Waiting…for nothing? D400 thoughts

D400The search term “D400” still brings a lot of people to this site.  This puzzles me since I haven’t written a lot about it, especially recently.  I see a lot of (sometimes chippy) dialogue about it on the various forums – did Nikon intend to merge the prosumer (D7000) and semi-pro (D300s) with the D7100?  Is there a market for a D400?  How should it be priced?  What features would it have?  Would a D800 in DX mode be an acceptable substitute?  (as a note, I use the term “semi-pro” as a reference to the build of the camera – full magnesium frame, non-integrated grip, pro-style handling and controls and top-class autofocus.  I don’t mean it as a reference to whether it is used to earn money.  I’d call it a “pro” body, but folks in the industry seem to equate that to a body like the D3/D4 or Canon 1Dx, which have integrated grips)

The price point and features of the D7100 make me think there is still an unfilled slot in the product line, and one Canon hasn’t abandoned (though it will be interesting to see if there is a C7D MkII…).

Thom Hogan and Nasim Mansurov among many others have speculated a bit on the features (Mansurov’s poll was pretty interesting, too).  I think the core elements are:

  • Same 51-point autofocus as the D7100 (CAM 3500DX)
  • Big buffer for the sports and wildlife shooters that love the DX platform
  • 7-9 frames per second (also mainly for the sports/wildlife folks)
  • Same build/controls as the D800 (including the AF ON button so important to the crew above)
  • $1799 price

People who argue that the price is too close to the D600 (at $2099, $1999 street) are missing the point – the D600 has literally none of the features above, and isn’t a suitable camera for the core D300s/semi-pro DX shooters.  Whether there are enough of them out there for Nikon is open for debate.  There are lots of opinions on the internet, but precious little data about volumes.  The D800 is over $1000 more than than we’re talking about and still doesn’t match the 7 to 8 frames per second (FPS) shooting speed of the D300s (the D800 only shoots 5 FPS in DX mode or 6 FPS with a grip attached).

Personally, I think the D400 was impacted by the tsunami disaster in Japan – I believe Nikon had to make a choice about what they could get out the door with limited resources and chose the D800 and D4.  Re-slotting a product isn’t easy – technology development isn’t a flexible process.

So the question is whether they killed the entire product, merged it or it is still in the pipeline, presumably this year or early next.  Personally, I’d love to see Nikon take this opportunity to do something really next-generation and deliver it by or before CES 2014 (which is in January).

Time will tell, and in the meantime, Nikon isn’t saying much.  That might be the biggest clue something is coming…

Advertisements

Should I buy a Nikon D7100?

D7100_heroIf you’re in the Nikon world you’ve heard about the recent announcement of the new Nikon D7100 (unless you were under a rock somewhere).  Predictably enough, the Nikon sections of the various photography forums are ablaze with questions of whether a given photographer should upgrade.

If you’ve found your way here, you might be wondering the same thing.  Regular readers of Enthusiast Photographer are probably predicting my answer already:  for the vast majority of people, it is “It depends, but probably not.”

Heresy.  Crazy talk.  Doesn’t a new camera make your images better?

Usually not.

Here’s the thing – why do you want to upgrade?  What isn’t your current camera doing for you?  In what way or ways are you exceeding the capabilities of the camera? Do you know the camera inside and out?

If you can’t answer those questions in some detail, you probably don’t need to upgrade (but you want to ;))

The desire is always there for the latest thing, and certainly the D7100 is a compelling camera.  If you’re carrying a D90 or D7000 (especially the latter), my recommendation is probably to sit tight.  Yes, the autofocus system is more capable and sophisticated as you go up from the D90 to the D7000 to the D7100.  Yes, you get more megapixels at each step.  The D7000 has a pretty big jump in ability to pull details out of shadows (dynamic range) vs. the D90, and we can assume the D7100 offers even further improvement.  There is a small bump in low light (ISO) performance – likely to be less than a stop between the D90 and the D7100, which isn’t much.

As I’ve said many times here, you can generally get better and more enduring benefits from investing in high-quality lenses than buying a new body.  The lenses will usually work on your next body.  If they don’t they tend to keep their value extremely well, especially compared to a body (which is more like a car – the older it gets, the less it is worth).

