Should I buy anymore DX lenses?

[RyanLilly]

You still need to have a much bigger lens for a DX chip than a little P&S camera, so that's one of the bigger obstacles. Getting rid of the through-the-lens viewfinder and metering would also save a ton of space. Make a newer digital rangefinder type camera with a DX-sized chip. With the newer APS-C sensors having live view, it's doable. Then the biggest obstacle would probably be power consumption and battery life. You still need a beefy battery to power all this. The dinky little ones in P&S cameras now are probably fine, but you'd need a much bigger one for an APS-C chip, especially if it's depending on live view for metering and viewfinding. I'm sure it'll happen, but don't expect even that to be cheap either. A P&S sized camera with an APS-C sized sensor would still be marketed as a "premium" type camera. They'd probably price it higher than an equivalent D40 setup.

Their is a Aps-c Size P&S from sigma, not a true rangefinder, though you can add a viewfinder. The Sigma DP1

 

[dipstick]

I don't see why Nikon would stop using DX at least for entry level, but also for prosumer cameras. By keeping DX and DX lenses around there is a greater potential for selling more stuff. People start out buying DX, and then when they want to move up the ladder they switch to FX and buy all new lenses as well. My guess is that DX will be kept at the low end and FX at the high end with the divider somewhere in the segment between where D300 and D80 is now.

So from Nikons point of view it would make sense to keep it around, and from us photographers point of view it makes sense too. With the D700, prices on D300 will drop and the market will probably overflow with used D300s and DX lenses. That means more choices for us. DX is also nice for wildlife when you want a longer telephoto lens and getting less DOF is not an issue anyway.

 

[Village Idiot]

Canon shooters have been asking this question for years...and it seems that crop sensors and EF-S lenses are here to stay...for the foreseeable future anyway.

Most consumers don't need full frame sensors...and smaller sensors are a lot cheaper to manufacture.
The camera companies will be hesitant to bring down the prices of their full frame models because that might canabilize sales of their crop sensor DSLR models. If you consider their line up down into P&S cameras...they will probably want to keep some structure there. If full frame gets cheaper then crop bodies get cheaper and then SLR-like cameras get cheaper and P&S digicams are almost free.

The one thing that will affect the prices most, is competition. Canon was king of full frame DSLR for a long time and Nikon finally jumped into the pool...and now they are taking another step with the D700. Canon will have to answer with a new version of the current 5D. Other companies might soon join the frey. This is all good news for pros and enthusiasts and even people after consumer level cameras...I don't think that crop bodies will drop out of the line up any time soon.

Except like 6 out of 65 lenses in the Canon line up are EF-S and the rest are EF.

 

[passerby]

I read in one of the mag that last year the number of digital cameras sold in australia were 3 millions. Of these 3m 100 000 were DSLRs. If this DX and FX stuff is circling around barely 3 percent of the market than it so obvious that the DX is staying. Considering that my sister just came out from the stone age era of photography called film only few months ago. It will take few dacades before people like her even bother with DX or FX, or maybe never will. These kind of people are the one that keep the company rollings. Look at the way the Leica priced their cameras. It is because lack of lowly customers that pours the money to cover the cost - therefore they hammered the unlucky few with the mamma mia price.

 

[Bifurcator]

oh... i'm not worried... i just think that DX might be dead...

This site disagrees. At least for the next product cycle or two. Here's the quote:

The only thing you're getting for $1,200 more than a D300 is much better finder, much better high-ISO performance and a green light to buy even more expensive ultra-ultra wide lenses. For most people, I wouldn't bother, or I'd step up all the way to the much faster and fully professional D3.

If you're shooting sports and action, the D3 is still your camera. If you're shooting landscapes, the D3X (not yet public) or Canon 5D is better.

Honest: if I need landscape image quality, the Canon 5D beats the D3 and costs and weighs much less. If I want speed for sports, action and news, the D3 has far faster AF and frame rates than any of these. The D700 or D3 aren't the cameras for landscapes; that's the 5D or D3X.

 

[dEARlEADER]

This site disagrees. At least for the next product cycle or two. Here's the quote:

The only thing you're getting for $1,200 more than a D300 is much better finder, much better high-ISO performance and a green light to buy even more expensive ultra-ultra wide lenses. For most people, I wouldn't bother, or I'd step up all the way to the much faster and fully professional D3.

If you're shooting sports and action, the D3 is still your camera. If you're shooting landscapes, the D3X (not yet public) or Canon 5D is better.

Honest: if I need landscape image quality, the Canon 5D beats the D3 and costs and weighs much less. If I want speed for sports, action and news, the D3 has far faster AF and frame rates than any of these. The D700 or D3 aren't the cameras for landscapes; that's the 5D or D3X.

pfff..... well I guess we'll see when the D700 starts flowing....

apparently nobody on this site is gonna buy it.... sure... (salavating at the prospect of cheap D300's)

the d300's are already for sale at the nikon forum....

besides..... I said five years for death of DX... that is 3 product cycle's.....

 

[Bifurcator]

I'm starting to think the D700 is a little bit of a misfit. According to discussions and sponsorless reviews I'm reading like that one at any rate.

 

[Mav]

the d300's are already for sale at the nikon forum....

I have my eyes on some of those. I'd rather get an 80-200 f/2.8 though.

 

[dEARlEADER]

I have my eyes on some of those. I'd rather get an 80-200 f/2.8 though.

common Mav.... the time is now.... there may never be a tomorrow.... you can get that D300 and the F2.8 80-200....

 

[Garbz]

common Mav.... the time is now.... there may never be a tomorrow.... you can get that D300 and the F2.8 80-200....

That's the second such morbid post from you today. You don't have any illness we should know about? :hug::

 

[dEARlEADER]

That's the second such morbid post from you today. You don't have any illness we should know about? :hug::

just trying to bring someone else down with me to calm my state of discomfort pertaining to what I might buy today....

having other forum members spend money they don't have on bodies that will be obsolete in 5 years makes me feel better about my own purchases with money i don't have of bodies that will be obsolete in 5 years....

 

[patrickt]

I suspect the full-frame will be to APS-C as medium-format was to 35mm. I suspect they will both exist longer than I will.

 

[Joves]

just trying to bring someone else down with me to calm my state of discomfort pertaining to what I might buy today....

having other forum members spend money they don't have on bodies that will be obsolete in 5 years makes me feel better about my own purchases with money i don't have of bodies that will be obsolete in 5 years....

Nice . I fortunately only spend money I have on thisgs I want. I dont see DX dying off for many, many moons. Im keeping my D300 when I buy my D700, I want the best of both worlds. That ans I want insanely high ISOs. I dont even see DX as being down graded to the P&S level.
And Bifurcator that is uncle Ken you are quoting. I dont take him the leat bit seriously. To me the D700 is the perfect camera for some of us. Just because some say it is a misfit doesnt make it so.

 

[Bifurcator]

Really? you don't like Ken? I have no priors on him. Actually no experience at all - I think that was my first or second visit to his site. What makes you distrust his opinions?

 

[dEARlEADER]

Really? you don't like Ken? I have no priors on him. Actually no experience at all - I think that was my first or second visit to his site. What makes you distrust his opinions?

Bifurcator.... i must say... you are the best....

If you like Ken there is no reason to distrust him..... he is not fraudulent or anything....

i like his 100% crop corner to corner comparisons on lenses he reviews...