[whitefero]

I love my d3100 though I can already feel the need for a bigger aperture lens (my 3.5-5.6 18-55mm is not particularly good for low light.. also adding that the camera can barely focus if there's little to no light.
 
I am not yet good enough at manual focusing. So this is a hassle.

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

I love my d3100 though I can already feel the need for a bigger aperture lens (my 3.5-5.6 18-55mm is not particularly good for low light.. also adding that the camera can barely focus if there's little to no light.
 
I am not yet good enough at manual focusing. So this is a hassle.

 
Nikon 35 mm f/1.8G AF-S go for $199 and Nikon 50 mm f/1.8G AF-S around $230.  
When such fine cheap prime lenses exist, why not just go for it?

 

[bigshot]

I read on Ken Rockwell's site that the Nikon 50 1.4 AF-D is on sale at Adorama for $294. That's a great deal on a great lens.

 

[Szadzik]

What are we expecting to see on Sep 13th?
 
I have an irresistible itch to upgrade my D90 and would like to se D7100 and D400 to choose between them.

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

What are we expecting to see on Sep 13th?
 
I have an irresistible itch to upgrade my D90 and would like to se D7100 and D400 to choose between them.

 
Nikon D600 is your man, and at $2100, it may even be a bargain.
 
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25488/D600.html

 

[bigshot]

When are they going to freshen up the DX line? That's what I'm waiting for.

 

[xxhaxx]

Highly doubt the d7000 is going to get updated anytime soon. Guessing there might be an update for the d300s

 

[Szadzik]

Quote:

Highly doubt the d7000 is going to get updated anytime soon. Guessing there might be an update for the d300s

 
D400 was what I was hoping for.
 
Quote:

 
Nikon D600 is your man, and at $2100, it may even be a bargain.
 
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25488/D600.html

 
I have a set of f/2.8 lenses for DX and not willing to replace them with FX ones, too much money.
 
Quote:

When are they going to freshen up the DX line? That's what I'm waiting for.

 
Exactly.

 

[jc9394]

Quote:

 
I have a set of f/2.8 lenses for DX and not willing to replace them with FX ones, too much money.
 
 

 
I agreed, upgraded from D200 to D800E and my wallet hurts like hell.  Luckily, I have brunch of prime lens that I have from the film days hold me over for a while.  At least that is what I was thinking until I mounted the 24-70.

 

[bigshot]

The main reason I'd go to full frame would be for the bigger viewfinder for manual focus. But the auto focus on my D200 works so well, I actually prefer it. I like the smaller and lighter size of DX.

 

[choka]

Quote:

The main reason I'd go to full frame would be for the bigger viewfinder for manual focus. But the auto focus on my D200 works so well, I actually prefer it. I like the smaller and lighter size of DX.

d200 is actually 20g heavier than d800

 

[bigshot]

What about the zooms?

 

[jc9394]

Quote:

d200 is actually 20g heavier than d800

 
Not if you have the battery pack on it. 

 

[jc9394]

Quote:

What about the zooms?

 
Actually I prefer the FX zoom, it is more realistic (I guess I'm old school from the dark room time).

 

[choka]

Quote:

 
Not if you have the battery pack on it. 

You mean d200 without battery VS d800 with battery?
 
From everything I read online, the difference in weight between the 2, with battery, is just around 20 grams or so. (d800 is 900g with battery, while d200 is 920g with battery) I actually have both of them and they feel absolutely the same in my hands. The only difference is that the d800 is taller because of the larger viewfinder. You can't complain about the increase in size because of the viewfinder when a larger viewfinder is what you've been asking for.
 
While there is no difference when there is enough light, when it gets slightly darker, the d200 really fades in comparison...