Maybe you can answer the questions above, know your camera inside and out and you have a clear idea of what problems the D7100 solves for you – you’ve wrung every bit of performance out of whatever camera you own.  Maybe you’ve got a complete kit of great glass and you’re ready to take the next step with the body.  If one or more of those is true, the D7100 will be a great camera to have.

If you’re on an older body, a D70 or a D80, I think the case for replacing your body is stronger.  There are a LOT of improvements in features, usability and performance in a D7100 over those cameras.  It might be wise to save a few bucks and grab a D7000 as it begins its ride into the sunset, too…

There are a lot of sensor-bullies on the internet who will say your aren’t getting good images quality unless you have the latest sensor, which is ridiculous.  Every other camera that went before didn’t suddenly become less capable – Nikon just took another step forward.  There are lots of ways to improve your images, and the top three are, in order most to least:

  1. Improve the photographer
  2. Shoot with better lenses
  3. Shoot with the best camera you can

OK – that is a little arbitrary, but it is pretty darn true! 😀

At the end of the day, it is hard to get away from the desire to buy a new body.  My general advice is to resist and focus on the other two things.  The next body will always be there…

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the D7100, upgrading or any other topic – feel free to comment!

Top 5 Pieces of Advice for an Enthusiast Photographer (100th Post!)

locks

I started Enthusiast Photographer because I thought it might be useful to someone to track what I learned over time about photography – tips, equipment, industry news, whatever.  This is now the 100th post on the site, so I thought it would be appropriate to boil things down a little.  Here are my top 5 tips:

  1. Learn more about photography: What makes photography fun (and sometimes intimidating) is the vast amount of knowledge out there to acquire – there is always something to learn!  I’ve said many times that the best upgrade in photography is improving the person behind the camera.  Find some good books (Kelby, Peterson, et. al.), Blogs (byThom, PhotoFocus, etc.) or videos (FroKnowsPhoto) and always keep growing!
  2. Learn more about your camera (and lenses): I don’t think it is unfair to say most Enthusiast Photographers haven’t maximized the capabilities of their equipment.  I was astounded how much I didn’t know about my camera (especially the autofocus system) when I read Thom Hogan’s guide to my camera.  What I learned greatly expanded my understanding of the piece of equipment in my hand, my comfort level while shooting and ultimately my photography.  I’ve read it a couple times, and I’m getting ready to do it again – each time I walk away with more.  The same thing is true about some lenses.  Does your lens have switches or buttons?  Do you know what they do and when you should use them?  Generally we’re limited to the owner’s manual here, but read RTFM 🙂 and check reviews to make sure you’re getting the most out of your glass, too…
  3. Decide if you’re a tripod shooter or not (if so, get a good system): Kelby, Hogan and others say that you should invest in a good tripod off the bat.  I’m going to disagree with them…sorta.  If your thing is kids, street or travel photography, a tripod might not be as big a deal – modern lenses with vibration reduction give you much better hand-held results at slower shutter speeds, and your money might be better spent on glass.  If you love landscapes, portraits, macro or any other area of photography where the sharpest picture is key or you’re dealing with very low light (think dawn, dusk or inside dark buildings), then a tripod is one of the most important things you’ll buy.  If you do, spend money on a good one. That doesn’t automatically mean a super-expensive one, but don’t go cheap either.  Find a nice one used or save up for a good one.  I’ll have a post coming on buying tripods and heads later.  For the record, I love my tripod and use it constantly.  I also have a monopod that has come in extremely handy, too.
  4. Always prioritize glass over body when it comes to upgrades:   The latest “sensor” is always sexy.  More megapixels, better low-light performance (ISO), more detail in shadows (dynamic range), whatever.  But here’s the thing – A good lens is going to make any camera better.  An average lens is going to make every camera and photographer work harder.  Icing on the cake comes from the fact that your glass will probably work on your next body, too.  If it doesn’t (for example if you switch from crop-sensor to full-frame), lenses keep their value far better than bodies.
  5. Have fun!: There are so many details to remember and settings to fiddle with that you can wind up missing out on the cool stuff going on around you!  Frankly, if you’ve been diligent about #1 and #2 above, this is probably less of an issue.  One other way you miss the fun is when everything becomes a photo-walk.  During my trip to Europe last Summer, I went light in my bag and shot for fun as much as expression.  It was great – we had a ball and they camera never got in the way of my vacation.  I wound up with some shots I really love, like the one at the top of this post.

