Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Retro" data-source="post: 478257" data-attributes="member: 37517">I appreciate this input as well. I find it interesting that DX does not stand to FX as a D3300 stands to a D7200. I have a friend who has a D7100 who is a beginner professional. I've been trying to get him to join here. He took a remarkable shot of a chickadee in take-off with a 300mm lens.I tend to be an all-or-nothing persnickety person, and the D7200 would be my minimum body. Not having the money for that, I'll stick with film. Adding an F100 to my FE2 would give me much more satisfaction than a D5500.Having said that, I wonder if some of you would suggest "If you have the money for a D7200, buy a D610 instead."Alternatively, you might say "The D610 is an inferior FX, and the D7200 plays an important role in the line up, as J-See says, so buy the D7200, and the D750 later on." I heard something a while ago about oil being squirted on the sensor. Maybe that adds a really cool special effect or something (jk<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />).I suspect that some of you would recommend the D7200 and D750 in a 'full-bodied' collection. As the D7200 is an important tool (birding), it's an ideal camera, and there is obviously an ideal FX body. It seems that one does not move on from DX to FX the way one moves on from an entry level DSLR to a D750.I hope I didn't hijack this thread.</blockquote>

Verification