Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

Have you gone solely FX?

avigar

Northern IL, US
523 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
avigar Registered since 29th Nov 2006
Tue 14-Dec-10 03:20 PM | edited Tue 14-Dec-10 03:22 PM by avigar

I used to have 2 DSLRs, the D90 & D700. I've recently sold my D90 body and contemplated on replacing it with a D7000. Now, I'm having second thoughts, since a majority of my lenses are FX. I'm also considering adding the Nikon 28-300 VRII to my FX lineup instead. My only DX lenses are the Nikon 18-200 VRII, Tamron 17-50 DiII, and Tokina 11-16. I shoot mostly street, landscape, general family, and vacation photos. I also own a Canon S95 and Nikon P100 for the times that I don't feel like carrying a DSLR.

To those that have gone strictly FX, do you miss having DX capability? Do you regret going strictly FX and have gone back into acquiring an additional DX body?

--Ben

hwdx347

Maumelle, US
6273 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#1. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

hwdx347 Basic Member
Tue 14-Dec-10 02:59 PM | edited Tue 14-Dec-10 03:00 PM by hwdx347

I had a D200 with one DX lens and D700 with a bunch of FX lenses and I was happy with this. I recently gave my D200 and lens to my daughter and so I'm down to one body. I'm content at the moment and my daughter is having a great time. She lives a couple of miles from me so it's easy to borrow the D200 if needed.

Hedley
Originally from Merthyr Tydfil, Wales -- now in Arkansas

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Robp

Gainesville, US
951 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#2. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

Robp Gold Member Nikonian since 23rd Oct 2009
Tue 14-Dec-10 03:25 PM

I've gone from a D50 and a D90 to a D700 and do not miss the DX format (better word choice than capability, I think) at all.

There is no problem with using your FX lenses on a DX body, but the field of view is equivalent to what you would see through a DX lens with focal lengths 1.5 times that of an FX lens. For example, the apparent crop of a 28-300mm FX lens on a D7000 will be the same as a 56-450mm DX lens. This is not to say that the image magnification is multiplied; it is not. The image quality of a full size print from a FX lens on a DX body will be about the same as the quality of an image cropped to the same viewing size from an FX lens on a FX body. You will have more "reach" but but less image quality at the same viewing size because the camera-to-subject distance will be greater. The image quality will be similar at the same actual distances, but the DX image will "cropped" relative to the FX image.

The reverse is not true. The DX lens will not fill the field of view on an FX sensor, so you will get vignetting using the full FX crop view. Your D700 may be set to appropriately crop the image to DX dimensions, however, so you may use DX lenses on it without the vignetting problem. Once again, you'll get the same image quality at the same camera-to-subject distance, but the image will be cropped with a DX lens.

I'd stick with a full FX capability unless you need a second camera and don't want to pay for an FX body. In that case, I'd still continue to purchase only FX format lenses and just accept the image crop on the DX body.

Rob Puller
my Nikonians gallery

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#3. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 2

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Tue 14-Dec-10 03:31 PM

>There is no problem with using your FX lenses on a DX body,
>but the field of view is equivalent to what you would see
>through a DX lens with focal lengths 1.5 times that of an FX
>lens. For example, the apparent crop of a 28-300mm FX lens on
>a D7000 will be the same as a 56-450mm DX lens.

This is incorrect.

The 28-300mm "FX" lens on a DX camera has exactly the same angle of view as a 28-300mm DX lens would on the same camera (if such a lens existed). The angle of view is the same as you would get from a 42-450mm "FX" lens on an FX camera.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

philipl

Oxford, US
1784 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#4. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

philipl Gold Member Nikonian since 31st May 2007
Tue 14-Dec-10 04:45 PM

I use my D300 90% of the time and D700 10%. Most of what i shoot is wildlife and macro so the DX "crop factor" suits my style. I have the 28-300 and it works very well on my D300. it is also a "near macro" that focuses at about 1/2 meter and does about 1:3.