So there it is!  Honestly, there are probably more than those five, but that is what is coming off the top of this hair-thinning dome… 🙂

One last note – if you enjoy this content, please feel free to “Like” the Enthusiast Photographer FaceBook page or “Follow” @enthus_photo on Twitter

[EDIT:  It has been a day or so since I posted this, and I just happened to wander by Thom Hogan’s site – he has a very-similar 5 things on his site (called “Last Camera Syndome II)!!  All I can say is I didn’t see his until just now, but it makes me feel good that my thinking tracked pretty closely with Thom’s (though that might worry him!! 🙂 )

Lens Dilemma

I’ll start this post with an apology for the long gap since I added anything to Enthusiast Photographer.  November and January combined for nearly 30,000 miles in the air, and while December didn’t involve any travel, I was either recovering from travel, working, enjoying the holidays or getting ready for more travel!!  The good news is I’ve been keeping a running list of topics, and I’ll promise to spend more time turning that list into (hopefully useful and/or interesting) content!  So let’s get to it!

Ironically, what inspired me to write were a couple of items I’ve seen in the last day about lenses.  I’ll start with a post from the almost-always interesting Photofocus blog about advice regarding what lens to buy.  The post boils down to the fact that the answer is different for almost every photographer – your needs, skills, budget, interests and style is different than anyone else.  If you frequent photography forums, you’ll nearly always find someone asking for advice on this topic.

What is my advice?  Same as it has always been:

  • Always buy the best glass you can, and don’t be afraid of older lenses.  I have some pretty vintage lenses in my bag, but I’ve got a very workable kit.
  • Buy used at places like FredMiranda.com where enthusiasts and pros sell to each other (and there’s a good rating system in place for buyers and sellers).
  • If you can’t afford the expensive constant aperture zooms, get the inexpensive zooms and add a nice f/1.8 prime to your bag (they’re usually pretty affordable, even new).

By the way, if you aren’t sure what “fast glass” “prime lens” or “constant aperture” means, see the my post on “Fast Glass“, and of course always feel free to ask any question via the Comments section – if I don’t know the answer, I’ll try to find out!

Honestly, most Enthusiast Photographers aren’t getting as much out of their equipment as we could (myself included).  Boning up on your skills, your knowledge, your holding technique and more can be a huge benefit.  See my book recommendations on books in one of my first posts “Breaking Through the Wall.”

Enthusiast Photographer Lens? Nikon Announces the 70-200 f/4

The net: Lower-priced, fairly fast glass gives Enthusiast Photographers a compelling and (relatively)  lightweight choice, but there are lots of options in this price range. It isn’t a mistake to get one, but my advice is look at other new and used options. In this price range, it is hard to wind up with a dud…

Being an Enthusiast Photographer has a lot to do with affordability.  Most of us never make any income from our photography, so the equipment you own is mainly about enjoying the process of capturing images.  And since I’m guessing most of you are like me, the amount of money you have to spend on that equipment is limited.

There are lots of great reasons to own a long zoom.  They help you get in tight on kids at recitals or on playing fields that are a long way away or the birds or animals that run away if you’re close.  On my recent trip to Europe, I spent a lot of time taking pictures of what I called “texture” for a project my niece was doing, and having 200mm of zoom was extremely useful.

Nikon just announced a new zoom aimed directly at Enthusiast Photographers – the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR telephoto zoom lens.  It offers a constant aperture of f/4 throughout the focal  (zoom) range.  This means that you can set the camera “wide open” for the best low-light performance and/or shallowest depth of field and it won’t change at all as you zoom, as apposed to my 18-200 VRII, which will automatically change to higher apertures as I zoom out, all the way to f/5.6 at 200mm.  How big a difference is that?  One full “stop” of light.  That means at f/4 the camera has twice as much light to work with, allowing you to use a faster shutter speed or a higher ISO if you need to.  Lots of people say “only one stop”, but for me twice as much is a big deal, and often the difference between getting the shot and *not* getting the shot.  One stop of ISO performance is a lot in a body – the D7000 only has “only” 1.1 stops better ISO performance than the ancient D70 (though it has many, many other advantages!).

Anyway, I’ll let you read the Nikon page on the 70-200 f/4 for the specs and full details, and offer up my opinions.

