Well thanks sir. (and now off topic) You live in Parke county? I am heading over to Terre Haute on Wednesday for work and will actually be out and about in Parke county before my meeting in Terre Haute.

I would post a picture I just took of a covered bridge this last weekend, but I haven't gotten around to messing with them yet.

(and back on topic)
I think most people want that priceless picture of the best quality. I think that people obsess with equipment so much in that we all believe we will make money or take that shot that everyone will buy or win photo contests. When in fact I personally see very little difference in any kit lens performance be it the 18-105 or 18-200...they are a bit different in their own respects, but does it matter that much...probably not.

We all want 36 MP to blow up billboard size pictures or super sharp glass to have them featured in national geographic. I mean I have been saying since I got my first dSLR that I was going to make money with it and shoot this and that. I might have taken some decent pictures, but I still haven't made a penny! I do blow up some pictures and have them around the house, but most are just desktop backgrounds of sitting on my hard drives.

I have mentioned it before though and even the lowly (insert whatever body you want here) and an 18-55 kit lens can take awesome pictures. I have opted as time went to get more and better glass. Each to fill their own niche for me and make taking pictures in certain situations easier. Each time spending more and more on the lenses. Now amassing nearly $5000 worth of stuff (now having made negative money since we have made prints for other people for presents), but some days I can't tell the difference from my 18-200 and my 17-55. I have now made educated and reasonable purchases in that I knew what I needed after a while and figured out what lenses to get to help with those needs. I started with my D5000 and 18-200. I think anyone starting out should do the same if they don't really know. I don't believe it is waste and you learn in the process. Gosh if I look back I know I made a similar thread to this when I was getting my D5000. Plus you can always spend more money later when you contract NAS (the need to buy more and more Nikon equipment all the time!). This weekend I did some nighttime long exposures for the first time in a long while and I was learning and struggling the whole time. Even with all my stuff and now several years under my belt I am learning all the time and it was fun. I also have slowly purchased and upgraded, but I don't have any equipment without a reason, I use it all, and they all have a known purpose.

tcole1983.........

A GREAT post, sir ! I was just thinking the same thing ! When I read all of the "requirements" people have, (and they want it ALL in one lens, (and preferably one which is "dirt cheap" ! My thoughts are, (after messing around with photography for about 60 years now)......if you don't "know about" photography, it's almost impossible to figure out which camera to buy to start out with, (let alone which 4 or 5 lenses to buy to go with this "starter" camera ! (And I just noticed someone up above mention that "don't pay any attention to Ken Rockwell, as he's a "schmuck", (whatever)......WoW ! I don't necessarily agree with Ken on every little thing, but if he's a "schmuck", he's certainly the single smartest "schmuck" I've ever run across !
Here's what I fail to comprehend; my fiancee's son and his wife, (with a total combined income of around 150 K, take more pictures than anybody I have EVER known.........he with his "Blackberry", and she, with her iPhone ! (and no children, no house payment, and yet another BIG promotion (that's imminent), Yet other people still in college, struggling to even survive, are "torn between" whether to "start out" with a D 7000, or a D 300 ? All while people "with means" are satisfied with cell phone photos ! (The world is a strange place, as are the people in it !

This is a TRUE STORY........I live in a dinky little village in western Indiana; our big "claim to fame" is.........we happen to have more wooden covered bridges than any other county in the U.S. So seeing people taking pictures of the covered bridge we have in OUR village, is a very common thing........people come from "all over" just to take pictures of OUR particular bridge, as it's the one most people "know" about. Anyway.......to illustrate how very different, different people are........one evening, just before dark I see this fellow with a fancy looking camera (on a tripod yet), about to take a picture THROUGH the bridge; (and it's almost dark)