Philip

Do not settle for mediocrity. Rather strive for excellence for even in that attempt lies a measure of success.

https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/139567[br />"]My Gallery

avigar

Northern IL, US
523 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#5. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 4

avigar Registered since 29th Nov 2006
Tue 14-Dec-10 06:47 PM | edited Tue 14-Dec-10 06:48 PM by avigar

>I use my D300 90% of the time and D700 10%. Most of what i
>shoot is wildlife and macro so the DX "crop factor"
>suits my style. I have the 28-300 and it works very well on my
>D300. it is also a "near macro" that focuses at
>about 1/2 meter and does about 1:3.


How has the Nikon 28-300 worked for you on the D700 so far? Any noticeable issues on the FX side of things?

TiggerGTO

Apex, US
2258 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#6. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

TiggerGTO Gold Member Nikonian since 22nd Feb 2006
Tue 14-Dec-10 06:50 PM

I was using my D300 primarily for sports. Since my kids have both aged out of that, I'm not shooting much sports anymore. A couple months ago, I sold my D300 and now I'm shooting with only my D700. I have to admit when I shot some wildlife a couple weeks ago, I missed having the crop factor when using my longer lenses. I may consider a D7000 or whatever replaces the D300s inevitably in the future.

Danny
A Nikonian in North Carolina

philipl

Oxford, US
1784 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#7. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 5

philipl Gold Member Nikonian since 31st May 2007
Tue 14-Dec-10 07:41 PM

>>I use my D300 90% of the time and D700 10%. Most of what
>i
>>shoot is wildlife and macro so the DX "crop
>factor"
>>suits my style. I have the 28-300 and it works very well
>on my
>>D300. it is also a "near macro" that focuses at
>>about 1/2 meter and does about 1:3.
>
>
>How has the Nikon 28-300 worked for you on the D700 so far?
>Any noticeable issues on the FX side of things?

I haven't used it a lot but it looks like it is going to be a great travel lens. It is not as sharp as my 70-200 but does pretty well. here is a link to some shots I took with it on the 300:

https://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=set_threaded_mode&forum=146&topic_id=185017&prev_page=show_topic&gid=185017#185021

Philip

Do not settle for mediocrity. Rather strive for excellence for even in that attempt lies a measure of success.

https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/139567[br />"]My Gallery

ScottChapin

Powder Springs/ATL, US
9045 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#8. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

ScottChapin Moderator Awarded for his high level skills in various areas, including Aviation and Birds Photography Charter Member
Tue 14-Dec-10 09:43 PM

I much prefer my D300 for airshows and other similar shooting, particularly when I have to grab the 2x tele. In good light, the DX is every bit as good for me and perhaps more versatile.

I use my D700 for portraiture and general photography. It is better to have when the lights start to go out:-). I expect both formats will have a place in my photography for some time to come.

Scott Chapin
Powder Springs, GA, USA

Nikonians Team Member

Pouncer

Memphis, US
1230 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#9. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

Pouncer Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009
Tue 14-Dec-10 10:57 PM

Not yet but time will tell. I recently bought a D700 and always assumed I'd sell my D300. For now, though, I'm going to keep the D300 for several reasons:

1. I like the idea of having a second camera with a similar feel, layout, and interchangeable batteries (especially for travel).

2. The D300 is smaller and lighter than an AF-S 300 f/4.

3. I don't need the funds to pay for the D700. I can always sell the D300 later and am willing to risk a couple hundred in depreciation.

So I can't really answer your specific question. But if I ever sell the D300, it will be because I don't need/use it and in that situation I will never buy another DX camera.

Garrett

stuff: D700, D300, AF-S 17-35 f/2.8, AF 35-70 f/2.8, AF-S 80-200 f/2.8, AF 85 f/1.8 D

and: Ai 28 f/2, Nikkor-O 35 f/2 AI'd, Ai-S 50 f/1.8, Nikkor-K 105 f/2.5 Ai'd

This is my Nikonians gallery.

