Reading mode: Light Dark

And it's all but official...

Go to last post
n057 said:
OceanFroggie said:
Yes its clear now that DX is the consumer range and FX the pro range (D4S/D810 for professionals and D610/750 for prosumers and serious hobbyists). I guess if folk occasionally want DX features they can switch DX mode on in a D810 or D750 and use their DX lenses. One pro body in the bag for FX and occasional DX use. It's only a camera, not the end of the world. Otherwise use what I regard as Nikons best value for money camera the D7100.
Click to expand...
It *IS* the end of the world :-)

The good thing is that since no Nikon camera tickles my fancy, I started looking at other manufacturers. And for now Pentax looks real good.
JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
Click to expand...
I had the K5 with grip. The best camera in my hands ever. And that's saying something because I do like the D300s with grip also. Pentax color output is spectacular. The 60-250mm and 300mm telephotos are superb. Now they have a nice looking 1.4x TC. I couldn't track birds as well as the D300s. The K3 is supposed to be better. I didn't want two camera systems. Now I think I made a mistake selling my Pentax equipment. I don't want to encourage any Nikon user to jump ship so these are just my thoughts at the moment. Good luck with your decision.
 
Robert A F said:
n057 said:
OceanFroggie said:
Yes its clear now that DX is the consumer range and FX the pro range (D4S/D810 for professionals and D610/750 for prosumers and serious hobbyists). I guess if folk occasionally want DX features they can switch DX mode on in a D810 or D750 and use their DX lenses. One pro body in the bag for FX and occasional DX use. It's only a camera, not the end of the world. Otherwise use what I regard as Nikons best value for money camera the D7100.
Click to expand...
It *IS* the end of the world :-)

The good thing is that since no Nikon camera tickles my fancy, I started looking at other manufacturers. And for now Pentax looks real good.
JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
Click to expand...
I had the K5 with grip. The best camera in my hands ever. And that's saying something because I do like the D300s with grip also. Pentax color output is spectacular. The 60-250mm and 300mm telephotos are superb. Now they have a nice looking 1.4x TC. I couldn't track birds as well as the D300s. The K3 is supposed to be better. I didn't want two camera systems. Now I think I made a mistake selling my Pentax equipment. I don't want to encourage any Nikon user to jump ship so these are just my thoughts at the moment. Good luck with your decision.
Click to expand...
 
OceanFroggie said:
Yes its clear now that DX is the consumer range and FX the pro range (D4S/D810 for professionals and D610/750 for prosumers and serious hobbyists).
Click to expand...
That's the way I see it. I think that they are marketing FX bodies because they are much more profitable than the semi-pro DX models. Plus, they don't truly make many new bodies, just versions of previous ones.
 
digitallollygag said:
Five FF DSLRs in the Nikon lineup now? It seems quite clear to me there is no "true" D300 replacement coming... ever.
Click to expand...
Agree. You have to look at the number of new models released both above and below the D300 and that is how they now see the market.
 
azguy said:
OceanFroggie said:
Yes its clear now that DX is the consumer range and FX the pro range (D4S/D810 for professionals and D610/750 for prosumers and serious hobbyists).
Click to expand...
That's the way I see it. I think that they are marketing FX bodies because they are much more profitable than the semi-pro DX models. Plus, they don't truly make many new bodies, just versions of previous ones.
Click to expand...
 
n057 said:
I will not exactly find myself up the creek without a paddle. My main work on Nikon is with the 17-55/2.8 and 70-200/2.8. I don't track birds, I track performers in unlit jazz bars.
Click to expand...
That sounds really, really, interesting. Can you tell us more about that? What focal lengths and shutter speeds do you usually end up using? Is tracking AF useful at all in such dim conditions? Does it matter if it's dim, so long as there is contrast between the performer and the background?
n057 said:
I was willing to pay up to $2500 for a modern pro-DX upgrade. List price for the D750 at Nikon Canada is $2550. I refuse to go FX, and for *around* that money I can get a K3 body + an all Pentax f/2.8 lens setup up to 135mm, or an all Pentax f/4 lens setup up to 250mm. I could go even cheaper to a Tamron f/2.8 lens setup up to 200mm.
Click to expand...
I've been looking at the Tamron and Sigma f/2.8 stuff, wondering.
 
Will Frost said:
n057 said:
I will not exactly find myself up the creek without a paddle. My main work on Nikon is with the 17-55/2.8 and 70-200/2.8. I don't track birds, I track performers in unlit jazz bars.
Click to expand...
That sounds really, really, interesting. Can you tell us more about that? What focal lengths and shutter speeds do you usually end up using? Is tracking AF useful at all in such dim conditions? Does it matter if it's dim, so long as there is contrast between the performer and the background?
Click to expand...
I have not updated that gallery in a while, but you can see some examples here . I use AF under those conditions, often the center point (on my D200), with AF-ON, then recompose. And of course I have to PP, because the files are noisy at 1600 ISO. A friend has been a Pentax owner for years, and we shoot the same stuff. We are amazed at the IQ at ISO 6400 ...
Will Frost said:
Will Frost said:
I was willing to pay up to $2500 for a modern pro-DX upgrade. List price for the D750 at Nikon Canada is $2550. I refuse to go FX, and for *around* that money I can get a K3 body + an all Pentax f/2.8 lens setup up to 135mm, or an all Pentax f/4 lens setup up to 250mm. I could go even cheaper to a Tamron f/2.8 lens setup up to 200mm.
Click to expand...
I've been looking at the Tamron and Sigma f/2.8 stuff, wondering.
Click to expand...
I am not sure yet if I will use Pentax lenses instead of Tamron and Sigma, even though Pentax is more expensive. I am poring through the Pentax forum to have a sense of how users rate their lens options. I know I tested the Sigma 17-50 before getting the 17-55 and preferred the responsiveness of the Nikkor. That was before Sigma had motors built into the lens. I plan to take my time.

I found a site that compares the Pentax-Sigma-Tamron zooms in the 16-50 range . We'll see.


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top