The curiosity got the better of me.......so I just HAD to "get nosey".....and and "casually" ask him.......whacha kinda camera yu got there , son ? The guy's got about a 3 day beard, but he ISN"T any "hillbilly", (even though he clearly assumes that I am "one" !
So he casually remarks, "Oh, it's a Sony A 900 (if I remember correctly) ( I'm not at all familiar with ANY of Sony's new D-SLR's (even though I AM a walking "catalog" of just about everything Nikon makes, from the D 40 on up. So we get into this conversation about "the latest and greatest" D-SLRS, and the guy happens to mention the Nikon D 700; and I'm like, "yeah, but for a full frame, FX body, and for only $2,700, it's a great deal.....and he looks at me (like he just saw a ghost), and proceeds to pull out of his bag......a brand new D-700 with a pretty decent lens mounted ! So we talk some more, and one of us mentioned the D3s (my camera to die for at that time, about 2 years ago; so he says, "let's step over here to my motor home, I want to show you something; (the "something" was a brand news D3s ! At this point, I'm thinking, this cat is either a rich millionaire who just buys every expensive camera he sees, and while I'm "pondering that", he's going nuts, wondering, "how the hell does this old hillbilly know so much about all the latest and greatest Nikon D SLR cameras ?

It was undoubtedly one of the most "unlikely" (while at the same time, very pleasurable conversations I've ever "blundered " into ) ! This fellow must have had easily 50 k worth of very expensive cameras in his bag, and in his motor home; (and we were just standing outside , by the door, but I could see inside )........and as I'm looking at this "strange looking contraption" on the floor.......trying to remember where I had seems something that looked like that.... I said.....Uh...is THAT by any chance... a Segway ?

And he goes.....good lord....don't TELL me you've ridden a Segway ! " No, never rode one, but I've seen a few, (mostly at Midway Airport in downtown Chicago) so he drags the Segway out, proceeds to un-fold the "steering "thingie".....and while I'm asking him "how long does it take to learn to ride those things", he's already telling me, any where from 30 seconds to about 6 months, just depending on the "prospective operator" ! ( It took me all of about a minute and a half to "master" the Segway ! By this time he's convinced I'm a camera salesman in some big shop someplace bigger than Terre Haute, and I'm realizing that this fellow is actually some kind of a pro photographer, who obviously isn't "broke", (what with 50 K in expensive new cameras, two Segways, and a pretty classy small motor home to haul it all around in. Turns out this guy's contemplating writing a book about our county's covered bridges, and I finally had to admit, after "several years of relative inactivity in photography, I was starting to get the "urge" to get back into it, and buy a decent new D SLR, and as is my nature, anything I get interested in, I tend to read everything in print about it, the better to determine how much to spend, and which camera to buy.

And my new "acquaintance" is thinking of photographing ALL of our 34 covered bridges for his "prospective new book........and I mentioned........it's been tried before, never been commercially successful, and HE says, Yeah, but I have something DIFFERENT......my pictures are ALL going to be taken from THE AIR ! Me........"good grief, don't tell me you have a helicopter ?" He..."Nope, no helicopter, but even BETTER ! I have a BLIMP ! (after the 50 K of hi-end cameras, 2 segways and a motor home, now this guy's got a damned BLIMP ? NO WAY ! ( Turns out the "blimp" is a huge "blimp-shaped" ballon, that takes TWO 200 lb cylinders of helium to fill it up, to lift the camera to the necessary height, (which is actually MUCH lower than any helicopter can safely go, and it's made specifically for doing ariel photography from very low altitudes; I forget what he said there blimp cost, but when I asked him what two cylinders of helium costs, and "isn't that pretty darned wasteful, having to "deflate" the blimp after every bridge, he explains, I only have to let one cylinder of helium out, THEN the blimp will fit into my cargo trailer ! Me......."looks to me like you need a bigger trailer ! " He........."yeah, you're right again, and I'm working on getting a bigger trailer !" ( And I'm thinking....."is there ANYTHING that this guy DOESN"T have" ? " A VERY wealthy girl friend, possibly ? "

