Upgrade from D300 to Nikon FX. Advice?

MLangton

Decisions, decisions...

Greetings. I finally want to take the next step up to a FX camera body. Here is my conundrum...

A few years ago, after careful research, I go out and buy a D300. I still love it. However, a few short months after buying it, they come out with the D300s. :huh

I am really thinking about taking the plunge on a D700, but keep hearing the new D__ FX is rumored to be only months away. The D700 has been out for a while now. Something upgraded, and dual SD slots would be really cool.

My goal is to take this to the next level and start making a little money with this hobby in the next year. I want to buy once, buy right. I don't want to buy once, then trade up a short time later. I have some really nice glass now and want to take advantage of it.

If we're only talking a few months... I can wait. Common sense. Any longer though and it has me thinking...

Thoughts from you gurus?

Thanks in advance.

cab.in.boston

IMO, if you want to "buy once, buy right," then you should be talking about lenses, not bodies. Even if the D800 came out tomorrow and you bought it, you'd probably be buying a new body in a few years at most. But if you buy top quality glass, you'll be able to still be using it in 10/20/30/whatever years. Electronics constantly get upgraded, new sensor advances are inevitable, and moving parts like shutters and mirrors will wear out, so the body is not as permanent as the lenses. I see you say that you have some really nice glass already, so you might be all set already.

Unless you crave video capability (and Nikon doesn't have the best example of that), there is not any real advantage of the D300s over the D300. So while it might be annoying that a "new and improved" body came out soon after you got your D300, it's not really a leap and bound difference, and it certainly doesn't make your D300 any worse than it was pre-D300s release. If you still love the D300 (as I love mine), and it's not holding you back in any way, then you should be upgrading your lenses (which can be used to good effect on the DX body as well). When you get to the point where the D300 is really limiting you (need higher fps, really need that low-light advantage, etc), then go for the latest-and-greatest FX body that is available at the time. You can certainly sell images taken with a D300. If the image is good it will sell on its merits. A buyer isn't going to look at the metadata, discover it was shot on DX, and decide not to pay you.

OTOH, if you have great glass and you have the money for the D700, then you may just want to scratch that itch and go for it. From all accounts the D700 is wonderful (again, unless you need video), so I don't think you'd have any regrets. There's little risk other than the cash outlay, because it's certainly not going to make you a worse photographer, but it's also not, in and of itself, going to make you a better one. And if you buy a D700 today and the D800 comes out tomorrow, well, the existence of a D800 doesn't make the D700 any less of a camera.

r3t1awr3yd

It's just a tool and there will always be newer and better tools. If funds/budgeting allow for the purchase now and you NEED a new camera, go for it. If you don't need it, keep your D300 and your money and buy a new camera when you do

MLangton

Good points. These cameras are getting to be like computers as far as upgrading goes. (sigh)

As far as glass goes, I have the Nikon 24-70 F2.8, the Nikon 80-200 F2.8, and the Nikon 50mm F1.8 so far.

Granted, I am the weak link in the chain. I think I have enough FX glass to warrant an FX body. I'll have no more excuses...

cab.in.boston

What about your D300 do you feel is limiting your progress?

r3t1awr3yd

MLangton wrote: »

Good points. These cameras are getting to be like computers as far as upgrading goes. (sigh)

As far as glass goes, I have the Nikon 24-70 F2.8, the Nikon 80-200 F2.8, and the Nikon 50mm F1.8 so far.

Granted, I am the weak link in the chain. I think I have enough FX glass to warrant an FX body. I'll have no more excuses...

I shoot my D7000 (not 700) with the 24-70, 70-200vr, 50 f/1.8, and 11-16... I still haven't moved to FX. Everything works great

MLangton

cab.in.boston wrote: »

What about your D300 do you feel is limiting your progress?

No. Absolutely not. I wish I was that good. Like I said, I am the weak link on the chain. It will be another year or two before I hit it's limits.

My issue? Specifically, I have had two or three potential customers question me on my gear. "Do you use an FX camera?"

I am perfectly happy with my 300.

Perhaps my fears are unjustified over the few rolled eyes I have seen when I mention the D300. I do not plan on doing many weddings. Mainly real estate, event, and some location portrait stuff.

I am looking at more from a marketing standpoint. I don't see a lot of pros out there using DX as their primary shooter. There must be a reason for this.

Go easy on me... I am new to the idea of moving up to the idea of making money. I hope the idea of "There is no such thing as a stupid question" applies here.