Robp

Gainesville, US
951 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#10. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 3

Robp Gold Member Nikonian since 23rd Oct 2009
Tue 14-Dec-10 11:41 PM

Thanks Brian. You are correct, of course; I botched the word selection as well as the math. The bottom line for me is that, relative to an FX lens on an FX body, you need to stand further away to fill the frame when using an FX lens on a DX body.

Rob Puller
my Nikonians gallery

TomCurious

Bay Area, US
2352 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#11. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

TomCurious Registered since 03rd Jan 2007
Wed 15-Dec-10 02:47 AM | edited Wed 15-Dec-10 02:47 AM by TomCurious

How interesting, until recently I also owned a D90, D700 and S95. Now I only have the latter two. I sold the D90 last summer and then considered getting a D7000, but decided against it. I used the D90 now and then for vacation use when I didn't want to carry the D700. But what I found is that carrying the D90 with a couple lenses is still an undertaking and doesn't save all that much in size and weight. And every time I used it, I wished I had my D700 with me instead. I don't think this would be any different with the D7000. So now I either go out with the D700, or put the S95 in my pocket. I don't miss DX.

Tom
Bay Area Nikonian


http://www.tkphoto.me/

robsb

San Jose, US
14823 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#12. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

robsb Platinum Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his expertise in CNX2 and his always amicable and continuous efforts to help members Laureate Ribbon awarded for winning in the Best of Nikonians 2013 images Photo Contest Donor Ribbon awarded for his enthusiastic and repeated support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2015 Nikonian since 23rd Aug 2006
Wed 15-Dec-10 03:30 AM

I got my D700 about 2 years ago. I was using a D200 before that, and decided to keep it because I thought I might use it from time to time and I had one DX lens a 12-24 f/4. All my other lenses were FX. Well as the story goes, I never picked up the D200, no matter what I shot, wildlife, travel, macro, etc., it was always the D700. So a few weeks ago I put my D200, camera plate and 12-24 on sale. I sold the 12-24 right away, the plate a few days later and it seems, I will be keeping my D200 body as I have now lowered the price to $500 and still have no takers on a mint low actualtions D200. I will not price it any lower as it is worth at least that much to me as an emergency backup to the D700. But do I miss DX, not a chance? I shot an F3HP for years and the DX format always seemed odd to me. I love my D700 and I expect I will own it for a long time.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!
Old age is a special gift that very few receive. Be thankful if you get it.

Len Shepherd

Yorkshire, UK
12722 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#13. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

Len Shepherd Gold Member Nikonian since 09th Mar 2003
Wed 15-Dec-10 05:10 AM

I cannot directly answer as going FX only would be a huge disadvantage to me.
Going back in time to when FX was launched there were regular polls at Nikon's on likely FX take up.
The polls hung around 10% likely to go FX only, about 50% likely to stay DX only and about 40% (my category) likely to mix both formats.
If the mix has not changed significantly only about 10% of Nikonians will be FX only.

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

jeremyr

Carcassonne, FR
94 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#14. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

jeremyr Registered since 12th Jun 2006
Wed 15-Dec-10 10:09 AM

Hi Ben,

I have not missed DX at all. After using 35mm film for a few tears, I always felt compromised by DX, especially by the tiny view finder. So I welcomed FX with open arms, at the first opportunity; It was like having the best of both worlds

Regards,

Jeremy.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

musical

north-central, US
1050 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#15. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 14

musical Registered since 12th Feb 2010
Wed 15-Dec-10 10:39 AM

My "2 cents" is much like the writer above... response #14. I did give the dx to my daughter. The d700, by the way, has a dx menu option, though I have never used it, it is not hard to see right there in the basic menus. I have the tokina lens like yours, the 11-16mm. At 16mm it works fine, just after that at about 15 the corners darken and then the crop--- which I occasionally use for fun, its peculiar dx look on fx.
I missed a few birds shots, but I gained so much.
I sort wish I had a nice flash, like the sb600, and maybe a bracket just for a cool look, and I dream of the 16mm fisheye some day-- I dream happily.
Having said that as an aside, I absolutely love the d700 and it's fx style. By the way, I have little interest in simple youtube movies; the 700 does not do any movies. If I needed that, my son can use his Sony H9.
I really am happy having this one camera for now-- the d700. It's a slightly heavier, rugged, serious camera and for me, that's exactly what I wanted at this point.
That's the dx with the d700 still on fx. Sort of cool?
Photography is fun, no matter what.

