Must have lenses...

[Phoenix1]

Aussie:

If I go DX, that's exactly the lineup I have in mind. My problem is I have not excluded an FX body from my choices. The Nikon choices are nowhere near as clear (or cheap). Canon choices are both.

 

[AussieByron]

Aussie:

If I go DX, that's exactly the lineup I have in mind. My problem is I have not excluded an FX body from my choices. The Nikon choices are nowhere near as clear (or cheap). Canon choices are both.

The orignal post was regarding DX lenses (user had a D200).

Decent affordable Nikon FX body maybe 12 months away?

When you start looking into FX lenses I think the 105mm would replace my 60mm as my favourite and maybe the 60mm with 2x teleconverter would make a sweet super macro in FX.

To replace my Tokina maybe the 16mm Nikkor or maybe Tokina will bring out something in FX on par with the 10-17mm DX lens.

I will not be looking at FX bodies until they affordable. Like current D3x features in a housing priced around a D300 (maybe its the new D400?).
DX lenses can still be used with the 10mp size (which isnt bad by any means) and then slowly collect FX lenses for the full size 24mp shots.

I will be very interested in what Nikon bring out to compete with the Canon 5DmkII in price and features.

Regards Aussie

 

[Phoenix1]

I know this is both a DX discussion and a Nikon niche, so I'll keep this brief.

My dilemma since September has been to select between DX and FX, and with either, which camera or maker. If I go DX, my present opinion is D90, hands down winner, with the lenses you've discussed.

Nikon's hand is extremely weak in FX choice department. Even if the D3X makes my coffee in the morning, I am <not> spending $8,000. That leaves me with the D700, a pretty respectable choice. Still, lens choices are extremely expensive, and Nikon has all but abandoned the mid-range FX zoom for walk-around land use.

As a 35+ year Nikon owner, I am looking for every reason I can find to stay with Nikon. Unfortunately, all my Nikon lenses are AI (convertible for use on a 700, but useless under water without autofocus). Without a substantial investment in lenses I can use, the siren song of the 5DII may be overwhelming. Put that together with 3 very good Canon lens choices and a package that comes in more than $1,000 less than the 700, Nikon is in trouble in this household.

The question, then, is whether to go with the D90 value package or the 5DII. Since I'm in no rush, I'm waiting for more hands on reviews of production 5DIIs to see how they compare. That will also give me time to keep saving.

 

[Mariozi]

I am a long time Nikon user as well as a great fan of film and FX format.
I figured out long ago (by the lack of investments in DX primes and good pro lenses) that the DX thing is a thing that will come to pass.
My guess is that the D700 and D300 will merge in one FX line in 2-4 years.
The DX might resist down the line for a decade or so...
So I decided to go DX for a few years 6-8 and do the least investments in DX lenses.
I bought 2 DX lenses:
Nikkor 10.5mm/2.8 fisheye (unbeatable at Close-up WA); and
Sigma 10-20mm (option is Nikkor 12-24)

But using DX cameras I found out 2 VERY interesting things:
- 10.5mm is a LOT better than 16mm...
- both 105 and 60mm looks a lot better with the 1.5x crop factor.

So I decided to stick with DX, either in the form of a DX body forever (D300 or D400).
Or a good FX (24Mp) that I could get a 10Mp+ DX crop. (D800???)

And I am trying to reorganize my lens quiver into:

For FX sensor and film:
Sigma 8mm/4 (got it)
Nikkor AF-D 16mm/2.8 (got it)
Nikkor AF-D 18-35mm/3.5-4.5 (underwater only) (wanna sell a 20mm/2.8 AF-D to get this)

For DX sensor:
Nikkor AF-D 10.5mm/2.8 (got it)
Sigma 10-20mm/3.5-5.6 (underwater only) (got it)

For both systems:
Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm/2.8 (will sell a kidney to get this)
Nikkor AF-S 50mm/1.4 (about to get) (old my 50mm/1.8 with the D80 to get a D300)
Nikkor AF-S 60mm/2.8 (might get if there is any money left)
Nikkor AF-D 105mm/2.8 (got it) (can trade it for the AF-S)
Nikkor AF-S 70-200/2.8 VR (got it)

 

[Eskasi]

Also a little off topic....

If going FX;
WA- Nikkor 17-35AFS F2.8
Sigma 15 Fisheye (better close focus than the Nikkor 16FE)

Macro - Nikkor 105VR
2x TCs
Sigma 150mm F2.8 macro
Diopters

Topside- 24-70 VR and 70-200 VR

If Nikon introduces a slightly higher Mpix DX camera (with all the same great low noise capabilities), I may oblige given that DX is better underwater IMHO (for my purposes).

If I go FX, I would go for the above lenses. If I were already shooting a D3 UW, I would get a D3x immediately. The high cost of the camera will seem a little cheaper once you factor in the money you save not having to buy another housing.

Edit: Nikon is discontinuing the 17-35 AF-S....which is a shame as there are no plans to make a replacement. The 14-24mm is reported to be soft around the edges when used UW especially when used at F8 or smaller...

 

[AussieByron]

I know this is both a DX discussion and a Nikon niche, so I'll keep this brief.

My dilemma since September has been to select between DX and FX, and with either, which camera or maker. If I go DX, my present opinion is D90, hands down winner, with the lenses you've discussed.

Nikon's hand is extremely weak in FX choice department. Even if the D3X makes my coffee in the morning, I am <not> spending $8,000. That leaves me with the D700, a pretty respectable choice. Still, lens choices are extremely expensive, and Nikon has all but abandoned the mid-range FX zoom for walk-around land use.

As a 35+ year Nikon owner, I am looking for every reason I can find to stay with Nikon. Unfortunately, all my Nikon lenses are AI (convertible for use on a 700, but useless under water without autofocus). Without a substantial investment in lenses I can use, the siren song of the 5DII may be overwhelming. Put that together with 3 very good Canon lens choices and a package that comes in more than $1,000 less than the 700, Nikon is in trouble in this household.

The question, then, is whether to go with the D90 value package or the 5DII. Since I'm in no rush, I'm waiting for more hands on reviews of production 5DIIs to see how they compare. That will also give me time to keep saving.

If I was starting from scratch and wanting a camera soon I would be looking very hard at the Canon 5DmkII.

Since I already have a collection of Nikon lenses I am looking at the D90 to replace my D80 and wait until something comes up from Nikon. The D90 looks like a great camera at a great price and would fill the gap before something in an affordable FX turns up.

Regards Aussie