EDITED:

PLEASE... Convince me that I can make a business work well with only a D300 and good glass. If I can keep from dropping another 2K on a body for another year or two, I have other places to spend the $$$. Food and gas come to mind. On the flipside, I don't want to lose potential customers based on the perception that I am using an "amateur" camera body. I am truly at a loss here, this is why I am posing the question here. Like I said, this is more about marketing the business.

Thanks!

cab.in.boston

I purchased my D300 used from a wedding photographer who was finally moving to FX. She had been successfully shooting twin D300 bodies for a few years and doing fine. Yes, she was going to FX, but it was after using DX exclusively for quite a while.

Dgrin's own Matt Saville does have FX, but also shoots DX successfully. I'm sure there are others.

My opinion is that if your customers are judging your work based on what kind of gear was used, then they're probably not very educated clients. I think you'd be better off showing your portfolio and emphasizing your output rather than the gear.

However, I am not nor do I want to be in business, this is strictly fun for me, so take my comments for what they're worth. You might be better off asking these types of questions in the Mind Your Own Business forum, or asking Wedding or People photographers if they have had to and how they did deal with gear biases like this.

Another gear-related thing I might have to say is that if you're doing real estate work, you might want to look at getting some DX wide glass like the Nikkor 12-24, Sigma 10-20, or Tokina 11-16. Your 24-70, as awesome as it is, isn't very wide on DX and might be limiting you doing interiors.

MLangton

More good points. I should have posted this question in the business forum. I just asked there also.

As far as the real estate goes, I do have the Nikon 16-85mm F3.5-5-6 DX, that is a great lens. The 16mm on the D300 is just wide enough to do what I need so far. I agree, if I get the FX, I'll need another wide angle.

Better go water the money tree. Thanks again for the replies all.

Icebear

MLangton wrote: »

My issue? Specifically, I have had two or three potential customers question me on my gear. "Do you use an FX camera?"

The answer to that question should be, "sometimes." You can always rent one if need be to impress a client. I can tell you this though, once I got my D700, my D300 became a 1.5 teleconverter and a sports body. The IQ really is noticibly better, and that's not even bringing up low-light performance.

angevin1

MLangton wrote: »

Thoughts from you gurus?

Thanks in advance.

No guru here...but the D3S is a step up from the D700, in low light performance as well as having dual slots to write to. Since you are worrying over the danger of obsolesence, go with Nikon's newest offering in it's FX line. The D700 is a capable camera, but as mentioned ,it may be nearing the end of it's cycle.

As far as the "rolled eyes" over the D300...That was one of Nikon's best selling cameras ever...and for good reason!

Icebear

angevin1 wrote: »

As far as the "rolled eyes" over the D300...That was one of Nikon's best selling cameras ever...and for good reason!

But if you're selling to the public, you have to meet their expectations, whether they're stupid or not.

angevin1

Icebear wrote: »

But if you're selling to the public, you have to meet their expectations, whether they're stupid or not.

Agreed....I've just never had anyone truly interested ask that sort of thing....been lucky I guess.

Qarik

It sounds like you don't need FX RIGHT now. I would wait a 6 months for the D800 or whatever. I would wager it will be specced significantly better then current D700.

MLangton

Qarik wrote: »

It sounds like you don't need FX RIGHT now. I would wait a 6 months for the D800 or whatever. I would wager it will be specced significantly better then current D700.

After a good nights sleep and lots of reading, this about sums it up. In the meantime, I can rent an FX body if I really need one. I'll start saving $$$ and just buy the D___ in several months if it's everything expected. I'll just keep the D300 as a back-up.

Thanks guys!

M38A1

I shoot for fun and for free, and had much the same quandary as you. After putting off a decision, I just decided my D90 was great but I wanted the FF and higher ISO performance along with some additional features. I've not had a single regret about the D700 purchase. No buyers remorse, no-nada. It's a wonderful piece of gear, and in my opinion, the images are different, especially at higher ISO/night and from what I perceive, color spectrum.

I still have my D90 and at this point have no intentions of selling it. Having the crop body has some advantages, primarily holding the second lens so I don't have to keep swapping (ie: opening up to dust etc) bodies/glass. I do find the D700 as my primary 'go-go' body now.

I hope I didn't muddy the decision process too much for you. The D700 is pretty awesome in my book.

MLangton

M38A1 wrote: »

I hope I didn't muddy the decision process too much for you. The D700 is pretty awesome in my book.

No mud at all. Thanks for the intel.

