Guys (and galls), I'm in a dilemma. As I'm sure many will be in a similar situation, I just thought of asking for opinions. Here it goes:

Should I stay with the D7000, or jump ship?

Situation: My D7000 is going strong, with a shutter count approaching 60.000 clicks. Resale value is dropping. I'm very happy with it, but sometimes find myself whishing for better high-ISO performance and especially better DoF control (both for subject isolation on one end, and difraction setting in on the other). The style I'm moving on to is street photography, kinda fast paced, strobism and portraits. No particular interest in landscape, macro or sports. Quick and accurate AF is a must, much more than ultimate IQ.

Options:
1. Go FX and stay with primes. The D600 seems lovely, I like the controls and handling, and will not need much more than the 50mm f1.8G I already have. Down the road an 85 and 28mm f1.8G would be nice, but that means spending more money. The body by itself is quite expensive for my limited budget, although that might be manageable if I can sell all my DX kit.

2. Stay DX, and grab my dream lens, a Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 that has popped up for an enticing amount, and just sell my 16-85mm to offset the cost. This, however, would tie me even further with DX, and worries me about longevity.

3. Stay as it is, live with it, and just spend more time taking pics, and less at surfing the net. Cheapest option, indeed. Eventually getting a Fuji (X100?), although I fear that may be too slow for street photography (AF and general responsiveness). Tried one briefly and was unimpressed, although IQ is quite adequate.

Anybody would like to chime in?

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

It's debatable, but the D7000 is possibly the best DX available at present. If you can afford to change as you already have one non-DX lens compatible with the D600 it makes sense perhaps dependent on your photography needs. Don't be upset if the D600 nose dives on price if you buy now, otherwise wait 6 months for it to drop further.

A replacement D300s is hinted at, I say "hinted" as some commentators more wise and knowledgeable than I, say it will arrive sometime. I have retained my D7000 when I bought my D800. Slowly the D7000's creeping into my bag less and less. The D600 has a very reasonable fps and used in DX mode will give a reasonably acceptable file size for printing.

It's a tough call, but at least you're not burdened with a bag full of DX lenses so you can afford to be flexible.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

Hi. Do you think the 17-55mm would make much difference for you? Yes it might be sharper and f2.8 is faster. But not that much faster and significant subject isolation in the focal range of this lens really only happens with quite short distance to the subject, even at f2.8. Peter

My choice would be #3.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

I think you are in a dilema many of us get into...NAS... Nikon acquisition syndrome: the next lens, the next body, the next accessory...

Questions:
What do you want your equipment to do for your photography?
What does your current set up do well for you?
What does your current set up NOT do well for you? (Are you fighting your equipment to get the shot?)
Can you find away to work around the problems?

Question about the Fuji: if it "may be too slow for street photography" and you were previously "unimpressed" with its performance, why are you considering it (besides its image quality)?



Anthony

The Moderator Page and My Gallery
The important things in life are simple; the simple things are hard.

Peolple, thanks for you words and thoughts.

Richard,
Yup, the D7K is pretty much top of the line on DX. Mybe I'll get to see those prices come down or a nex DX camera appear. But I guess my NAS for FX will not subside... blame Nikonians for this!

PAStime,
I find VR great for still subjects. But wide apertures are essential for both stopping movement (on the street and around jumping kids) on low light and on DX I'm always fighting for subject isolation and DoF control. Every little bit helps, although I agree, it's just a little bit.

Brian,
That's the most probable and reasonable course of action, waiting for some time.

Anthony,
Motion stopping, subject isolation, low-light performance, those are the areas I'm looking into. DX is very valid, but the best way to improve these would indeed be FX. There are always ways to minimize the problem and optimize the gear you have, but better gear, put to good use, should give more options and better results. Not to say the results I'm getting are not good, just saying they could be better. As for the Fuji line, the portability and simplicity are quite appealing to me, the operational speed is what's holding me back.