Click on image to view larger version


Attachment#1 (jpg file)

jonshonda

US
215 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#16. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 15

jonshonda Registered since 11th Mar 2009
Wed 15-Dec-10 11:49 AM

I moved from a D40->D200->D300S(very short time)->D700. I miss having the D200, because it was a $500 camera that I took more liberties with (because of its lower replacement cost should something happen). Now, I have a $2500 camera hanging from my shoulder, worried all the time about damaging it. I have learned to relax, but still keep my gaurd up in certain situations. Now that winter is here, I would like a DX format body with a long lens for wildlife shots.

I would love for you to check out www.j-strophotography.com

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#17. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Wed 15-Dec-10 12:45 PM | edited Wed 15-Dec-10 01:05 PM by briantilley


Perhaps to get a full picture of member's feelings, you should also be asking those who bought a D700 and kept a DX camera. Those who have switched from DX and now use only a D700 will have made their decision for good reasons, and it's not surprising that they now prefer the D700 - particularly if they came from a lesser or earlier-generation DX camera. But there is a alternative view...

In my own case, since I need to have two cameras for certain assignments, and want them to be as similar as possible in handling and controls, the combination of D700 and D300 is ideal. The D700 provides the high-ISO performance I need for theatre work, whilst the D300 with its greater pixel density is perfect for wildlife and aviation, and (with smaller DX lenses) is great for vacations

Other than better high-ISO noise performance (because of the larger photosites), the shallower Depth of Field options (because of the FX sensor format) and the availability of fast wide prime lenses (like the 24mm f/1.4G), I can see no reason to prefer the D700 over the D300.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

cyclist_D70

Olathe, US
12 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#18. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

cyclist_D70 Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Jan 2005
Wed 15-Dec-10 12:51 PM

I have gone pretty much solely FX. I shot 35mm (Minolta MF) for years and then went digital and DX with the Nikon D70. It always felt a bit odd, but I learned about digital and then when the D700 came out, it was time to go FX. I now have what I wanted-a digital 35mm camera (and more !).

When I got the D70, I didn't do 35mm any more and the same is true now the I have the D700, I don't use the D70. I have loaned the camera to a cousin (would have actually given it to her), but once she figured out what she wanted, she bought the D90 and I have the D70 back. My niece will be getting the D70 around Christmas as she thinks she wants a DSLR and hopefully this will let her know...

I have two DX lenses. The 18-70mm D70 kit lens and the 12-24mm DX. I do use the 12-24mm lens on the D700 without DX crop when I need a wider than 24mm lens. I usually use this lens around 18mm to avoid the vignetting.

As far as getting a better DX camera, that is really not in the picture as the D700 does what I want and I don't mind the extra weight.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

dclarhorn

Berwyn Heights, US
14839 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#19. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 17

dclarhorn Moderator In depth knowledge and high level skills in a variety of areas including landscape Laureate Ribbon awarded for winning a Nikonians Annual Photo Contest Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2015 Nikonian since 31st Mar 2002
Wed 15-Dec-10 02:41 PM

Exactly, Brian. I have a D700 for paid event work where I may run into various lighting conditions and possible flash restrictions. I kept my D200 and do enjoy the crop factor for my birding--although I don't own any DX format lenses anymore.

