Any FF upgrade regrets?

D

darkeeboy

Messages
137
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
Been seriously thinking about upgrading my D90 to FF D600 and was wondering of those people who have done the similar thing had any regrets about spending the £1k+ and had issues with weight increase ?
 
the d600 is not very heavy, the same weight as a d7000 there abouts.
 
weight be damned, its the price of new lenses thats added grey hairs.
 
Yeah, having to upgrade my tamron 17-50 at the same time too. A few reviews show the kit vr lens to be almost as good as a tamron / Nikon 24-70 and its over half the price...
 
essexash said:
weight be damned, its the price of new lenses thats added grey hairs.
Click to expand...

Ha ha...this is probably spot on. Upgrading to FF, I've LOVED the jump in ISO performance but then it's made me start chasing FF lenses. And a quick lesson I learned is cheap glass is erm...cheap for a reason. My only regret is that i used to have a healthy bank balance!
 
If you have to question the upgrade and don't understand the benefits I would suggest that you don't rush to upgrade.

I did and found that, yes it has a massive benefit in what you capture in FF but if you know how to use a camera you can get just as good images with your DX.

It's an expensive upgrade if its just a hobby (as I have found), I only bought FF lens so had only the body to upgrade.

I suggest you research and understand why you are upgrading and compare the differences.
Cost is a start, but look at the iso capability and loss of zoom etc.
 
Characteristics said:
If you have to question the upgrade and don't understand the benefits I would suggest that you don't rush to upgrade.

I did and found that, yes it has a massive benefit in what you capture in FF but if you know how to use a camera you can get just as good images with your DX.

It's an expensive upgrade if its just a hobby (as I have found), I only bought FF lens so had only the body to upgrade.

I suggest you research and understand why you are upgrading and compare the differences.
Cost is a start, but look at the iso capability and loss of zoom etc.
Click to expand...

^^^this^^^

I upgraded from a D70 to a D700 four years ago, as I wanted something that was better in low light. I wasn't disappointed in that respect! However, the weight of the camera, especially with a decent zoom lens is considerable, and I do find myself using primes a lot these days. The cost of changing my lenses over has been long and costly as well.

My philosophy is to upgrade for a specific capability (rather than because I can afford it or fancy a change) so I've still got the D700 and am still really happy with it but if there had been a dx camera around at the time like the D7000, I'd have gladly bought one of those and saved myself a lot of money!
 
i regret how heavy my bag has become but thats about it :shrug:
in reality i've not really gotten out & used my gear since i went FF as i spent the best part of September & October in hospital & since then have been trying to get my life back on track/christmas out of the way etc.
hopefully i'll be able to enjoy the change more this year (y)
 
D70 (and later a D200) along with an F80 plus spare batteries and film were heavier than the D700 and took up more space in the bag! Luckily, being a film user alongside digital, I only had one Dx lens (the 18-70 kit lens that had come with the D70) so had no expensive lens upgrades to make at the same time.

Before the arrival of my D700, I carried the F80 for wide angle stuff - sometimes the crop factor can work against you.
 
I went from Micro 4/3 to FF a year ago...this week I've gone back to Micro 4/3! I enjoyed it and I'm glad I've scratched the itch, so no regrets in that respect.

I just found I ended up having to fit in specific photography time due to the size/weight of the kit rather than before when pretty much my entire kit would go everywhere with me because it was so unobtrusive.

Cost was the secondary factor, as somebody who likes a bit of motorsport as well there was simply no vaguely cheap way of doing it.

Thankfully Micro 4/3 has grown so much in 12 months that going back to it was easy, they've plugged most of the prime gaps with excellent glass, so the transition should be fairly painless.
 
Something tells me i would be a little disappointed if i made the move which is why i haven't yet.
 
Is it going to make you any better? No


You need to ask what you can't do at present with your current gear? If its nothing then you don't 'need' anything different.

Both DX and FX can take amazing pictures if you can use them, both will give you crap photographs ;)
 
Thanks all, I guess if Im still thinking about it then the answer is no. Maybe in a month or three's time Nikon will bring a DX replacement out for the D90, and look at that option instead.
 
darkeeboy said:
Thanks all, I guess if Im still thinking about it then the answer is no. Maybe in a month or three's time Nikon will bring a DX replacement out for the D90, and look at that option instead.
Click to expand...

I went FF from a D90. Was looking at the d600 but at the time there was an offer on at pc world so got the d800. Wanted ff for the better iso, perspective/dof and build.

Initially was a bit unsure as it was a more unforgiving beast than the d90 but after a couple of days never looked back. Love love love it.

Don't love the cost of better lenses. But I always knew it wouldn't be a cheap hobby.

On a side note. I've had some great pictures with the d90 and tamron 17-50/nikkor 35/nikkor 50. It's an awesome camera.

S
 
Characteristics said:
If you have to question the upgrade and don't understand the benefits I would suggest that you don't rush to upgrade.

I did and found that, yes it has a massive benefit in what you capture in FF but if you know how to use a camera you can get just as good images with your DX.

It's an expensive upgrade if its just a hobby (as I have found), I only bought FF lens so had only the body to upgrade.

I suggest you research and understand why you are upgrading and compare the differences.
Cost is a start, but look at the iso capability and loss of zoom etc.
Click to expand...