All,
This week I've confirmed that a recent knee injury I took has some severity and will require complex surgical intervention, keeping me grounded for a few months. No more outdoors photography for some time, so this is the chance to catch up on post-production skills, go through my archives to clean things up, and dream at night of walking the streets and jogging again. I may put some of my gear for sale and see if something comes up. The second hand market around here is being flooded with D7K from enthusiasts going FX, and my copy is one of the heaviest used (shutter count) I've seen for sale.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

<< Mybe I'll get to see those prices come down or a nex DX camera appear.>>

I don't think you'll see much of a reduction now as it's rock bottom at 55% below it's launch price! I may be wrong, but I've never seen a Nikon dSLR bottom out that low.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

Speaking of ships, Nikon is flooding the market with D600 bodies by the boat load.
Surprising to me, how many are selling their D7k to buy one.

It could pay to wait.
When supply catches up with demand there will be sales on the D600,
especially when/if the D400 is announced in the Spring.
The price of the D7k is a real bargain right now.
I expect the surplus of used D7000s to be used up soon after Christmas.
And, if the D400 is not announced before PMA/CES in January,
there may be a resurgence of used camera buyers
wanting to go back to or pick up a (what I consider top of the line) DX camera.

If the money is burning a hole in your pocket (NAS attack!),
it would be a lot better investment to buy some Pro FX Glass.
The AF-S Nikkor 28-300 VR was my favorite lens on my D7000 and is now dedicated to my D800.
I also just bought a second one for my second shooters D600.
The 24-84, 24-120, 14-24, 17-35, 16-35, 24-70, 28-70, 70-200, 80-200, 80-400, and 200-400
+ lots of primes are all much more likely to rise in price than a camera body.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

<<The AF-S Nikkor 28-300 VR was my favorite lens on my D7000 and is now dedicated to my D800.>>

It was mine on my D700, now an almost constant partner to my D800. Use it daily until things get special, then revert to 24-70mm and 70-200mm. Never really used lenses less than 300mm on my D7000 although the 28-300mm did make a few appearances.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

Don't get the 17-55, it has horrible flare and does not have VR.

Sell the D7K before it hits $200 for the body. Buy the D600 and never look back.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Don't get the 17-55, it has horrible flare and does not have
>VR.
>
>Sell the D7K before it hits $200 for the body. Buy the D600
>and never look back.

Quite direct. Yes, upon further thinking, the 17-55 would never leave me truly satisfied. I may just follow up on this advice, but it will take some time to gather the money (by selling the D7K, grip, 16-85 and 35mm).

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

Option 1...D600 is very good but so is the D7000 and you have one. Both need good lenses so buying a D600 means getting both more lens and a $2100 camera.
Can you post an example of the sort of subject, distance, framing and light level in a typical shot you are trying to improve?
You mention a number of different focal lengths that all can be used for street but are specialized. The 85 1.8G is indeed an excellent, high performance lens but it is a telephoto on a DX body. 85 is an excellent detail or head shot, head and shoulders lens so that is the reason for the request for a post of a typical scene and perspective you are interested in.
Option 2 is the least appealing to me, getting shorter, a lot more expensive and still requires a longer lens for many scenes. I have a 17-55 and have not mounted it in 18 months, it is just not the solution for my shooting. It is fine, but not spectacular. Even on DX I much prefer the 24-70 for range and optics with very good bokeh. Sorry to say, your dream lens is not going to be noticeably better than your current lens, just a more light sensitive.

Option 3 is the best with some reservations, are you really missing the FL you need. For example for street and great isolation I go longer, like a 70-200 for getting back away from the subject and melt the background into fog even on DX. There are few distance and subject to background ratios that really give high degrees of isolation with a 55mm 2.8. The 85 1.8 or 1.4 will. An 105,will, 1 70-200, 1 180 2.8, etc will very easily. The best street lenses I use on DX are the 70-200 and 24 1.4. A used 70-200vr will be about $1300 now and will probably never go down much more. A 24 1.4 is too expensive for such a kit unless all the other needs are taken care of first.
. If you really want to get into flash, picking up any old manual slave flashes when you see them will help, and get at least one CLS compatible flash like the SB900. Once you get some practice in with multiple small flash units and light modifiers(most can be home-made, shoot, I even designed and built my own high power studio strobes), it is amazing what can be done with so little money and a bit of creativity.
Post some examples and we can give specific suggestions and how to keep the cost down

Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

yelcab <Sell the D7K before it hits $200 for the body. Buy the D600 and never look back.>

I think that's a very pessimistic view as the D90 is still available new in the UK and retails at £449 (US$675)! I think the D7000 has bottomed out.

