So tell me why I shouldn't jump to FX...

So I recently have located and have an interest in a D3x, and I am mildly curious about making the jump to full frame, but also slightly hesitant on going with this camera. I mean putting it down on paper in comparison to today's standards ISO would be the only significant issue that I can see as the D3X will be clean only through native ISO 100-1600. This does not bother me much, as I rarely see myself shooting anywhere above those numbers (3200 being max). However then there is the well I can always go with a D3s, 800/e (File size scares me) or Df.

I guess as this moment it's hopeful wishing that I will quite probably purchase the D3x provided that the price is right. But should I hold out for another?

The reason a lot of people give is the cost in changing glass! I had no issues there since all of my glass is FX. How are you fixed for FX glass my friend?

oh... I have no problem with doing the switch over.. I only have a few DX glass... but still all can be used. Not like I would give up my other cameras either.

PS. I love my D800E, and the file size can limit how many raw files I can post process on my old laptop. So I have to limit how many shots I put onto my memory card at a time. But if your computer isn't as old and low memory as mine is, you should do OK if your careful at first to not over load your computer!
But even with the limitations I am thrilled with my D800E!

Well if money isn't a problem buddy, and you'll still be keeping your DX Nikon's, then go for it! Pick the FX that suits your needs/wants best and go for it my friend! Lol

skene said:

oh... I have no problem with doing the switch over.. I only have a few DX glass... but still all can be used. Not like I would give up my other cameras either.

Click to expand...

There is only one question you need to ask yourself. What is my DX camera not doing for me that an FX camera will for the things that I am shooting.

After struggling with this same question, I have decided not to go FF right now, because quite honestly, aside from the better ISO performance I would not really gain much else going FX for the things that I shoot. (I will still rent one during my vacation, just to be really sure):welcoming:

@Blacktop, there is nothing lacking from any of my cameras. However I just want to know if I am missing something, and it's really not so much about the jump to FX as it is a hesitation between a D3X vs other FX bodies... For me though the upgrade is inevitable, as I do want an FX body. Time is still a luxury for me so I enjoy my cameras, however I have not shot as much as I did previously due to my latest job and lack of inspiration in Las Vegas.

I went back and forth on this DX-FX debate last year when I wanted to upgrade from my D5100. In my case I was weighing the D7100 vs D610. The D610 won the debate in my head. The deciding factor was when I was in the camera store with both cameras on the counter in front of me, picked up one, and then the other. My dearly beloved wife of 39 years says to me "don't settle for less than what you really want to save a few dollars". That did it. the D610 went home with me.

Would the D7100 have served me well - absolutely - to the point I'm considering adding a D7100 to my collection at some point when funds will allow.

As for FX Glass - yes that costs as much as the camera and more - if you let it. I have since bought my first lens that was over a grand (24-70 2.8 Tamron). And have a couple of bits of FX glass in the $500-600 range. But much of my collection came in far less. If you are willing to use vintage glass (the new DSLR's can give old glass a new lease on life) and if you are willing to go further and try manual focus - you can get some dang fine glass for a lot less. Most will not have silent wave motors or VR or other new tech but they with a little skill you can coax some brilliant images out of these old bits of glass using new tech camera.

It is not an easy answer.

Best I can say is I went FX last year and do not regret it one little bit.

Fortkentdad said:

Best I can say is I went FX last year and do not regret it one little bit.

Click to expand...

I'm in the exact same here. I agonized over the decision for some time before getting my D750.

Not that I don't love my D7100, because I certainly do, but you'll have to pry my D750 out of my cold, dead hand's.

Regrets? Not a one.
....

The only con to me going to FX would be the reach of some zooms. I did a comparison not more than a week ago. I shoot my sons baseball teams games. I use my D3s. Why?
Allot of the games fall into the evening hours and the D3s is one of the kings of ISO performance. Plus it just feels more natural in my hands. The reach when comparing the same image at 200mm was not that big a diff for me to use my D90. Most people dont want to give up the reach and is why most people have both DX and FX.

@Fortkentdad, like I stated previously to Bill, I am not worried about glass. My 70-200 F2.8, 70-210 F4, and 50mm are my go to lenses. I will be adding an 85 F1.8 just to fill in the gaps. Also several other lenses are in my possession which are geared for FX. I have minimal DX glass, which are more specialty lenses which are not going anywhere.

But with all things considered it is just the inevitable of the transition to acquiring an FX body.

Since as you've said this going to FX is going to happen, then it's just a matter of which FX as I think you mentioned!
Though I have thoughts about Nikon's I don't have, I can only really say on Nikon's I do have or have tried, which is the D700 and D800E.
Since I don't believe the D700 is of interest to you,I'll just say my 2 cents worth about the D800E that has been my dream Nikon from the beginning!

The D800E Nikon is a specialty camera, and some might find the file size bigger than they are worth! The 24 MPs Nikon seem to be the preferred by general shooters! So in some cases this might be true, but mostly I think sports and birding would be the biggest areas that other Nikon's either could or would out shine it in! But in macro, regular wildlife,street, and especially landscapes this awesome Nikon holds it's own or excels! Now don't get me wrong, the spray and pray method, or more controlled versions like that will put this model in the less likely to please list! But for most other methods this is an outstanding performer!

Now to the dreaded file size issue! It is real and even if this Nikon did handle the spray and pray method, nobody would want to load their computer with that amount of these huge files! Lol I can't even imagine that outside of a nightmare! Lol
But on the other hand here I am with less ability to handle these files than most, and I am still doing it though on a very limited amount at a session or on a card! What it would take to shoot full bore and post processing a big card full of these files, would have to be asked of somebody who has done so! Which by the way is what I'll be looking for in my next computer! Lol
As to if this Nikon would the right one for you, only you can answer that one buddy! But I will say I love mine and it is worth every penny of what it costs IMHO!

You get used to the file size Bill. I shoot uncompressed which makes for some 70Mb each. It takes quite some longer if I have to load 100-200 shots to my computer but I insert the card, hit transfer and then go do something else.