>I guess my main concern is that I will be using my DX lenses >primarily until I come up with the cash for the FX lenses. If >the quality of the DX format pictures are as good as the >D7000, I will be sold on the D600. You mentioned about the >dynamic range is better with the D600. Do the specs of the >D600 make you come up with that conclusion or it is just a >matter of personal opinion?
I checked your equipment but it is blank. If you only have DX glass, your first question should be... should I go FX? This is a big question. FX has better IQ, low iso performance etc. IT gives you less magnification.
It cost a lot in money and you will be lugging around heavier equipment.
Ask yourself, Do you need the extra IQ and low light performance.
Are you an outdooor sport shooter or wild life shooter? If so DX may be better.
The extra IQ is not easily visible especially in the end product, a print. I would bet most people would not be able to tell the difference between an 11 x16 inch print shot on DX or FX camera.
What do you do with your images? Do you sell large fine ARt prints or do work for clients that demand this? Do you know that you want to eventually go FX for some reason?
If you are relatively happy with your D7000 and just want to upgrade for the benfits of the 7100, I would just do that. I wouldn't get a D600 and use DX lenses on it unless I knew I needed to go FX and would eventually be compelled to buy FX glass. I think shooting in DX mode with DX glass on a D600 would not be as good as using the D7100 and if it was or even a little better, you probably wouldn't be able to tell and you would lose cropping ability or the ability to print at larger sizes. You would also be paying for something you really aren't benefitting from.
"Cameras and lenses are simply tools to place our unique vision on film. Concentrate on equipment and you'll take technically good photographs. Concentrate on seeing the light's magic colors and your images will stir the soul." Jack Dykinga