It makes me smile, 2 years ago the D7000 was launched and it was applauded just about everywhere including here as the cutting edge DX. To many it still is. I never got on with it and it is now just a spare to my D800. I am sure the D600 is a wonderful camera, but it is often compared as the FX version of a D7000.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

http://egozarolho.blogspot.pt/2012/10/lisbon-photowalk-13oct12-parte-ii.html

http://egozarolho.blogspot.pt/2012/10/lisbon-photowalk-13out12-parte-i.html

This sort of things is where I would like more subject isolation. Actually, the last photo on the second link came out quite well. All these were shot with the 35mm on DX. I'm not really interested in long focal distances for this kind of shooting.

Where I'm at, is the 35 for street, the 50 for portraits, the 16-85 for travel and the 70-300 for "sports" (kids and aviation).

As for flashes, I'm playing around with an SB-700, an old SB-800 and a YN560EX, all remotely piloted via CLS, so that's more than elaborate for my needs.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

I think the IQ is excellent, great monochromes. I needed a D7000 for distant wildlife and on many occasions it didn't measure up to my needs. However, I have always conceded that for the type of work your images portray it is an extremely capable camera as your images demonstrate.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

I agree, the D7000 is fine for this sort of scene distance to subject. The 35 is a good choice but I hate to suggest it but the 24 1.4 is perfect for this sort of scene but really expensive. Nikon has a new 28 f/1.8 that is getting good reviews. I have never seen one but it might be the closest to the 24 in IQ and speed for about $700 in the US, more there in Portugal. The 24 is 3.5 times as much. With the 28 you would be closer to the scene but the perspective is more artistic than the 35 which is like a normal human eye field of view when on a DX body.
At low ISO there is very little in the camera world that produced lower noise and wider DR with the exception of the new Nikon D600, 800, and D4 and older D3x. Everything else will be weaker in shadow noise which means the D7000 files are pretty flexible for pushing and pulling without generating or revealing artifacts and noise. To get better at higher ISO, the only answer is newer Fx.
Your flash work will be well suited to the D7000.
If you did not have a budget, your work, a D800 would really shine.
Regardless of camera, I suspect a good prime would be better for you than a mid zoom. To get wide open during the day, with a fast lens for best isolation, you should look at a ND filter prevent needing to stop down and lose the isolation.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>I hate to suggest it but
>the 24 1.4 is perfect for this sort of scene but really
>expensive.

One has just popped up around here, like new, for 1200€. Great price, but if I had the money...

If I do jump to FX, somewhere down the line I'll get a 28 f1.8G. Staying in DX, it's too close to my beloved 35mm to justify the cost (and size).

Thanks for your advice, Stan.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

>I think the IQ is excellent, great monochromes. I needed a
>D7000 for distant wildlife and on many occasions it didn't
>measure up to my needs. However, I have always conceded that
>for the type of work your images portray it is an extremely
>capable camera as your images demonstrate.
>
>Richard

Very kind, Richard, thanks. Do bear in mind that I take a heavy hand with Silver Efex Pro, looking for that contrasty look, and beating the #### out of those pixels in the process. That's why ultimate IQ doesn't mean much to me, 'cause I usually tear it to pieces. But it's great to have this DR to start with, my favorite feature of the D7000 nefs for the LR4-SEP2 approach.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

Allow me to offer a suggestion upon which to ponder. In looking at your pictures I think a D700 would offer you all you need, unless the latest and greatest is a need.

I went this route. I have a D7000, which I still use for bird and wildlife photography. I purchased a used D700 a couple of months ago and fell in love with the camera. You can get one rather inexpensively, by camera standards, and it will give you beautiful street photos.

The DOF and low light capabilities, along with the dynamic range of the camera is still outstanding. Where a D800 or d600 might give you a bit more dynamic range and pixels, the D700 is more forgiving in those once in a lifetime shots.

Just something to ponder.