Dan L.
http://www.danlarussophotography.com/

robsb

San Jose, US
14823 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#20. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 16

robsb Platinum Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his expertise in CNX2 and his always amicable and continuous efforts to help members Laureate Ribbon awarded for winning in the Best of Nikonians 2013 images Photo Contest Donor Ribbon awarded for his enthusiastic and repeated support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2015 Nikonian since 23rd Aug 2006
Thu 16-Dec-10 01:22 AM

You can buy my D200 (ha ha).

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!
Old age is a special gift that very few receive. Be thankful if you get it.

westcoast

California, US
835 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#21. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 20

westcoast Silver Member Nikonian since 28th Jan 2007
Thu 16-Dec-10 02:33 AM | edited Thu 16-Dec-10 02:36 AM by westcoast

I agree completely with Brian's last comment about the D700 and D300 complementing each other and both have a place. I recently sold my D200, but I also have a D300 that I purchased before the D700 came out. The D200 is certainly worth keeping, if I didn't have the D300 I would not of sold my D200 for less than $500 dollars.

However, I didn't need two DX cameras, and wanted one FX system for the reasons Brian stated. The D200 is a fine camera if you don't need high ISO's and the best AF tracking system. The D200 price has dropped below $500 dollars simply because Nikon has come out with much less expensive DLSR's that have better sensors.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

avigar

Northern IL, US
523 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#22. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 18

avigar Registered since 29th Nov 2006
Thu 16-Dec-10 04:48 AM

Well, I've finally packed and stored away my 3 remaining DX lenses. I'll be holding on to them, for now, in case I decide to pick up another DX body in the near future. In the meantime, my D700 and FX lenses seem to fill my photographic needs just fine.

robsb

San Jose, US
14823 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#23. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 21

robsb Platinum Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his expertise in CNX2 and his always amicable and continuous efforts to help members Laureate Ribbon awarded for winning in the Best of Nikonians 2013 images Photo Contest Donor Ribbon awarded for his enthusiastic and repeated support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2015 Nikonian since 23rd Aug 2006
Thu 16-Dec-10 07:13 AM

I totally agree. Digital cameras are just computers with an optical input, so there is no reason to expect them to hold their value like the old mechanical Nikon's did. I am glad I set a $500 floor as if I wind up keeping it, it really won't bother me to have the back up. My real goal was to sell my 12-24 which i did. If my D200 had been a D700, I most likely would not have considered selling at all because as Brian said the D300 and d700 complement each other well.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!
Old age is a special gift that very few receive. Be thankful if you get it.

RRRoger

Monterey Bay, US
3373 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#24. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 22

RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter Member
Fri 17-Dec-10 11:42 AM

Last spring, I sold my D90 camera & 4 lens and went FX only by adding a 5D2 for Video and Hiking.
I thought I would never go back to DX.
Problem was the 5D2 AF was way too slow and inaccurate to use the camera for action.
Also the workflow was really messed up when trying to use the 5D2 as backup for the two D3 bodies we use for EVENT photography.

So, I ordered the two newest Nikons and have already sold nearly all the 5D2 outfit.

The D3100 turned out to be too small and too light for me to use comfortably.
I returned it when my D7000 arrived.
My D7000 is a keeper, excellent in all respects.
The only problems I've had are caused by user error.
They are all related to the higher resolution.
The D3 is so fast and forgiving that I had gotten sloppy in my shooting.
Now, even my D3 shots are better because I have become more careful.
I have to use a MonoPod on hikes to hold the D7000 more steady, especially with long lens.
And, I have to use a tripod for Video.

Nikon lens rebates are now available with a new camera purchase.
I just added a 10-24 DX, 18-200 VRII DX, and a 28-300 FX.

Don't you just feel that NAS tearing at you?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

gtm

Searcy, US
1451 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#25. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 24

gtm Silver Member Nikonian since 17th Feb 2002
Fri 17-Dec-10 12:45 PM

I have both the D300 and D700 for the reasons some have stated above. I like both formats for different uses.