The decision has been made a long time ago. I am going to go FX, the question that I had was "when". After a few nights sleep and a lot of reading, I am going to buy the FX, but the perceived urgency of running out and buying one right away is gone.

I really hope to see a D700s or a D800 out soon. I am already in the saving process.

Matthew Saville

MLangton wrote: »

The decision has been made a long time ago. I am going to go FX, the question that I had was "when". After a few nights sleep and a lot of reading, I am going to buy the FX, but the perceived urgency of running out and buying one right away is gone.

I really hope to see a D700s or a D800 out soon. I am already in the saving process.

Well said. FX is in any "pro's" future.

If there were two facts that are absolutely true, they are:

1.) You can get the job done with a D300. I did it for years, and so have plenty of others.

2.) A D700 or better is still an inevitable part of a pro's future. And the difference, once you taste it, is undeniable.


Having said that, to answer your questions...

* The D700 replacement, at the EARLIEST, would be announced in August with a shelf time between then and September / October. Or at the latest, towards the end of the year or in the first quarter of 2012.

* Honestly though, since you're considering "going pro", (just like every other person with $2-3K to spend, no offense) ...You can count on owning multiple full-frame bodies, period.

* Therefore, it would be my advice to just buy a used D700 any time you can afford it, and then *add* a D800 (Or whatever) to your bag when you can afford IT. If you're not doing "many" weddings then you can put off owning two full-frame bodies, but still, each time you walk into an extremely low-light job with just one FX body, you're rolling the dice.

Sorry the "buy once, buy right" mantra just will not apply if you are aspiring to shoot professionally. Having said that, get yourself a D700 and get to work. The world will not end if a D800 comes out and you can't afford it, and your clients will not hire someone else just because you don't have the latest 24 megapixel behemoth. Or at least, if they do, you're not doing your job right. ;-)

So, that' my advice- fear not! Get the D700 and don't look back, just assume that in the long run you'll be upgrading every few years, especially as a professional.

I got a D300 right when it (and the D3) came out, and waited until just a few months ago to get a D700. I'll happily work with my D700 for another couple years until I can afford a D800. All these cameras have no problem paying my bills. :-)

=Matt=

Mitchell

I can guarantee that the D800 will come out the week after you purchase a new D700.

Seriously, if you are considering real estate photos, there is a significant advantage on the wide end with FX bodies. You will require and excellent wide angle lens to go with your new FX body, so consider your purchase options carefully.

I would also suggest you sit down and carefully consider your business plan. Many folks who went into real estate photography have gotten burned by realtors and sellers who don't want to spend money and are satisfied with cell phone quality snaps of the homes. It's really only the high end real estate market that does any type of quality photography of interiors and exteriors.

borrowlenses.com

If you are shooting real-estate the wideness of FX would come in very handy. The rumors are the D800 or whatever will be announced this year but what is more likely is the D4 will come out in August or so with the D800 following some time next year.

Icebear

So, is the conventional thinking that there is no D400 (or whatever the call the next DX) in the near future? That's what I'm waiting for.

zoomer

cab.in.boston wrote: »

What about your D300 do you feel is limiting your progress?

This ^
If you are being limited then upgrade now. If not no harm in waiting.

For the long term....if you want to make money doing portraits/weddings.....save up and get the best FX camera you can with the best noise performance.

cab.in.boston

Icebear wrote: »

So, is the conventional thinking that there is no D400 (or whatever the call the next DX) in the near future? That's what I'm waiting for.

I certainly hope there will be a D400! Although I probably wouldn't upgrade at that model (I'm thinking my D300 will suit me well for a while still, maybe I'll upgrade at the D500). I just hope Nikon doesn't abandon DX in the semi-pro body. As good as the D7000 seems to be, I just don't want to downsize and lose some of the functions that I'm used to on my D300. I used to be comfortable with my D90, but ever since I've gone to the D300, the smaller body just doesn't feel right in my hands. So I hope Nikon keeps the line going!

Matthew Saville

borrowlenses.com wrote: »

If you are shooting real-estate the wideness of FX would come in very handy. The rumors are the D800 or whatever will be announced this year but what is more likely is the D4 will come out in August or so with the D800 following some time next year.

Mitchell wrote: »

I can guarantee that the D800 will come out the week after you purchase a new D700.

Seriously, if you are considering real estate photos, there is a significant advantage on the wide end with FX bodies. You will require and excellent wide angle lens to go with your new FX body, so consider your purchase options carefully.