John

My Pictures may be seen here: http://jmiguez.smugmug.com/

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Very true John and good advice.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

John, that is a very good idea indeed. I have been searching the used lot for some time now. So far, the best I've come up with is like 1500€ for a used D700 vs 1900€ for a new D600. If the price difference was a little bigger I would gladly forget the recent technology factor and jump right in the D700, which I consider great and more than adequate for my needs. I'll keep looking at the used market, but around here they don't seem to be dropping much. Not many people will trade their D700 for a D4/D800/D600.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

Hi

I just received my D800 and had a play with it yesterday. I too have a D7000, and a D3s so I have a combination of DX and FX lenses so I bit the bullet and purchased the D800. First impressions, ... the D7000 will be sold along with the lenses and accessories. I am blown away by the quality of the D800.

This makes the choice easy for me as I am not worried about the file size appart from the extra costs for the larger cards. I can now standardise on my lenses and move on.

Hope that you work out which way you will go.

Cheers

Kim

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Personally, I don't need or want more pixels, so I'm sticking with my D7k. More pixels equals more disk space (I have each picture backed up three times), more cards, slower upload times and longer time spent in post processing. None of that sounds appealing in context of the quality of the D7k.

I do have one question: I know a guy who bought the D800 and after 2 -3 days he said he couldn't get a clean exposure without using a tripod. Would anyone else validate that?

Mike

Mike
It took me a month to "Dial In" my D800.
The High Resolution and tons of controls is a mixed blessing.
But after 3 months, I have never had so many hand held keepers.
First thing is to raise your shutter speed.
Second: increase the in camera sharpening.
Next 20 depends on your shooting style but will include settings and how you hold the camera.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>I do have one question: I know a guy who bought the D800 and
>after 2 -3 days he said he couldn't get a clean exposure
>without using a tripod. Would anyone else validate that?

It's not the camera...

------
Webpage: http://www.ptfphoto.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

<<Second: increase the in camera sharpening.>>

Just to clarify, do you use in camera sharpening if shooting in RAW? If so surely no picture controls are applied to a Raw file, or that's my understanding, they are only burned into a jpeg file. Or, do you mean that you set it, even when using a Raw setting, so the rear display jpeg thumbnail shows a sharpened image.

Thom Hogan's D800 book recommends setting a higher sharpening setting for rear display check purposes.

I would be grateful if my understanding of picture controls such as sharpening having no effect in a Raw files is correct or not please.

Thanks

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

I've got a knee injury that' gonna keep me grounded for a few months. This will give me time to dump all my DX kit and save up for a D600. I'll be set with the 50 prime, the 70-300, and I'll be getting an AF-D 24mm f2.8 to take care of the wide side of things. That' it, final.

Thanks for all the good advice. This is a great community of photographers and, above all, good people.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

Picture controls may not effect RAW files but they do effect the imbedded JPEG that is displayed on the LCD screen.

Someone else can clarify as I only shoot RAW + JPEG at Weddings and similar important Events.
And then I almost always use the JPEGs.
So my knowledge of RAW is very limited.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Picture controls may not effect RAW files but they do effect
>the imbedded JPEG that is displayed on the LCD screen.
>
>Someone else can clarify as I only shoot RAW + JPEG at
>Weddings and similar important Events.
>And then I almost always use the JPEGs.
>So my knowledge of RAW is very limited.

You are correct.

And I also use your approach; i.e., RAW+JPEG for important events but almost always use JPEG unless I blew the exposure or white balance. The in-camera JPEG engine and applying the picture controls gives me a great look almost always. Spend more time shooting and less time on the computer.

Mike

What would you go guys go for, a brand new D600 for some 2000€, or a D700 plus grip, 27.000 clicks, at 1200€?

The D700 is cheaper, comes with the grip, has smaller files, and it's a safe bet regarding condition, coming from a very reliable source. The D600 is newer tecnology, new shutter, smaller size, and comes with a warranty.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

In this instance and I haven't got a D600, but a D800 which I upgraded from a D700, I would recommend at the price you've been offered the D700. The caveat here is what you need or want the camera for. If you shoot landscape, portrait etc the D700, but if you shoot eg. wildlife where perhaps tight cropping occurs, you may be better off with the D600 purely for file size.

