Ready to upgrade, but to what?! - DPChallenge Forums

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/27/2012 05:49:07 PM · #1

Hey all

Don't get me wrong, I love my D90. Hell, I love em so much, I'm on my 2nd one...the 1st one eventually proved to be a lemon, but not til I had ribboned with it. Twice.

But I want to upgrade, and after shunting aside the bf's suggestions to sell everything I have Nikon and go Canon - sorry Canon peeps, tried them, find them heavy and not as user-friendly as Nikon - and am left with two feasible options, both fullframe. Which is good and bad.

First the good. Full frame. What more can I say? So no, I don't want the D7000. Nor do I want the D800, which seems to be waaaaayyyy too much of a good thing.

The bodies I'm looking at are either D700 or D600. I was surprised to see that even now a refurbished D700, at *only* 12.1 mp but with amazing lack of noise, is still commanding around the $2k range (on nikonusa.com anyway), and the D600 at 24 mp was released at $2200 CDN and has probably come down to approximately $2k as well. Not so knowledgeable about the noise on that baby but I know the approximate specs of both and could live with either.

But the bad....I'd have only the f1.8 50mm and f.4 300mm to shoot with. OK, make it f5.6 420mm with the teleconverter. Still, in order to replace the marvelous walkaround lens that I used forever, the $700 f3.5-5.6 18-200mm, I'd have to buy a $2300 f2.8 70-200. Even worse I will lose my beloved Siggy f.4-5.6 10-20mm, which I bought from

vikas. Replacing Siggy will cost around $800. Either way it all adds up in a big way.

So, what to do? Sell those two lenses and the D90 and get a D600/D700? Cling on to the D90 and those lenses and carry on for awhile longer, til I win the lottery or something?

What would you do, fellow Nikoneers?

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/27/2012 05:54:52 PM · #2

Well, I think you've gotten right to the root of the issue... going FF is a siren song, and bodies can be had reasonably, but the cost of the glass will make you weep. I'd think the D600 would be nearly the ideal body. Very versatile, plenty of resolution. Once you shoot with something in that class, you will have a hard time shooting with a smaller format camera again.

Enlightened

12/27/2012 05:58:47 PM · #3

the D600 is on sale at Henry's
Henry's

Here is what you get for $2000.00 - NIKON D600 D-SLR W/24-85 3.5-4.5 VR LENS

12/27/2012 06:11:03 PM · #4

Susan, here is a similar deal but includes a tri-pod as well...BHVideo.

I think

Scalvert posted a good deal that included a camera bag and memory card in another thread by

Neil.

Have fun with your camera purchase...can't wait to see what you get!

Enlightened

12/27/2012 06:12:39 PM · #5

Originally posted by hihosilver:

Susan, here is a similar deal but includes a tri-pod as well...BHVideo.

I think Scalvert posted a good deal that included a camera bag and memory card in another thread by Neil.

Have fun with your camera purchase...can't wait to see what you get!

They are great deals but they won't ship this deal to Canada.

12/27/2012 06:19:11 PM · #6

Originally posted by Enlightened:

Originally posted by hihosilver:
Susan, here is a similar deal but includes a tri-pod as well...BHVideo.

I think Scalvert posted a good deal that included a camera bag and memory card in another thread by Neil.

Have fun with your camera purchase...can't wait to see what you get!

They are great deals but they won't ship this deal to Canada.

I thought

Yakatme posted that he ordered a D600 from BHVideo and then changed his mind. He wanted to sell just the body for $1800 from the unopened box. If he's willing to ship to Canada, he may be worth a PM. That was a few weeks ago that I read his post. So, not sure where that stands. Just a thought...;-)

Enlightened

12/27/2012 06:20:43 PM · #7

Originally posted by hihosilver:

Originally posted by Enlightened:

Originally posted by hihosilver:
Susan, here is a similar deal but includes a tri-pod as well...BHVideo.

I think Scalvert posted a good deal that included a camera bag and memory card in another thread by Neil.

Have fun with your camera purchase...can't wait to see what you get!

They are great deals but they won't ship this deal to Canada.

I thought Yakatme posted that he ordered a D600 from BHVideo and then changed his mind. He wanted to sell just the body for $1800 from the unopened box. If he's willing to ship to Canada, he may be worth a PM. That was a few weeks ago that I read his post. So, not sure where that stands. Just a thought...;-)

12/27/2012 06:31:20 PM · #8

Originally posted by hihosilver:

Perfect timing that I happened to drop in to lurk a little so I can reply to this.

No, it's the other way around. I decided to keep the D600 and send the D800 back in return for a D7000 and a $1500 laptop. Now I just want to sell the unused Nikon 24-85VR that came with the D600 kit.