I would also suggest you sit down and carefully consider your business plan. Many folks who went into real estate photography have gotten burned by realtors and sellers who don't want to spend money and are satisfied with cell phone quality snaps of the homes. It's really only the high end real estate market that does any type of quality photography of interiors and exteriors.

I dunno what it is about FX that makes people think there are so many better options in the ultra-wide range, but that's not really true anymore. Sure, Nikon has the legendary 14-24 2.8, but that's about it and only if you're measuring the per-pixel sharpness in the EXTREME corners of the frame, making mural sized prints. What other "amazing" options are there for FX users on Nikon? The Nikon 17-35? the new 16-35 f/4? That's about it, in the "decent sharpness" department, and even those lenses aren't perfect yet are heavy as a brick and quite honestly in my opinion, overkill unless you're booked solid as a professional working for high-end real estate brokers and magazines etc...

For the rest of us who don't care to invest $5K in just ONE body and lens, and lug around an extremely heavy setup, there are AMAZING options in the likes of a D7000 and the Tokina 11-16 2.8, Sigma 10-20 4.5-5.6, Sigma 8-16, etc. As far as "getting into business" is concerned, I would much rather minimize my equipment investment and focus resources on other more important things, such as actually starting the business. With that consideration, I can HIGHLY recommend a D7000 and Tokina 11-16mm or Sigma 8-16mm.

(I don't do real estate mainly, but I have entertained a couple real estate agent friends who needed a quick job here and there. Just to clarify my qualification, or lack therof...)

=Matt=

Matthew Saville

cab.in.boston wrote: »

I certainly hope there will be a D400! Although I probably wouldn't upgrade at that model (I'm thinking my D300 will suit me well for a while still, maybe I'll upgrade at the D500). I just hope Nikon doesn't abandon DX in the semi-pro body. As good as the D7000 seems to be, I just don't want to downsize and lose some of the functions that I'm used to on my D300. I used to be comfortable with my D90, but ever since I've gone to the D300, the smaller body just doesn't feel right in my hands. So I hope Nikon keeps the line going!

I posted about this on my CameraTalk blog- basically, I feared the same but after shooting with the Nikon D7000 a few times, for both pleasure and for work, I firmly believe that a D400 is still out there. Especially if you consider the ramifications of Nikon's crop sensor lineup versus Canon's, in some ways even the Canon 60D is better than the Nikon D7000, which puts the Canon 7D on a whole different level. (Even though the D7000 DOES beat the 7D in one or two features.) Bottom line- I don't think Nikon can afford to just evaporate the D300 / D400 lineup.

Based on release cycle history, we could see ANY of three new camera bodies starting this August-October: we could see a D4, a D400, and/or a D800. Unfortunately, my bet is that Nikon will be using the D4 sensor in the D800, in which case the D800 will have to wait approximately one year. So, the most likely thing will be that we see a D4 and D400 announcement this August / September / October, and then a D800 announcement in 2012 June / July / August...

=Matt=

ThatCanonGuy

Matthew Saville wrote: »

I posted about this on my CameraTalk blog- basically, I feared the same but after shooting with the Nikon D7000 a few times, for both pleasure and for work, I firmly believe that a D400 is still out there. Especially if you consider the ramifications of Nikon's crop sensor lineup versus Canon's, in some ways even the Canon 60D is better than the Nikon D7000, which puts the Canon 7D on a whole different level. (Even though the D7000 DOES beat the 7D in one or two features.) Bottom line- I don't think Nikon can afford to just evaporate the D300 / D400 lineup.

Based on release cycle history, we could see ANY of three new camera bodies starting this August-October: we could see a D4, a D400, and/or a D800. Unfortunately, my bet is that Nikon will be using the D4 sensor in the D800, in which case the D800 will have to wait approximately one year. So, the most likely thing will be that we see a D4 and D400 announcement this August / September / October, and then a D800 announcement in 2012 June / July / August...

=Matt=

http://nikonrumors.com/2011/06/19/nikon-d4-with-32mp-d400-with-24mp-sensors-from-sony.aspx/

Icebear

That would be awesome, but that particular rumor (the 24MP D400) flies in the face of this one. Because I'm an incurable optimist, I'm squirreling away nuts for the winter just in case!

Harryb

There is a D400, a D4 and a D800 in the future. We probably would be hearing something about now if the recent disaster in Japan had not occurred. Right now it is extremely tough to find the D3s, the D3x or the D700 in stock anywhere. Even the newer D7000 isn't all that easy to find. At this point I think if Nikon is going to release a new model this year the D400 is the probable candidate. I would guess that 16 MP is more likely than the rumors of the 24+ MP.