GARY
The Arkansas Nikonian

Marshall Photography

My Gallery

blw

Richmond, US
28559 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

#26. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004
Fri 17-Dec-10 01:05 PM

> To those that have gone strictly FX, do you miss having DX capability?

Yes, to the degree that my next body will be DX. I've actually always had DX in inventory, but because the FX body is so much more modern than any of them, it ends up being the first camera in essentially every situation. And I often use two bodies.

I likely won't buy another body now until after the D4, but the next one will certainly be DX.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

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

mklass

Tacoma, US
7421 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#27. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 26

mklass Platinum Member As a semi-professional involved in all manner of photographic genres including portraiture, sports, commercial, and events coverage, Mick is always ready to help Nikonians by sharing his deep knowledge of photography and printing. Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 08th Dec 2006
Fri 17-Dec-10 03:32 PM

I'm trying to figure this out right now.

I had a D700 and sold it to get a D3s. I have a good complement of FX lenses.

I needed a backup for weddings and other work, and something lighter for travel, so I went with a D300s and the 18-200 lens. Got a 1-55 2.8 DX for weddings to complement the FX with a 70-200.

Was not entirely pleased with the 18-200, so I got the 16-85 DX and 70-300VR for a 2 lens travel kit, but also missed super wide so picked up the Sigma 8-16. So I now have 4 DX lenses plus the 70-300 (I have had a 10.5 Fisheye for a long time that I will never sell for sentimental reasons) for what was supposed to be a backup body and 1 lens travel kit. And while I like the apparent "reach" of the DX, I am spoiled by the D3s IQ.

I am trying to decide whether to sell all of the DX stuff and the 70-300 (But not the 10.5 fisheye, sentiment, you know), and get a D700 and 28-300 for a travel kit.

My biggest conundrums: Is the 28-300 on the D700 going to give me better results that the 18-200 on the D300s? Will I miss the "reach"? (My longest lens is a Sigma 120-300 2.8 with TC's or the 70-200 Nikkor. I am patiently waiting for the 80-400 replacement, of maybe a Sigma 150-500 (or better yet, I want my 300-800 back).)

Decisions, decisions...

Mick
www.mickklassphoto.com

brooksfarm pa

Philadelphia vicinity, US
583 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#28. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

brooksfarm pa Silver Member Nikonian since 04th Apr 2002
Fri 17-Dec-10 05:12 PM

I'm nearly all FX. To explain . . .

Love(d) the D200 w/18-200 attached and keep it like that always, but I love the D700 even more, and all my other lenses are FX.

If I could afford it right now, I'd sell the D200 w/18-200 and buy a second D700 (maybe, but not necessarily) with the new 28-300.

It took a while for me to adjust to DX, but it took much less time for me to re-adjust to FX. If Nikon production and my finances come together, I anticipate all future purchases will be FX. But--because of my strong positive feeling for the D700--I don't anticipate shopping for a new camera for quite a while.

Denis-

CharlieS

US
1729 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#29. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

CharlieS Registered since 29th Aug 2007
Fri 17-Dec-10 05:42 PM

Having recently gone FX with a D700, I'm thoroughly impressed with the high iso performance, & from that aspect it will probably be ages before i "upgrade" any more.
That being said, i fully plan on hanging onto my D300 for the crop factor advantage, and of course as a back up body. The few DX lenses we have serve dual purpose with the D300 and the mrs. D80, so not a loss there.

____________________________________________________________________
When no one is looking, Pigs can walk on they're hind legs

JBS101

Canberra, AU
594 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#30. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

JBS101 Silver Member Nikonian since 20th Apr 2009
Fri 17-Dec-10 08:34 PM

Hello Everyone,

Could I add my two cents worth. I like to shoot railway picture, both actual trains and old railway infrastructure. My D300 works well because the extra reach allows me to shoot into locations where I cant walk without trespassing on railway property or buying really long lens' that are unaffordable for me. It is particularly useful for picking out architectual details when matched with a manual 300mm f4.5 and 2x converter. I have now added a D700 to the lineup and am really appreciating the low light capability and the capacity to go wide with my 24-70 lens. I now carry both cameras on location with the 24-70 on one and my 70-200 on the other. What lens goes on which camera depends on what I am shooting. That combination meets my current needs very well, and hopefully the D300 will last long enough that I dont soon face the conundrum of what to replace it with. I suspect that I will eventually go fully FX, but not until I can afford a good quality long lens. Anyone got a good Nikon 500mm F4 that would like to sell for next to nothing???