The choice is yours, but the D700 is a legend of a camera and of course the build quality is excellent. Plus, as you are getting the grip thrown in it's fantastic value.

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

Hi Jose,

Always enjoyed your photography and your second gallery above blows me away - looks like HCB to me

I haven't been paying attention to D7K used prices so I hadn't realized, but it makes sense that they are dropping since Nikon is giving new ones away over here for $893 dollars! Considering the D7000 remains Nikon's best DX camera that is one heck of a deal. I already considered the $1199 I paid a fantastic value, anyhow I am keeping my D7000 which believe me is not something I often say about my cameras.

Anyhow this year I sold my D300 72K actuation but I had to keep dropping price to make it stand out as there were other lower actuation ones for sale, I ended up getting $575 and I was doubly happy as it seemed to be going to a good home. I also sold my D700 by offering it at a good price and it sold for $1500, so my experience is price does motivate buyers.

Have you considered a longer path, which is keep the D7K and still get a D600? In my case a lot of "stuff" happened this year at work but the upshot was overtime which allowed me to get some gear earlier than I expected to. Perhaps there is some other avenue in your life (sales of other assets, generate additional income in some other way, or earn photography income) that will allow a different way of achieving your goal?

- if you need low-light then yes FX is wonderful, no doubt about it.

- shooting two cameras is way better than shooting one. I'm not saying I schlepp multiple bodies when I need to be nimble, but in many cases I don't need to be nimble and the second body is invaluable.

- some people don't like a mixed DX and FX kit and I applaud them as it tends to keep life simpler going all one way or the other. Myself I still find advantages in both.

Anyhow, love your photography and clearly I have to get that Silver EFEX and mash those pixels even half as good as you do!

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

<<I already considered the $1199 I paid a fantastic value, anyhow I am keeping my D7000 which believe me is not something I often say about my cameras.>>

Similar situation to you Steve. However, I was disappointed with the D7000 price crash when one considers a D300s in the UK still retails for 35% more than the D7K, allowing that the D7K is a more capable camera.

I don't mind a mixed FX/DX kit as my genres are D7000 wildlife with FX lenses and D800 landscape/portrait/wildlife. I am using my D800 now more and more for wildlife and only keep the rather lonely D7K as a second body.

Forgetting the camera build and image quality for a moment, one really useful advantage for having a D800/D7000 and a V1 is that they all take the same battery and therefore I have 3 chargers too. This makes charging the batteries a lot more efficient when there are grips attached to both dSLR's

Richard

Visit my Nikonians gallery

SteveK, thanks for your kind words, your compliments far exceed the real value of my photos.

I'd love to keep the D7000, as I see a great advantage on keeping both systems. For instance, I'm quite sure that my 70-300 VR is a lot more usefull in DX. I'm already selling some of my electric guitars, watches, and all sorts. But truth is, photo is just a hobby, the times in Portugal are getting real hard, and I have a family to support. It will be difficult already to justify upgrading a perfectly useable camera.

As for dual role, I'm still keeping that lovely P7100, so versatile and portable.

http://egozarolho.blogspot.com
1. Good content, good aesthetics and good tecnique. On that order.
2. Light is more important than glass and pixels.
3. In the digital photography process, software is as important as gear.

OMG there is a name for my affliction. I love my 7000 rented a 600 and 24-70 plus 28mm to shoot a bride getting dressed. Shot uo to point where she left hotel in lip. Loved that 24-70. Now going to buy 800 so it gets justice.

My affliction is so bad my hubby had business cards made he says as much money as you are spending you have got to stop doing it or free. But I don't want the pressure.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

" I'd love to keep the D7000, as I see a great advantage on keeping both systems. For instance, I'm quite sure that my 70-300 VR is a lot more usefull in DX. I'm already selling some of my electric guitars, watches, and all sorts. But truth is, photo is just a hobby, the times in Portugal are getting real hard, and I have a family to support. It will be difficult already to justify upgrading a perfectly useable camera.

"

Number 3.Im in a similiar head space and number 3 it is.