+1. If you don't have the right glass now then I would suggest that you get that first. I have my collection of FF glass which I enjoy using but still using my DX D7000. I was never in 2 minds about any of my glass but I m still wondering whether I should get a FF body or not.
 
Glass now is primarily DX:
17-50 Tamron
35mm afs Nikon
50mm Nikon (FF ok?)
90mm Tamrn (FF ok?)
70-300 VR Nikon (FF ok - unsure?)

I would like to change the Tamron as sometimes the focussing is off, and Im sure its not always my fault. The logical step is to the Nikon 17-55 but thats a DX lens so no good for futureproofing.

The upgrade would be either the D600 kit or body+Tamron 24-70, pushing budget to around £1800-£2200 with only a small contribution from the sale of the D90(£250) 35mm(£100) and 17-50(£200) £550 total, so outlay is £1300-1700, just to get a better camera, with the same numpty behind it!

Although upgrading the D90 to its eventual successor is going to cost a chunk - my guess is the new body will be around £900 plus would like to change the Tamron then too, so £700 odd to change bodies and at least £500 for the walkabout lens change... pushes it to £1300 - nearly the same as the D600+kit...
hmmm
 
i think i must have taken a blow to the head before i moved to FX as in the 2 months before i bought my D3 i bought a 35mm f/1.8 a 10.5 fisheye & a 17-55f/2.8 DX :bonk:

i dread to think how much i've spent last year :help:
 
D3100 with a few cheap DX lenses (12-24, 18-200, 35G) to 5D mkII with a few red ring monsters (17-40L, 24-105L, 85, 50, 35).

overall, with red ring zooms forced on me by Canon, I found my shots to be sharper, clearer and with larger viewfinder: better composed.

do I regret the added weight? yes sometimes. but it also means thinking about the kit I bring and sometimes swapping the heavy zooms for a 2 prime setup (85+35) to cut down weight. I think doing this also made me a better photographer.

do I regret the added cost? not at all. the extra cost to get full frame lens just means I had to save up for longer to buy the better lens, giving me sharper photos. at the moment, I've no desire to buy a new lens, whereas I always wanted to buy a sharper lens on D3100.
 
gadgeteer said:
And a quick lesson I learned is cheap glass is erm...cheap for a reason. My only regret is that i used to have a healthy bank balance!
Click to expand...

Some of it is cheap because no one wants the older stuff, but some research will lead you to some bargains.

105 f2.5 AiS £200 used ... manual focus, but superb lens optically

28-105 f3.5/f4.5 AFD £100 used ... great value for money walkabout lens
 
Martyn... said:
manual focus, but superb lens optically
Click to expand...

good luck getting more than 70% of the lens performance due to missed focus though
slip the focus even just a small amount and be punished :D

darkeeboy said:
Been seriously thinking about upgrading my D90 to FF D600 and was wondering of those people who have done the similar thing had any regrets about spending the £1k+ and had issues with weight increase ?
Click to expand...

it's the lens corners that are the killer, (canon shooter going from 1.3 crop to 1.0 suddenly my wide angle zooms suck, and depth of field can be problematic (also lenses don't focus as close)
I use all 3 formats because they all have a use
 
mrjames said:
good luck getting more than 70% of the lens performance due to missed focus though
slip the focus even just a small amount and be punished :D
Click to expand...

No luck involved, piece of cake manually focusing with the D700 ;)
 
darkeeboy said:
Been seriously thinking about upgrading my D90 to FF D600 and was wondering of those people who have done the similar thing had any regrets about spending the £1k+ and had issues with weight increase ?
Click to expand...

Depending on which lenses you use you may well feel the D600 needs a grip to feel balanced with some FX lenses.

I have a D7000 and have invested in FX lenses with the intention of going FF at some stage and have the grip on permanently for this reason....especially when shooting portrait.
 
I use the same lenses on D800 as I do/did D7000, both without grip. Still prefer the D7000 as it's smaller, but can't get the field of view + aperture combination I want with it which is why the D800's there.

Balance is fine with both bodies without grip with anything from 50 1.8 (smallest of my lenses) to 70-200 (biggest) or 24 PC-E (most mass close to body).

Would have had the D600 if the AF point spread had been wider though, and if there were a 16mm 1.8 or 1.4 I wouldn't have bothered with the upgrade at all.
 
Last edited:
Tirpitz said:
i think i must have taken a blow to the head before i moved to FX as in the 2 months before i bought my D3 i bought a 35mm f/1.8 a 10.5 fisheye & a 17-55f/2.8 DX :bonk:

i dread to think how much i've spent last year :help:
Click to expand...

I've bought 2 dx lenses (10-24 and 50-150) to avoid the tempation of buying an fx camera....:thinking:
 
i moved from a much loved D7000 to a D700 a few months ago and have not regretted it for a second. The camera is excellent, the pictures are excellent, low light is superb. I find more of the photos I take are keepers with the D700 compared to the D7000.

like some have said above, depends what you need from FF as you can get great results with a D90 / DX body.
 
As I sit here awaiting the delivery of my 5DII, it does concern me that I "need" to spend between 1.2 and 2.4 times as much as I did on the body to get zoom lenses equivalent to what I have for my 40D :bang:
 
i never even thought about the cost of the lens

isnt it cheaper for wideangle though?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top