John

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

sunndance

Texarkana, US
131 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#31. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

sunndance Registered since 17th Mar 2009
Fri 17-Dec-10 08:34 PM

I prefer Dx crop factor for birds in flight/wildlife, and Fx for everything else...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Low light is the right light for me...

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

avigar

Northern IL, US
523 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#32. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 31

avigar Registered since 29th Nov 2006
Sat 18-Dec-10 06:06 PM | edited Sat 18-Dec-10 06:12 PM by avigar

I just received my new Nikon 28-300 FX lens. This will make a nice general purpose lens replacement to the Nikon 18-200 DX that I used with my former D90.

mklass

Tacoma, US
7421 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#33. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 32

mklass Platinum Member As a semi-professional involved in all manner of photographic genres including portraiture, sports, commercial, and events coverage, Mick is always ready to help Nikonians by sharing his deep knowledge of photography and printing. Donor Ribbon awarded for his generous support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 08th Dec 2006
Sat 18-Dec-10 06:24 PM

I would love to hear your opinion of the 28-300 compared to the 18-200.
Mick
www.mickklassphoto.com

RRRoger

Monterey Bay, US
3373 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#34. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 33

RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter Member
Sat 18-Dec-10 11:46 PM | edited Sat 18-Dec-10 11:51 PM by RRRoger

I just got a new 10-24, 18-200 VRII and the 28-300
I used the 10-24 at the Monterey Bay Aquarium with great results.
The 28-300 is on the D7000 now.
I will also be using it on the D3.
I have not tried the newest 18-200 yet.
I will compare them soon but think this should be done in the Nikkor AutoFocus lens Forum.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

rhom

Sacramento, US
136 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#35. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

rhom Registered since 06th Aug 2008
Wed 22-Dec-10 04:30 PM

I haven't gone totally FX because I enjoy both formats and for different reasons.

I purchased a D700 because, 1) I could use my AIS MF and AF FX Nikkors at the focal lengths that I was used to with my film bodies, 2) while incredible in its high ISO performance, it gives even more spectacular IQ at the base ISOs that I use most often, 3) it is a manageable size for travel, and 4) it really is the first Nikon dSLR that allows me, previously mostly a film shooter, to directly substitute a dSLR body and shoot pretty much in the same manner as before (but obtain digital images that in virtually every way exceed my film results).

However, I also like owning one of the smaller DX bodies (I now own a D3100) as cameras to carry with me on an everyday basis (folks can keep their P&Ss and camera-phones, not for me). Great for casual family events, beautiful scenes that you unexpectly encounter and other impromptu events.

Could I go totally FX? Yes (we were all FX-only users during the film-only days). But I'd rather have both formats.

Best Wishes,

Rick

Nikon user for 40 years.
F-Ftn, F3, F4S, F90, F100, D5100, D700

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#36. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 35

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Wed 22-Dec-10 04:36 PM

>Could I go totally FX? Yes (we were all FX-only users during
>the film-only days).

Apart from those who used half-frame, 126 or APS, of course. Or medium format...

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

JerryT

US
615 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#37. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 0

JerryT Registered since 31st May 2010
Wed 22-Dec-10 05:40 PM

Nope.

Until recently my backup for my D700 was two D70 bodies. I decided to upgrade my backup to a D90 and haven't looked back. I have several nice DX lenses and have no interest in parting company with them. All FX is way down the road for me.

