So I'm torn, upgrading to FX...

[2WheelPhoto]

I'd still look into getting an exotic or fast prime in the midrange. It's almost as if everyone who has a FF Nikon digital uses the 24-70, and it's just...boring for something so expensive.

24-70 and 70-200 <----just works good

 

[The_Traveler]

FF Nikon digital uses the 24-70, and it's just...boring for something so expensive.

Yeah, all the beautiful and consistent perfection in the range that I need - really bums me out.
I'm thinking of getting an old 18-200, knock the barrel against the curb a few times, shoot jpgs at either 18 or 200 and get some really interesting ****. (also looking forward to lots of messing with it in filters and ****)

 

[KmH]

Video doesn't add very much cost to a DSLR.

All video is, is still pictures taken and shown at a 25 frames per second or more, so it looks like constant movement.

 

[Aloicious]

I'd still look into getting an exotic or fast prime in the midrange. It's almost as if everyone who has a FF Nikon digital uses the 24-70, and it's just...boring for something so expensive.

yeah, it's not an exotic lens, thats for sure, but it's probably one of the most useful ones out there....it's a working man's lens...it's like a hammer, sure you can pound a nail in with a rock or a boot or something, but a hammer will get the job done effectively, even if it's a little boring of a tool.

Video doesn't add very much cost to a DSLR.

All video is, is still pictures taken and shown at a 25 frames per second or more, so it looks like constant movement.

oh yeah, I've got an electical engineering background so I'm familiar with the function of it, and you're right the video function isn't too complex itself...but the cost of development, improvement, software and processor performance development, etc, etc...and to keep a competitive edge in video alone adds to the cost....personally, I'd rather spend $5k for a D4 without video, than $6k for one with...of course those numbers are just hypothetical, but the D3 was a little under $5k when it came out without video, and the D3 most likely required alot of development cost since it was the first FX DSLR in nikon's lineup.

 

[Aloicious]

okay, now I'm back to the drawing board with nikon announcing the D800....according to nikon they're saying the D800 will have the ISO noise charactoristics of the D700 due to improvements in the processor and such even with a pixel pitch closer to (and slightly larger than) the D7000...okay, that sounds good. but at 36MP, if you downsize the the image to 12mp that the D700 puts out, then the noise would be extremely reduced in comparison. this sounds really promising since my large print options are usually well lit subjects, the low light stuff is usually for web publication, that means I could get much less noise, or even have the option to do some serious crops without losing alot....and the high MP stuff would be good for shooting products that I do occasionally, as well as landscapes and, other things that I do for fun

plus, DX mode will actually be useable with 15MP! that means I could use a 200 2.8 w/ 1.7 TC, giving 340mm, then use that in DX mode, which won't degrade the image like a larger or second TC, and get an effective focal length equivalent of 510mm at f4.8 wide open, and still get a 15mp image with room to crop...damn....that could come in very handy...

granted the FPS isn't as good as some other options, but even full uncompressed RAW it's slightly better then my D90 does, and about the same as the d700....and DX mode would increase that to 6fps with the grip...I could probably live with that...

and the much more reasonable $3k pricetag is a good thing...I'd still be able to get both the 24-70 and 70-200 vr2 lenses I need at the same time for that price tag...

more decisions...more decisions...

 

[2WheelPhoto]

LoL @ this thread

 

[MReid]

d700
50 1.8g
24-70 2.8
Buy this and don't look back.

 

[Aloicious]

and my indecision...yes..

 

[2WheelPhoto]

d700
50 1.8g
24-70 2.8
Buy this and don't look back.

Or whats in my sig works fairly well too =)

D700's should be had on the cheap real soon too

 

[Aloicious]

well, I'm on the reserve list at my local nikon distributor for the D800 which should be coming in late march. luckily they'll reserve one for me, but I don't have to pay until it physically comes in, so if I don't like it at that point, I don't have to get it.

I didn't think I'd be looking at it at all, but with nikon's claims that it's equal to the D700 ISO performance, I gotta say, it has piqued my interest for sure.

I'll be picking up the 24-70 and 70-200 VR2 next week too.

/decision made...time to end the madness...unless I don't like it when it comes in, then the madness will start up all over again, but at least at that point I can look at the D4 in person or a D700 which hopefully will have more sane used prices...

 

[Aloicious]

d700
50 1.8g
24-70 2.8
Buy this and don't look back.

Or whats in my sig works fairly well too =)

D700's should be had on the cheap real soon too

yeah, actually some of your pics are one reason the D700 was even on my list in the first place

 

[MReid]

Why do you ask for advice if you just ignore it....in your application, what are you going to do with 36 megapixels?
What are you going to gain with a d4 over the d700 for the extra $3000.

 

[mjhoward]

d700
50 1.8g
24-70 2.8
Buy this and don't look back.

Or whats in my sig works fairly well too =)

D700's should be had on the cheap real soon too

yeah, actually some of your pics are one reason the D700 was even on my list in the first place

Photographer not included

 

[Aloicious]

Why do you ask for advice if you just ignore it....in your application, what are you going to do with 36 megapixels?
What are you going to gain with a d4 over the d700 for the extra $3000.

sheesh, as was stated in my original post, I simply needed a sounding board to think through my ideas out loud, I wasn't requesting people TELL me what to get, but rather their experiences and thoughts, so I could come to my own decision.
and I'm not locked down into the D800, if it isn't what I want when it arrives, then I don't need to get it. but it's at least worth looking into more seriously...did you even read my thinking and reasoning behind the D800?

your questions are exactally why I started this thread, just trying to debate between them. no need to get all hurt that I didn't run out and buy what you suggested.

 

[Aloicious]

Or whats in my sig works fairly well too =)

D700's should be had on the cheap real soon too

yeah, actually some of your pics are one reason the D700 was even on my list in the first place

Photographer not included

yes, he's very accomplished. and I may be far from perfect, but I'm not a newb to photography either.