At $1399, it is a pretty pricey lens.  Yes it has the latest generation of “VR” (Vibration Reduction) technology that will let you hand-hold at very low shutter speeds.  I have to say that walking around Europe and Asia in low light with this camera and, say a D600, would have been a magical hand-held shooting experience.  That is because for shooting stuff that isn’t moving at very low shutter speeds VR is a huge help, and you won’t need a tripod.  Add that to clean files at ISO 6400 from cameras like the D600 and D7000 and you can have a lot of fun.  One word of caution, however: it won’t help you nearly as much if what you’re shooting is moving.

Also – it doesn’t have a tripod collar!  The collar is what gives you a tripod foot for good balance and stability, plus allows you to rotate from “landscape” to “portrait” orientation (horizontal to vertical) without taking the lens off the camera).  I’m sure Nikon’s logic was that VR means a tripod isn’t necessary, but there are plenty of landscape shooters shooting panoramic photos with a long zoom, bird-in-flight shooters and others who use a tripod a fair bit.  Having this 30 oz/850g lens hanging off the body isn’t going to do much for stability on the tripod.  If you want a tripod collar, Nikon is happy to sell you one for $223.95 (who came up with that price?? For that kind of money, I’d wait and see what Really Right Stuff or Kirk come up with).  That said, this lens is a much lighter alternative to the Nikon f/2.8 “pro” zooms – 30oz. vs. over 54oz. for the current 70-200 VRII and almost 52oz. for the older 70-200 VRI (so a little less than 1.9lb vs. roughly 3.4lb and 3.2lb).  1.5 pounds is a lot when you’re running around all day with it on your shoulder or back.

New 70-200 f/4 with the collar

The optional RT-1 collar…

Even without the collar, we’re now talking about money that gets you close to the older, $2399 70-200 VRII, which is f/2.8 throughout the range and one of Nikon’s best zoom lenses ever.  Of course, that isn’t chump change, either.  (but it does have a collar 😉 )

Inside Nikon’s product line, that makes me look at the old 80-200 ED f/2.8, which is great “Pro” glass for under $1100 brand new.  It doesn’t have VR, but fast glass makes up for a lot.  Or you can find a nice used copy of the first generation 70-200 “VRI” that has stability control and is a terrific lens for about the same money as the new f/4 model (though it is slightly better for DX than FX, where the new lens is optimized for FX or DX).

If you’re looking for affordability, the 70-300 VR is still a great lens for under $600 brand new and is even lighter than the 70-200 f/4 (a bit over 1.6lb), though it isn’t capable of the low-light performance.

Outside Nikon’s product line, Tokina has announced they’ll offer a similar lens, though pricing and availability haven’t been published.

Lastly, Tamron and Sigma have f/2.8 long zooms for similar money.  These are generally well-regarded and are “faster”, though I have less confidence in Sigma’s consistency when it comes to quality (which is just a personal impression – I have no data to back that up and there are many Sigma owners thrilled with their lenses).  User reviews of both of these makers tend to complain that low-light focus performance doesn’t match the Nikon-branded lenses.

Should you buy one?  Hard to say.  If you have a D600, this lens is designed for you, and is as-good or better than anything out there for the price.  I think the Tokina lens will be a very interesting and high-quality product, probably at $1299 (though it apparently doesn’t have a collar, either).

If I had the money to buy a lens in this price range, I’d be a little flummoxed.  Especially with the collar, there are a ton of options.  The good news is any of the options will net you a really nice lens.  Personally, I’d probably go with a used 70-200 VRI, though the weight and the likely quality of this lens would make it a tough call.

If you’re debating about a new body vs. this new piece of glass, the old saying comes to mind – always invest in glass.  Good lenses make any camera better (see my posts on fast glass and “should I get a new camera” for some additional thoughts), and this lens is good for any modern Nikon DSLR whether it is DX or FX.

Please feel free to post any questions, thoughts or comments!!

DxO Marks Published for the Nikon D600

The team at DxO (who measure sensor performance for cameras across the industry) have published the scores for the Nikon D600, and the results look pretty darn good!  (they use the term “enthusiast photographer(s)” many times during their writeup, which I thought was kind of fun, too…  :))  Before we get to the benchmarks, you might want to see my post “Should I get a new camera?”.