And that's really what everyone should do; learn as much as possible about the "subject"; in this case, it's such a humongous subject, that one must first determine MANY "things" about one's self, before you have any hope of making an intelligent decision, regarding "which camera to buy"? Some people have more interest than others; some have more money than others; some have more "enthusiasm", and so on; It's really a daunting task to make objective suggestions about cameras, unless you first know a lot about the person needing the advice ! Some people may be ecstatic about photography one day, and almost equally as "enthused" about buying a boat the next day… (I'd hate to recommend someone buy what I like one day, only to find the next day that they really wanted to buy a boat ! Even though I know a bit about photography, (over many, many years), about all I can do, hell, all anyone can do, is to tell people what I like, and WHY I like it, and if you see any relation to our "likes and dislikes"....maybe you'll like what I like, and then again, maybe you won't ! I can only suggest to prople what I like, based on facts, as opposed to merely what my "taste" dictates that I like.

This is a fantastic website, and I love it dearly, HOWEVER.........there are a couple of VERY "vexing" things about it......(or is it just me?) ... that tend to drive me "batty".....??

A. first of all... many (or most?) of the questions being asked, were asked one, two and even three years ago ! Yikes! what use is there in answering someone's "year old question" about "which camera to buy ? ( Nikon has probably come out with two more models by now ) !

B. and the passwords ! the password that I'm obliged to type in, would probably be great (if I was a spy, working for the National Security Agency ! I mean...talk about SECURE passwords ! This thing is so "secure" that NSA would take six months trying to crack it with their super-duper-computers !

(and it's real hard to even type in, what with upper case. then lower case, then "punctuation" marks, followed by more upper and lower......Whew !

The website I'm "used to" has 900, 999 members, so when a thread gets started, 637 people answer it in the first 3 minutes........ and here, i/10 of that take about 9 years ! (but at least I like what people like to "talk about" on here a lot better )!

C. my third and final "rant" for the moment.......every time I try to change pages, I somehow become "logged out", thereby necessitating going through all of that laborious password nonsense all over again ! I think I need a simpler password ? like maybe "1,2,3,4" ? (if I can just find the password department !)

BarryH said:
I'm looking to buy a D3s body.

Is there a cut off point when I should start to think twice about the number of shutter actuations the body has done?

Are there any other major things I should look at or ask about when buying a used D3s?

suntiger1965 said:
why??

a D700 would do me just abit out of date now..
d3s too heavy and not that much better than 700?
Why buy a 700 when possibly a D600 will be better?

In nothing other than dynamic range, color, movie, resolution and maybe size and weight?

sevencrossing said:
suntiger1965 said:
I want low light for motorsport

I think you need a D4 or for less money D3s

why??

a D700 would do me just abit out of date now..
d3s too heavy and not that much better than 700?
Why buy a 700 when possibly a D600 will be better?

TaoTeJared said:
Interesting...

Let's just throw yet another wrench into decision time for me.
I'm almost ready to give up and just shoot a Fuji xpro1 and the 35mm (50mm equiv) for the next year.

Please quit saying this TTJ. I keep looking this up on B & H and then look at the lenses available and wonder if I am just going fricking mad. I really would like a nice "rangefinder" size camera to carry around which will give me stunning images..... and I suspect the XPro1 is the answer.

suntiger1965 said:
I want low light for motorsport

I think you need a D4 or for less money D3s

Interesting...

Let's just throw yet another wrench into decision time for me.
I'm almost ready to give up and just shoot a Fuji xpro1 and the 35mm (50mm equiv) for the next year.

suntiger1965 said:
I went to order a D700 today in the Uk today and was told by the shop they will not be recieving anymore D700 as Nikon has stopped building them. I then asked why and was told Nikon said because of the D700 replacement. I explained the D800 wasnt a replacement for the 700 and her reply was, i cant tell you what it is as Ive signed a Confidentiality clause however can tell you the rumours on the internet are pretty true if that helps.. mmmm so is the D600 about to be released... Now do I wait or buy the D700 now(although 3 years old but has no waiting list or problems)... I want low light for motorsport so not sure if i will get that in the spec yet??

