Tamron-Nikon) on the used market.