The overall DxO score of the D600 was 94, just one point behind the $2999 D800 and two behind the $3299 D800e.  Pretty amazing.  Even more incredible is comparing the $2100 D600 to the former-flagship Nikon D3X that lists for $7,999.  The D3x scores only an 88 and is bested in every category.  Of course, the D3x was no low-ISO king, so what about the other flagship, the king-of-the-night D3s?  82 vs. 94.  The D600 doesn’t measure up to the D3s in terms of ISO performance, but crushes the D3s in dynamic range and color to claim the crown.  Even the much-loved, former entry-FX Nikon D700  scores an 80.  Wow.  If you’re a Canon shooter, the news is even worse.  While they don’t have a new 6D to test, the current 5DMkIII priced at $3464 scores only 81 and we have little reason to think that Canon would embarrass the fairly-new 5DMkIII with a 6D.

One Important Note: These numbers aren’t the only measure of a camera by any stretch.  In fact, I’d take the position they are very often used to place too much emphasis on the sensor when you really have to look at the entire system and make decisions based on handling, autofocus performance, lens compatibility, weather-sealing and other factors  Iif you’re a regular reader, you know I hate the technology bullies who say you must have the latest sensor.  I chose the D300s with pro handling and AF over the newer D7000 with the better sensor but prosumer AF and handling – I couldn’t be happier.  For the record, the D600 has the same handling and (essentially) AF as the D7000.  That is a good thing for a whole lot of people, just not my personal preference.  I happily shot my similar-handling D70/D90 for years, though, so I’m not saying the D600 doesn’t handle very well – it handles great.  It just doesn’t handle like the pro-handling D300s/D700/D800 – it is a tow-MAY-tow, tow-MAH-tow kind of thing.

The Bottom Line:  These numbers absolutely say that the D600 represents an amazing value.  Nikon is hitting the ball pretty hard these days.  The price of FX isn’t for everyone, but this camera sure lowers the cost of entry.  If you’re a Nikon-shooting Enthusiast Photographer, this gives you a terrific price point for an easy-shooting camera with great durability and stunning performance.

You can check out the full DxO write-up by clicking here.

Nikon D600 – Full-Frame for the Enthusiast Photographer

The subject of swirling rumors and debates for many months, the worst-kept secret in the photography world finally saw the light of day today: Nikon finally announced the first “prosumer” (my term) full-frame DSLR, the D600.

Before we talk about the specs, lets talk about the price.  Many rumors put it as low as $1500.  I guessed it to be Euros and put it at $1899 or $1999.  All of that was wrong – the price is $2099.  That places it at the same price as the D700 did once the D800 came out, and potentially leaves enough room underneath for a D300s replacement.  On the whole, I think it is a good price but not a great price. An additional $900 gets you to a D800, which will make a lot of people think (personally, I think the D800 is under-priced).

As for specs, they are pretty much what everyone thought:

  • 24.3 Megapixel FX (full frame) sensor, producing images as large as 6,016 x 4,016
  • 5.5 Frames per second
  • ISO 100-6400
  • 39-point autofocus system with 9 cross-type sensors
  • Dual SD slots
  • Built-in screw drive for non-AFS lenses (in other words, lenses that don’t have a built-in motor)
  • U1/U2 user-definable presets like the D7000
  • 3.2″ screen, 921,000-pixel screen
  • 1/4000 maximum shutter speed
  • 1/200 flash sync

Those last two have a lot of people up in arms, and frankly I can’t see why.  This is a camera for the enthusiast.  A body for the serious amateur photographer seeking the low light performance offered by a full-frame sensor.  With ISO 100 and 1/4000, it covers a similar range as the D700 with a base ISO of 200 with a 1/8000 shutter.  Want both ISO 100 and a 1/8000 shutter?  Welcome to the D800.

Ergonomics and autofocus are virtually identical to the D7000, which is a good thing.  I’ve read some reports of the D7000 not working well with superzooms (think 600mm prime lenses as long as your arm), but I don’t see why people who own one of those lenses are going to shoot a D600.  All the lenses the target customers will want to use will work perfectly on the D600.  Ergonomics are classic Nikon, which is a good thing.  Personally, I much prefer the handling of my D300s over the D7000, but it offers a great combination for the novice and advanced shooter.

Since we don’t have comparisons, ISO performance and other figures, it is hard to compare the D600 to anything and come to a full conclusion.  But it is probably very good. Nikon hasn’t laid an egg in a long time (I don’t count the D800 focus issues, since that is a quality control escape, not a product design issue), and this is a new category for them: They’ll hit the ball pretty hard and it will be a winner.

