D3 impact on market for used DX's, especially 12-24's and 17-55's?

Am guessing that a lot of pro's who will be buying D3 might already own one or more of the higher end DX lenses, which would probably be considered to be the 12-24 and 17-55 at this time. With the new 14-24 and 24-70 offering (roughly) FF versions of those two lenses for FF, should we expect a lot of 12-24's and 17-55's hitting the used market as people start upgrading to the D3?

I hope the prices drop like a rock in water! Do I think they will? Nope!
I'd like to get both of these for just a few $$!

M Katz said:

Am guessing that a lot of pro's who will be buying D3 might already
own one or more of the higher end DX lenses, which would probably be
considered to be the 12-24 and 17-55 at this time. With the new
14-24 and 24-70 offering (roughly) FF versions of those two lenses
for FF, should we expect a lot of 12-24's and 17-55's hitting the
used market as people start upgrading to the D3?

Click to expand...

I would think the 12-24 would tank, with the 14-24 being f2.8 and only $1700 new it seems this lens was always overpriced (I knew it when I bought it, but t was the only game in town at the time). On Full Frame the 12-24 was really an 18-36 so my 17-35 will be close enough (and f2.8) and will be restored to it's full glory which was wasted on DX.

I'm the only guy on the Nikon forum who never warmed up to the 17-55. The 24-70 on full frame is almost the same thing so I think it will be tremendously popular (just not with me).

Larry

i think, you are right. the second hand prices will take a big fall. i sell my 12-24 shortly and change my 17-55 one the day, when i get my D3, hopefully in the start of november

uwe
--
Nikon NPS Member http://www.serengeti-wildlife.com

the ability to use traditional filters on the 14-24 is limited so the 12-24 might still hold its value. also, if a D3x comes out at 21 mp, the cropped mp level on a dx lens will be usable, so who knows. there will probably be a flood initially, but as long as Nikon continues to make DX cameras the market should be there
--
JBerk

There is utterly no reason for either of these two lenses to fall in price. All of the replies so far are from the school that thinks FF will eventually replace DX. They are living in a fantasy world. DX and FX will live alongside each other for the foreseeable future, with DX by far outselling FX.

M Katz said:

Am guessing that a lot of pro's who will be buying D3 might already
own one or more of the higher end DX lenses, which would probably be
considered to be the 12-24 and 17-55 at this time. With the new
14-24 and 24-70 offering (roughly) FF versions of those two lenses
for FF, should we expect a lot of 12-24's and 17-55's hitting the
used market as people start upgrading to the D3?

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/fjp
FJP, Software Developer

just to clarify, I don't think FF is going to replace DX in the next five to eight years. That being said, I think a lot of people are going to function on that assumption and sell old DX lenses. It would actually make an interesting free market economics/psychology study for some college professor wouldn't it?
--
JBerk

At the press conference, Nikon made a particular effort to stress their continued support for DX format cameras. DX is not going away. What's more, the D3 incorporates a DX mode with automatic switch-over when DX lenses are attached. One would assume that future FX bodies would do the same.

And did you read Nikon's manufacturing plans for the D300 and the D3? 60K units per month for the D300 and only 6K units per month for the D3. Just how fast are FX mode bodies going to replace all those DX bodies already out there? With more coming? And ONLY 6K FX mode bodies per month?

I would not expect the value of the 12-24, the 17-55, or the 18-200 to "tank" until specific replacements for them are introduced -- something that has NOT happened with the introduction of the 14-24 and the 24-70. The ONLY lenses that might drop in value as a result of these two introductions are the 17-35 and the 28-70 and they probably wont drop a lot.

I went a bit mad with my D70s and got a 17-55 and 12-24 to go with it, but soon realised I'd dented my bank balance too much and offloaded them via ebay for about 85% of the "new" price and got a cheap & cheerful 35mm f/2 lens as that's all I really need right now. I'm hoping the FX format might eventually filter down to prosumer DSLR's like it did with Canon's D5 so that cheap fast primes like the 35/2 and 50/1.8 regain the wider field of view they were originally designed for.

... I will definitely not getting any DX lenses in the future as I envisioned that in 3-4 years I will settle with a reasonable priced (i.e. D200/300 priced) FX body. So, if you have similar upgrade plan for the future you may want to stick with FF lenses. Not to mention FF lenses perform fabulously on DX bodies so it is a no brainer. Cost is not a factor for me since good DX wide angle lenses like the 17-55 f/2.8 cost a fortune anyway

Not that it matters to me since I only has one DX lens in my bag

Nikon will make 60,000 D300's a month vs. only 8,000 D3's. Not to mention ever other DSLR that Nikon has made will be DX format. In other words, the vast majority of users will continue to use DX lenses so I do not expect to see a mass ebaying of DX lenses anytime soon.

--
http://www.southfloridapics.com

IeraseU said:

Nikon will make 60,000 D300's a month vs. only 8,000 D3's. Not to
mention ever other DSLR that Nikon has made will be DX format. In
other words, the vast majority of users will continue to use DX
lenses so I do not expect to see a mass ebaying of DX lenses anytime
soon.

Click to expand...

I really hope they do though!

=)

--
http://www.andrewthomasdesigns.com

GaySatyr said:

I would not expect the value of the 12-24, the 17-55, or the 18-200
to "tank" until specific replacements for them are introduced --
something that has NOT happened with the introduction of the 14-24
and the 24-70. The ONLY lenses that might drop in value as a result
of these two introductions are the 17-35 and the 28-70 and they
probably wont drop a lot.

Click to expand...

Do you really think there will ever be a replacement for any of those three lenses?

The 17-35 in contrast has regained its stature now that it can perform as originally intended, it was a complete waste on DX, I anticipate its used price to climb.

Larry

fjp said:

There is utterly no reason for either of these two lenses to fall in
price. All of the replies so far are from the school that thinks FF
will eventually replace DX. They are living in a fantasy world. DX
and FX will live alongside each other for the foreseeable future,
with DX by far outselling FX.

Click to expand...

I think so, DX will continue to thrive. They will become more affordable compared to FX and DX bodies will be more appealing to travellers.