Nikon seems to be pushing new stock out the door faster and faster. I bought my D200 and in 9months the D300 broke ground. Last year they eliminated my 28-70 f2.8. I guess I am just always late to the party.
I would really like the D700, but the price is just to steep for me and the resale on my d200 is in the dirt. Best Buy had bodies for $600 not too long ago. I almost bought one for dedicated IR work. Would be nice.
Don't worry about the pricing on the D200...just keep it. It's still a great camera that should last you for many more years. I too almost bought another one at $600. But I'm really trying to save for a full-frame camera that I hope will last a long time for me, regardless of what Brad says
As for the 28-70...I guess Nikon phased it out back when they came out with the 24-70 f/2.8. I currently have the 17-55 f/2.8 DX lens. I'll probably sell that and get the 24-70 when I finally have my hands on a full-frame camera.
off-roader said:
What don't you like about it? I have the Tokina version and I love it. If you find it too slow, how about the 14-24mm f/2.8 version instead? Both are thankfully rectilinear too.
Mainly, I dislike the lens flare and chromatic aberration that are common in these ultra-wide lenses. Take that Tokina and point it near the sun (not directly at it, just off to the side; the sun doesn't need to be in the frame to cause this) and you'll see what I mean. It doesn't always show up in the viewfinder, but it certainly does on your shots.
Also, I get tired of the distortion in the corners. At 12mm these lenses distort quite a bit. Try placing your truck in one of the corners and taking a wide landscape shot, and you'll see what I mean.
off-roader said:
As for FF, myself I'm not truly convinced that it's the way for me to go. I like having the 1.5x crop factor of the D300 since it helps with both Macro and Long shots (sports photography). I do like how good the higher ISO shots are with the D700. I rented one for a friends party and the results were incredible.
You're right about macro (except for the smaller viewfinders make it difficult) and sports photography, or wildlife for that matter...anything that you can benefit from the extra "reach" of the 1.5x crop factor. There are times when this is nice. My boring 50mm f/1.4 is now a nice short portrait lens on my D200...almost like an 85mm on a full-frame camera. My 300mm f/4 and my 70-200mm f/2.8 now have extra reach that I use all the time. So, don't get me wrong. I like this benefit as well. I just miss the stunning quality I could get with my 20mm and 35mm primes.
off-roader said:
If there were one lens I'd buy that's not currently available it would be an 18-200 AFS f/2.8 lens. That would be a great all around daily use lens (assuming it wouldn't be as massive as the 70-200/80-200 f/2.8 glass).
I'm not sure that physics and current lens technology can support this. Even if they could, I'm not sure the image quality could rival the 70/80-200mm lenses. Those are some of the best Nikon has.