Should you buy one?  Harder to say.  It isn’t cheap.  You only get partial function from your DX lenses if you have any (there is a DX-mode that lets you shoot DX lenses, but I’d like to see it in use before I say that is something you’d live with happily…).  If you don’t have any lenses, your bill for FX glass is generally going to be higher than DX.  At 24MP, your holding technique had better be pretty good or it is going to show up big-time in your photos.  24MP is going to mean bigger cards, more hard drive space and chew up some performance on your PC.

Low-light performance should be strong, and a well-executed image is likely to be very, very good.

If the money isn’t a big deal, I’d say you can’t go wrong.  FX at this price point is a bargain, and you’ll get plenty of help from the camera to get great images.  But like my last post, I don’t ever want to have a great camera and poor lenses.  Being glass-poor is going to make any camera look bad.  Great glass is going to give you wonderful results even from a limited camera.

You might have noticed I haven’t mentioned video.  Call me a curmudgeon, but I have no desire for video on my DSLR, and frankly I don’t know enough about it to offer perspective or opinions.  I’m sure the internet has no lack of those for the video features.

I’m sure a lot of you will be happy owners of a D600, and it is likely to be a big success for Nikon.  As for me, I’m focusing on the equipment I have, and looking at the blank spot in Nikon’s product line where the D300s used to be.  If I was going full-frame, I’d be strongly tempted to pick up a used D700, but I’m a happy DX guy at this point.

Read the official press release, information and see many photos on Nikon’s website.  Also, check out dpreview.com’s preview of the D600 here.

So what do you think about the announcement, the price and the camera?

“Should I get a new camera?”

The Nikon D800 might soon have company…

Internet forums are abuzz about what Nikon will (and possibly won’t) announce soon.  The widely-rumored announcement of the D600 in September has a lot of D700 and D7000 owners thinking about an upgrade, while many D300s owners lament Nikon’s apparent lack of intention to release a successor to that product.

As all the specs and debates swirl around, I’m reminded of the advice I got early on: Invest in better lenses first.

Why?  Lots of reasons, but here is my big three:

First, constant-aperture lenses (called “fast glass” on lots of forums) give you a lot more flexibility with ISO and shutter speeds.  When I got my old Tamron 28-75 f.2.8, it was just terrific on my D90, and it improved my ability to shoot in low-light a lot.  My Nikon 35mm f/1.8 is even better.  There are even 50mm f/1.2 lenses that can be had on the used market for under $500. These lenses give you as much as two to four times more light to work with than a kit lens.  Those additional “stops” of flexibility are hard to achieve at the sensor, and expensive, too…

Second, good lenses make any camera better.  Your view is only as good as the window you’re looking through, and average lenses are going to deliver average performance or worse.  Good lenses are going to give you better results, even if you aren’t using their low-light capabilities.  They tend to produce sharper images with better colors and contrast.

Lastly, for the most part, the nice lenses you invest in today will still be nice lenses on your next camera.  So my D70, D90 and now D300s all have been able to share and benefit from the same lenses.  I said “for the most part” because Nikon makes lenses specific to their DX  “crop sensor” platform.  Three of the lenses in my bag are DX lenses (the Tokina 11-16, the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 and the Nikon 18-200 VRII), so they won’t work if I ever decide to switch to FX.  However, unlike bodies, lenses tend to keep their value extremely well.  I could probably sell the lenses I bought used for the same money I paid, and the two I bought new are still worth 85%+ of their original purchase price.  In return, they’ve made all my photographs better, and I’ve gotten shots I would have missed with a kit lens.  That is an investment.

Contrast that to a body that is two or three years old.  Some are worth only half of their original price, and eventually become very difficult to sell.  Lenses tend to hit a price and pretty much stay there unless a new version pushes the price down, though occasionally the older models are worth more.

Great lenses don’t have to be expensive.  In Nikon’s portfolio, the 85mm f/1.8 G is astounding and sells brand-new for under $500.  I mentioned you can pick up the astounding Nikon 50mm f/1.2 for about the same money used, or get the classic “nifty fifty” 50mm f/1.8D for around a hundred bucks.  My Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is ancient and sells for around $300, less than 1/3 of the pro-Nikon version, with 90% of the performance (in my opinion).