As far as the OP's question, I would go with the D600 deal at B&H (actually, I did). If you really want a good camera and save a lot you could get a used D700. I would think that with the release of the D600 and the D800 that there would be a lot of used ones out there. I absolutely loved the D700 (before I destroyed it) and if Best Buy still sold it then that's probably what I would have gone back to with the replacement from the warranty.

As far as lenses go, yes they are expensive but worth it. I would suggest buying used lenses from reputable sources or in person so that you can check them out first. I've used KEH.com several times with good results as well as buying in person from Craigslist ads. Be careful with meeting people on Craigslist and try the lenses before handing over cash.

I would suggest getting the Nikon 24-70 first unless you think that the middle of that range in the 50 f/1.8 that you already have will get you by for now.

I chose to go with the Nikon 17-35 instead of the Nikon 14-24 because of the problem of using filters (CP is most important to me) on the latter.

The 70-200 is a great lens, but not exactly a walk around lens as the OP mentioned. I'm not sure what all of the furor over the second version is, but I'm very happy with the original. You will save a lot of money buying the original used.

I hope that this helps.

12/27/2012 06:39:37 PM · #9

LOL...sorry, I didn't get that "deal" right. Oh well...;-)

12/27/2012 06:47:51 PM · #10

You did get it right. I just changed my mind since I really didn't need two camera with 24+ mp each. The D600 will work well for my landscape work and the D7000 will work well for my sports photography and as a backup. I'll see if I really want to go with a 36 mp D800 down the road or see what Nikon will come out with next that will be even more competition for medium format makers.

12/27/2012 06:52:43 PM · #11

Originally posted by yakatme:

Is there a buffer issue with the D7000? I thought I read that drawback for sports photography and that camera.

The 17-35 is a good recommendation...on my wish list!

12/27/2012 07:24:56 PM · #12

Yes, I've read a bit about the limited buffer and I have experienced it's limitations already, but I don't do the type of almost non-stop sports shooting as is required with some sports. I do a lot of photography of kiteboarders and there is time between runs for the buffer to empty. Stand up paddleboarding is something else that I cover a lot and I certainly don't need much of a buffer for that. What I appreciate, after having been without it for awhile, is the extra reach of a crop sensor and the D7000 gives me that with much better quality than my last DX camera, the D80.

Sports photography is not high on my list of priorities anyway. I get great quality, large files in the D600 for landscape and portrait work. I just needed a good backup camera and decided to save money while getting the benefits of the crop sensor at the same time. The quality of the images from the D7000 are plenty good enough for an everyday walk around camera and for when I am shooting sports. The sports images go to the magazines instead of getting enlarged like my landscapes do and the D7000 quality is good enough for them. I don't think that the buffer is going to hold me up at all.

12/27/2012 07:35:57 PM · #13

Oh yes...I love the kite board photos you take.

Is the D600 a dust magnet? Also is it important that the whole body isn't magnesium alloy?

Hmmmm...

12/27/2012 07:43:52 PM · #14

Thanks on the kiteboarding photos comment. They are a lot of fun but it has been awhile. I need to get back out on the water to do some more. Actually, I've got a kiteboard rig coming my way for some work that I did for one company and I look forward to doing it myself, soon and regularly.

I've also read about the "dust magnet" concerns on the D600 and I wonder if that wasn't just some hype that got blown out of proportion. As I mentioned in the other thread, I guess I'll find out.

As far what the body is made of, I really don't care. Through the D70, D80, D700, and now the D7000 and the D600, I've never been concerned about what the body was made of as long as they held together. That doesn't matter as much to me as performance and image quality.

A lot of people talk about the weight of a camera and/or a lens, but I would carry twice the weight all day long if it made a difference in performance and image quality.

snaffles

12/27/2012 08:26:49 PM · #15

Thanks all for your insight. Just a few notes...

Yes, I could get B&H to ship the camera to me via the Ogdensburg, NY UPS store;

Have considered the original 70-200mm lens, still may do so as i have seen them listed at about $1500;

I was looking at getting a refurbished D700 but it still seems to be approx the price of a D600 new; also though I don't mind buying used lenses, I'd rather get a new camera body; also don't know if refurbs have a warranty. Definitely, used ones bought privately wouldn't;

I was extremely lucky that both the guy I bought the 18-200 from, on ebay, and

vikas (Siggy) were honest and didn't sell me pups as I didn't have the opportunity to try out either prior to purchase!!! Ignorance is bliss I guess :-)

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

12/27/2012 08:35:58 PM · #16

Although they may be approximately the same price, the D700 is still a good option. What levels the playing field despite the difference in pixels is:

1) The D600 has only 39 autofocus points as compared to the 51 that the D700 has (along with the rest of the high end of Nikon's offerings).