I can't say how much I like carrying only my D90 (sans its MB-D80) with my lightweight 35mm f1.8 G affixed to it. It's a walkabout combination that's hard to beat. Then there's my 18-200.....

I've never been into selling cameras or lenses and just can't give up the DX lenses I have. The two D70s I sold were the only Nikons, in 40 years of Nikon shooting, that I've sold in addition to one F5.

I love FX! With my still relatively new 14-24 it's fantastic but long live DX IMO.

Jerry

JerryT

US
615 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#38. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 10

JerryT Registered since 31st May 2010
Wed 22-Dec-10 05:45 PM | edited Wed 22-Dec-10 05:46 PM by JerryT

>The bottom line for me is
>that, relative to an FX lens on an FX body, you need to stand
>further away to fill the frame when using an FX lens on a DX
>body.

There's a simple solution to this. In my case it has three "faces", all of them wide angle: 18mm fisheye, 14mm f2.8 and my new 14-24.

(But I do understand the intent of Rob's post.)

Jerry

JerryT

US
615 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#39. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 4

JerryT Registered since 31st May 2010
Wed 22-Dec-10 05:48 PM

>I use my D300 90% of the time and D700 10%. Most of what i
>shoot is wildlife and macro so the DX "crop factor"
>suits my style. I have the 28-300 and it works very well on my
>D300. it is also a "near macro" that focuses at
>about 1/2 meter and does about 1:3.

And my 300mm f2.8 with its 1.4 TC sings when its worn by my D90. The smaller DX image rocks when it's combined with good glass.


Jerry

JerryT

US
615 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#40. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 15

JerryT Registered since 31st May 2010
Wed 22-Dec-10 05:56 PM


>It's {D700} a slightly heavier, rugged, serious camera and for me,
>that's exactly what I wanted at this point.
>That's the dx with the d700 still on fx. Sort of cool?
>Photography is fun, no matter what.

Agreed. I love the feel of my D700.

However there are times when I just love carrying around my lightweight D90 with its lightweight 35mm f1.8 G lens.

Jerry

RRRoger

Monterey Bay, US
3373 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#41. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 37

RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter Member
Wed 22-Dec-10 06:40 PM

I will be going back to FX only when an affordable Nikon with better Video and High ISO performance is released.

As much as I like the D7000, it is a stop-gap for me.
I basically bought it to replace the 5D2 Video and to use for a D3 backup.
I do not need any of the advantages of DX other than size, weight, and cost.
My entire D7000 + 4 lens outfit cost less than a D3s and I would trade in a heartbeat.
But, I would prefer a FullFrame (12mp D3s sensor) Camera the size of a D90 or D7000.
I would also like it to have an Expeed II processor, larger buffer, and 60fps Video.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

GregMen

Ona, US
25 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#42. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 41

GregMen Silver Member Nikonian since 21st Nov 2010
Wed 22-Dec-10 10:54 PM

I'm a new member here and this is my first post, so forgive me if I mess it up.
I've shot regularly and happily with a D90, and recently stepped up to the D700 (which is a fantastic camera!). No discernible (to me) noise at ISO3200 - YES!

I use both cameras regularly.
I try to imagine the most likely situations I'll face, preload the most likely lens on each, attach both bodies to my Black Rapid double camera strap (quite comfortable BTW), and I'm set for most of what I may encounter.

I guess my point is that there's a still a place for my DX body and lenses simultaneously with my FX.


Click on image to view larger version


Attachment#1 (jpg file)

Visit http://www.gregmencottiphotography.com

musical

north-central, US
1050 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

#43. "RE: Have you gone solely FX?" | In response to Reply # 42

musical Registered since 12th Feb 2010
Wed 22-Dec-10 11:03 PM

I like humor. I enjoyed this. So, "yer" right handed maybe and the 700 is to yer right hand fur quick response. Seriously, hello sir and a Musical welcome... Don't turn around though 'cause somebody mighta stole yer very favorite horse and got away while you turned?

G