What would you do for the money?

[Sw1tchFX]

I have been at this for a year now, and I feel like I'm ready to upgrade. I currently have a D80, a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8, a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5, a SB600, and a few odds and ends.


My options are:

Buy a D700 and keep the lenses.

Or:
Keep the D80 and buy some Nikon glass. A 50mm 1.4, a 24-70mm 2.8, and a 105 micro.

I know the lenses cost more, but if I keep the D80 I can sell the lenses I have now to offset the price.



What would you do????




I'm also looking into this. Westcott | Strobelite Plus Two Monolight Kit (120VAC) | 230

Do the lenses becuase if you get a D700, the only lens you'll be able to really use on it is the 70-200.

 

[NateWagner]

Personally I would think the D700 would be great... only thing is if you get it then you need to get something other than the Sigma 17-70. I mean, if nothing else get a Sigma 24-70 2.8 or something like that.

 

[elemental]

Do the lenses becuase if you get a D700, the only lens you'll be able to really use on it is the 70-200.

This is a good point. If you get a D700, you'll need some full frame lenses to use with it, so you'll end up buying both. Get the lenses first- they're not getting any cheaper, but the D700 will. I plan on buying one as well- right after the D800 comes out.

 

[Wolverinepwnes]

I would personally go for the lens for the time being! then you can save up and get the model after the D700! the lens are a far better investment i think!

 

[fiveoboy01]

Lenses first, as you only list two lenses. Get a fast prime like a 50 1.4 or an 85 1.4. 35 1.8 is a great lens as well if you would like to save some money.

 

[robitussin217]

My I would do: Get Nikon glass, learn how to get great shots from the D80, upgrade to the D90, get some more glass, sell the D90 body and upgrade to the D700 later. (or whatever replaces it in that time)

I have a D40 and am gradually getting better shots the more I learn. I think once I become proficient with it, I'll really appreciate and take off with an upgrade.

 

[Shockey]

For what you shoot the easy choice is the d700.

 

[Wolverinepwnes]

Do the lenses becuase if you get a D700, the only lens you'll be able to really use on it is the 70-200.

This is a good point. If you get a D700, you'll need some full frame lenses to use with it, so you'll end up buying both. Get the lenses first- they're not getting any cheaper, but the D700 will. I plan on buying one as well- right after the D800 comes out.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

 

[djacobox372]

having just upgraded from a d200 to a d700, I'd have to say: go for the d700!

You'll need to replace your sigma lens, since it's a crop sensor lens--trade it in for a 50mm nikkor, or perhaps a 60mm micro nikkor.

One major benefit of the d700 is it's compatibility with older lenses. For ultrawide and macro photography I rely on manual focus ais lenses, which have the same optical quality as modern pro-glass but costs 1/4 as much!

 

[DScience]

Personally I have no idea why so many folks are so in love with owning a 50mm f1.4 or 1.8 "normal" lens. I have one but I never use it. Who needs a 50mm when you already have a 24-70mm f2.8 or 24-105mm f4? To me the 50mm is so inflexible it isn't very useful. Everybody is talking about needing a fast lens. At f1.4 shooting indoors with the subject located reasonably close to the camera, the DOF is too shallow to be useful. If you have a D700 the high ISO performance would be great. A f2.8 lens would be more than adequate in terms of speed. Can someone please educate me on the true value of a 50mm f1.4? As it is right now I don't think it is worthwhile to buy a fast normal prime lens.

No offense, but I am the exact opposite. I hate zooms, and will try to get mostly primes. Although there are a few high end, wide angle zooms I want, fast primes are where it's at in my opinion.