2) The D600 brackets only three exposures compared to up to nine with the D700. That was a serious concession for me because I bracket five or seven frames fairly often. I decided that I'll just do it manually if I need more than three.

There might be more drawbacks to going with the D600 over the D700, but these two were what I had to seriously consider. As I said before, I would have replaced my D700 with another one if Best Buy (where I had the warranty) still sold the D700.

spiritualspatula

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/27/2012 09:19:49 PM · #17

Originally posted by yakatme:

As far as lenses go, yes they are expensive but worth it. I would suggest buying used lenses from reputable sources or in person so that you can check them out first. I've used KEH.com several times with good results as well as buying in person from Craigslist ads. Be careful with meeting people on Craigslist and try the lenses before handing over cash.

I would suggest getting the Nikon 24-70 first unless you think that the middle of that range in the 50 f/1.8 that you already have will get you by for now.

I chose to go with the Nikon 17-35 instead of the Nikon 14-24 because of the problem of using filters (CP is most important to me) on the latter.

The 70-200 is a great lens, but not exactly a walk around lens as the OP mentioned. I'm not sure what all of the furor over the second version is, but I'm very happy with the original. You will save a lot of money buying the original used.

I hope that this helps.

Agree about the 70-200 not being a walk around lens. The equivalent of your 18-200 on FX is the Nikon 28-300. Granted, the 70-200 is a very nice lens, but I wouldn't call it walk around because 70 is pretty tele for just walking around, even on FX. If you ARE interested in the 70-200, you should be interested in it for being an 2.8 constant. Alternately, if the 2.8 is too high budget wise, consider the relatively new F4 version, which has gotten excellent scores in reviews. One last option is to get a 80-200 AF-S like I have, but it doesn't have VR.

Also, if the 24-70 is too expensive, consider a used 28-70, which is also a very nice lens, just the older generation. It suffers more from flaring, and chromatic aberration wide open at minimal focus isn't great, but those are my only complaints.

The 17-35 is probably more useable overall and will more closely replicate your Sigma, but that 14-24 is a legendary lens for a reason.

What the body is made out of will dictate how durable the body is. There are places on my D300 that show the magnesium where the plastic has been worn through, but my camera spends lots of time schlepped around in a pack in the backcountry and on mountains. The magnesium will make the body less prone to cracking, make it more expensive to manufacture, and add some weight.

The D600 and D700 were intended for different audiences. The D600 is more what I would characterize as a FX D90, the D700 was essentially a smaller form factor D3, with some other smaller differences. The D700 was aimed at a professional audience and it's seen in the difference in controls. This doesn't mean the D600 isn't a good camera, but the controls are different because the camera has different expectations upon it. That's also why it has a different AF system, amongst other things.

Oh, and as for the D600 dust issue- worth a read.

Zeissman

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

12/27/2012 11:35:56 PM · #18

Rockwell really like the 70-200 F4 (and the 28-300). why not take advantage of the low noise and save some money?

Rockwell

And from Ken on the dust rumor - not that this is scientific or anything.

The Sensor Dust Rumor

My D600's sensor is clean.

I wouldn't worry about what you may have read over the Internet from people you've never met. These things always happen for every new camera: one guy of many sees it, and the Internet spreads it like wildfire.

See My New Product Reliability article for more on this phenomenon. People spread these things all over, and they greatly multiply themselves over the Internet.

My D600 is fine, and if it weren't, Nikon would fix it under warranty.

It doesn't bother me, but I'm astounded at how many impressionable people have gotten all terrified of this not because they've ever seen the problem, but because they read it somewhere as posted by some stranger.

I do know a guy personally who claims that his D600 had some dirt, and Nikon fixed it for him for free, fast. Big deal.

Message edited by author 2012-12-27 23:42:02.

smardaz

12/28/2012 01:04:28 AM · #19

Originally posted by Zeissman:

Rockwell really like the 70-200 F4 (and the 28-300).

This guy?

12/28/2012 01:13:42 AM · #20

Originally posted by Zeissman:

It doesn't bother me, but I'm astounded at how many impressionable people have gotten all terrified of this not because they've ever seen the problem, but because they read it somewhere as posted by some stranger.

Ohhhh...is my question about cute little dust bunnies an expression of my internal terror?!!! Oh Dear...

::promptly faints::

Perhaps, Susan, defining and streamlining the goals of your photography will provide a more accurate road map as to what suitable camera body and lenses you wish to invest in and tailor to your needs. Shouldn't hardware ultimately match the end goal? Just my two cents...;-)

snaffles