My point is this – there are lots of internet bullies who’ll tell you that anything but the latest sensor isn’t worth having.  Don’t buy into it (literally and figuratively).  Especially at the megapixel range we’re seeing in Nikon’s latest lineup (16MP D7000, 24MP D600, 36MP D800), focusing on lenses first is a much better idea.  These cameras are going to make average glass look pretty darn average.  They’ll make good glass sing.

Not only will you likely spend a lot less money upgrading your lenses, they’ll make a bigger difference in your photography, and they’ll last longer, too…

—————————————————————————————————————————
UPDATE:  I wanted to add one more thing.  If you’re an Enthusiast Photographer, think beyond the body and glass. Are you doing landscape or other shooting where you’re going to need a tripod? Budget for a decent one. I’m not saying you have to go spend $1500 on ReallyRightStuff.com (though I would if I could), but get something serious if you’re a serious hobbyist.  My point is that bodies are sexy (:)), but you have to think holistically about your system to get the best results, and a good tripod and head are a big part of that for a lot of us.  If you shoot landscapes, etc. and are wondering if you should spend your money on the latest body or a good tripod setup, my vote would be tripod.

…and the Saga of the D600 Continues…

If you’ve found your way here via a search engine, the Nikon D600 has now announced.  Check out my take on it here.

—————————————–

The internet (at least the Nikon area of it) is abuzz again today with updated rumors of the FX camera said to be a D600.  The biggest piece of news is that the autofocus motor is now rumored to be included, contrary to previous reports. This makes the camera much more attractive to people like me who have older FX lenses like the original Tamron 28-75 and the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 ED that are manual-focus lenses on a body without a built-in motor like the consumer Nikon D3200 or D5100.

From a glass perspective, this camera still poses an issue.  I have three DX lenses in my kit – the Nikon 35mm f/1.8, the Nikon 18-200 VRII and the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8.  All of these lenses are terrific, and I don’t think I’d sell them to chase the FX-equivalents: the “nifty fifty” 50 f/1.8 and the 28-300.  Honestly, I’m not sure what I’d do for wide on FX – wide is pricey on FX!

I’m still hoping for a true DX-based D300s successor.  As I said before, the camera described at Nikonrumors sounds a lot more like a D8000 than a D400/D600.  Since I have upcoming trips to Asia and Europe looming in the next six weeks, I’ll probably be watching from the sidelines…

D3200 Emerges

So now we know.  The D3200 announced last night, and it looks to be a pretty strong little camera: 24 megapixels, 1080p movies, 11-point autofocus system that now works while shooting video, improved ISO range (6400 with a HI setting for 12,800, which probably won’t be all that usable), upgraded 4 frames-per-second shooting and the ability to add the Nikon Wifi module.  It appears it is only available in a kit with the 18-55 VR lens, which is a pretty nice lens.  For some reason Nikon keeps making special-edition colors of this camera. There is a screaming red version of this camera if that rocks your socks.

For $699, it is a lot of camera, and appears to be a very good starter/travel/entry SLR, at least on paper.  There really isn’t a pothole to fall in these days in the Nikon or Canon SLR families – they are all good products.  Honestly, if you’re scouring the internet trying to decide between Canon and Nikon, I’d say just buy the one you can find the best deal on unless you have some other reason to pick a brand like a family member with a lot of lenses they could loan you.

For me, the D3200 is an important window to where Nikon is going:  more megapixels and more video.  I’m still not screaming for either – I want clean ISO 3200 and 6400.  What it means for the D400 is that 24MP is almost a guarantee.  I’m sure we’ll get more video as well.

I’m not sure where Nikon is going with SLR’s these days.  Everything seems very evolutionary and stepwise.  There isn’t much going on from an innovation perspective that separates them from Canon, which is in the same boat.  Somewhere there are new features and designs that people want – Nikon and Canon should figure it out.  I’m also frustrated that great features like the U1/U2 presets in the D7000 aren’t in newer cameras like the D800.  It is a great and useful feature.  Share.

If I was in the market for a camera in this general category, I think the D5100 would still be my choice.  Among other things, the ISO performance is likely to be better and the flip out screen is handy if you’re using the camera for video.  I also can’t get over how small the D3x00 cameras are in my hand.

I guess we’ll continue to wait and see what Nikon’s next announcement brings…