Yes, good points. I too worry that investing in "old" technology will prove to be a waste of money. Old glass is not a waste of money since glass technology doesn't change as rapidly as sensor and in-camera processing technology. If new technology is affordable, as it is in the D7000 and will be in the D7100 and D400, it may completely trump an reason to purchase a sued D700. We will have to wait to see what those two cameras will offer later this year.

^^^ What a random bump.

Good Luck with your new Best Friend Now all you need is TIME !

Random thoughts:
1. Wouldn't a used 24-70 lens be just as much if not cheaper than the body and last much longer? Cheaper (and last longer) to add a wide angle as well. Just a thought of where money is best spent.
2. "I think IQ would look better and noise would be less noticeable in the same size enlargement from FX than from DX, for example." Although true at this moment - that is all technology that a DX will eclipse, if not the D400 then something else soon. The only physics that FX has over DX is Bokeh that DX can not eclipse.

3. The huge MP is my concern as well since my computer will show it's age on those files. You can always shoot in "normal" or "basic" mode as well which would give if not the same but better results as the lower mp body. With the assumption - DX Tech eclipsed FX.
4. There is very little difference between the D300 and D700 viewfinder. I wouldn't mind a larger one as well, but that wouldn't be a item for me.

I would be more concerned with a comparison of AF and metering systems especially shooting sports.

The thing that I keep looking at, even a good used D700 will be 2yrs old and 4yr old tech (everything of the D700 was in the D3 and D300), and I plan on keeping my cameras 3-4 years. So a D700 puts that at 8yr old tech with a user life at 5-6yrs for a fairly high cost with a end cycle of almost unsaleable. I bought my D300 for $1700 3 1/2 years ago. I should be able to sell it for $700. The camera cost me $1000 or $333/yr to use. A d700 @ $1800 with (3+years more) will be only hundreds if I could sell it ($600/yr cost). Plus there would be shutter life/button, body coverings, and other failures come into play.

If the top of the line DX eclipses the D700 FX there would still be some reasons to want an FX body in your inventory and to use it in certain situations. You don't always need the "latest and the greatest" for certain purposes.

For example:
1. Using lenses in their native range. I currently use a D7000 with a 35-70 2.8 and a 80-200 2.8 zoom to shoot High School Sports action in low light. This is giving me effective focal lengths from 42.5mm to 300mm. I love the lenses but would like to be able to swap bodies and use each lens in its normal range. I find the 35-70 on a DX body not quite wide enough and the 80-200 on a DX body a bit too long. I would like to have true 35 to 200 mm range in 2.8 zooms. Only FX gives me that with my current lenses.
2. Minimizing enlargement of the image. I would like to not have to enlarge the image so much to reach my final viewing product. I think IQ would look better and noise would be less noticeable in the same size enlargement from FX than from DX, for example.
3. The D400 may be 24 megapixels while the D700 is 12 megapixels. I would like to have the option of fewer megapixels when I don't need to enlarge the image much so as to avoid unnecessary storage space and processing time. Of course, I would also like a 36 mp body for those times when I want as much resolution as possible.
4. I would like to have a larger viewfinder than DX provides for looking through over long time periods.

I don't think reasons like these are "being fixated on FX" for no good reason. FX just becomes a specialized tool which offers certain advantages other than IQ in certain situations. I would love to see a D700 drop to near the price of a D7000 so it becomes a viable second or third body to have around for specialized use.

You missed the point - If everything eclipses the D700 it will fall = D700 is no longer better than DX. Logically it wouldn't be a viable option if new, used with no warranty, the only who will go after it will be those who are fixated on full frame rather than quality.

I heard the same being said about the D2x how many were excited the D300 performed better so they could get a "Pro" body and people were clambering for a "pro" body rather than any real reason to get one.

I hope it falls like a rock: no, like two rocks!

I would like to see the used D700 become the "entry level" FX body selling for less than the top of the line DX body.

We can all wish.

The D700 prices are really going to be interesting to see what happens. The D700 may just become one of those cameras that get passed around for years for people who want a FF camera even if DX passes it in all of the tech advantages. It won't take long before the only advantage is bokeh which is just the physical characteristic of the larger sensor. The lack of video will/has pushed many away from it already. That being said, I could see it hovering around $1500 for a few years.

If the D400 gets the video, wifi, AF, metering and a few of those other things from the D4 (which historically it has) with a sensor that can navigate the High res vs Low light, it could really push people out of FX back to DX who find the D800's price too steep to swallow.

If that happens and the D400 out performs the D700 in high iso, the D700 could drop like a rock to above the D7000.

zlik said:

So, do I sell it for 4500$ and save for the D4 ? Do I keep it? I don't know yet.

Don't know. You could try just to see if anyone bites. I hope you're satisfied with it enough to be happy in your own mind. The problem now is this...you try to sell it and can't -- the D4 starts shipping and the reviews from normal photogs (not McNally, Hogan, Rockwell, Moose) start rolling in -- and surpass all expectations. Now you've got a little remorse going on.

Personally, I don't think he'll get $4500 USD for it. Probably more like what you paid. So don't let it get to you. When he's down to $3400 I might give him a call. Enjoy your D3S and wait for the D5!

My D700 tracking on eBay has it running right around $2,000; currently half the price of a D3s. I have not been tracking D3 prices.

BUT, the real "price drop," if there is going to be one, will occur when both the D4 and D800 are in plentiful supply so anyone who wants to upgrade can do so easily and "glut" the market with used D3s and D700 bodies. When will that be? Maybe next fall? Maybe next winter? Right around the time a $1,700 to $1,900 D400 is out. Then we can all ask the questions: For just under $2,000 what is the best value in a camera for your needs and desires? I don't think the D3s will be in that group but the D700 should be and perhaps even the D3.

Thus, I am suggesting a used D3 and D700 will be cross-shopped with a new D400. And I will also go out on a limb and suggest the D400 will win because it will include advanced technology which will trump the advantage of FX sensor size combined with last generation technology.

I also suggest the D3s will provide better cleaner high ISO images than the D400 unless some new technology, which has not yet surfaced, appears in the D400.

My D3s tracking on e-bay is setting the average at $4,000 with a low going for $3700 and a high of $4,300. Interesting nothing is going above that $4,300 and only a couple going below $3,900. (3 weeks data collected. Second chance offers not included.)

I'm kicking myself now because I missed a "Second Chance Buy It Now" offer on an almost-new D3s on ebay. I didn't see the notification email and by the time I logged on, the Second Chance had gone. It was $3001. Bummer.

I'll give you 3000 for it because the D4 will prolly push the price down to 2000 so I'm doing you a BIG favour - trust me......

@donaldejose, excellent points. Two D400s vs one D3s, that's a tough one. That all depends on how much importance you put in FX. The D400 sould be a tough competitor to the D700. The D700 should still win in the high ISO field, but I am pretty sure the D400 will be much better at low ISO (DR, mp).

@RxPhoto, I just got an incredible deal on a D3s, I met someone that sold me his one year old D3s, with 2900 clicks, second battery, AC adapter and MC-30 cable release for 3900$ (converted, I'm in Switzerland). He wanted 4350$ but I talked him down. I told him that with the upcoming D4, the D3s will drop at around 3000$ (which is probably a lie), and that 3800$ was already a great price, and he accepted for 3900.

So, do I sell it for 4500$ and save for the D4 ? Do I keep it? I don't know yet.

There're a lot of people who have the funds to buy whatever they want regardless of that they really need photographically. Yeah, I hate'm too. Personally, if I already had a DX camera I'd more likely save, save, save for a FX 2nd body even if the latest DX (D400) was better than my current DX camera. It's just me though.

Some guy is advertising his D3S on Craigslist in the city where I work. States he's an amateur and the camera only has 4000 clicks. Wants $4500 for it. If he's truly an amateur, did he really need a D3S? Probably not, and he probably didn't get to stretch that puppy out like it was meant to be. But if he's got the funds, he'll buy the D4 anyway.