pher said:
Middle school - that's super cute! You should just buy a rangefinder like the Canon QL17. Pretty cheap, 40 1.7 and it's sharpest wide open. RF are really hip right now, so by the time you get to high school you can tell all the kids what's up and steal their girls.

LOL, and may I ask how do you know this? ;^)

kanuck said:
By the way, are you any good with photoshop by any chance?

Maybe I would be, if I could afford it! I'm not crazy about PP, but a lot of people say I'm very good at it. But one of my friends has pirated CS4, but doesn't know how to use it, so I usually show him how. I'm good with computers, so it doesn't take long for me to figure out anything.

Cool, processing your own film. By the way, are you any good with photoshop by any chance? I'm just curious.

Middle school - that's super cute! You should just buy a rangefinder like the Canon QL17. Pretty cheap, 40 1.7 and it's sharpest wide open. RF are really hip right now, so by the time you get to high school you can tell all the kids what's up and steal their girls.

LOL, the name's Alpha!

I like your logic the best. I'm not "switching"—I'm sticking to the good ol' F-mount. I'm "evolving" my vision. Yes, I like that. I'm not "switching", I'm "evolving"! :^D

And I love the analogy. New lens and camera combinations are like new recipes!

That works for me—thanks optima!

Arman, I really think you'll get used to it quickly.
I don't understand why everybody is talking about "switching"?...
If you were to sell all your stuff and go to Canon or Sony or Leica or whatelse I'd understand, but you'll stay with F-mount material won't you? So it's really more an "evolution" or a "shifting" than a total switch.
Just like cooking different recipes from the same ingredients, you'll discover another tastes for your 50 1.2, 80-200 2.8, 18-70 (and probably new ingredients - who knows), and that's all. You'll probably keep the D300 (or the D70?) and will be able to enjoy the difference with a great wisdom. You'll indeed expand your DOF limits, taste the UWA madness (though the 10-24 already allows that in DX), and enjoy more shooting in the dark.

poster said:
Really?

LOL, I'm quite serious. This is the way I think. I may be lacking some "common sense," but hey, I'm a teenager :^)

Really?

It's a quick adjustment. Unless you have a impaired cerebellum making you only remember the most recent day like the chick from 50 First Dates, you should not have a problem whatsoever. Seriously. It doesn't matter whether you had experience with film or not.
You will have a huge bright viewfinder, and fx lenses won't have the crop factor. I find this thread amusing. You make it seem like you are about to have your biggest photoshoot in life, and you only have 10 seconds to capture the moment/scene, and you have to choose which lens to use.

LOL needing FX to "Redraw Your Boundaries". you're funny alpha

No, I haven't used a rangefinder or MF camera. This summer I plan on experimenting with MF though, as well as learning how to process my own film.

Yes as a photography major I would imagine you had to shoot film and maybe only film no? I hear the old professors won't budge on this. I understand your thought process alphanikonrex, but don't worry its a fairly fast adjustment. I have been to various shops and have rented and tried out various FX bodies (D3, D700, D3x) over the past few months and you do adjust. Its strange at first thats all. Adjustments even have to be made when you use the zoom on your flash obviously as well. Alphannikonrex have you ever used a rangefinder or medium format camera? I actually owned an M8 for about a year and I'm sure it would really floor you. The viewfinder is completely different changing composition completely. You find yourself looking for maincommand dials and subcommand dials on the front and back of the camera body that aren't there...24 more hours till my D700 finally!^^

jonnyapple said:
Agreed. As we say in physics, what's a factor of two among friends? And this is only a factor of 1.5.

Order of magnitude is the only thing that matters anyway :).

You're right. I'm too caught up in the numbers I guess. Ah, well, like jonny said I'll figure it out when the time comes.

I'm not majoring in photography—I'm a middle schooler :^) Maybe I will though—I love photography :^D

I still play around with film, just not for anything serious. That's why I don't have a 35mm idea of my lenses.

pher said:
I think you're getting way too caught up in the numbers.

Agreed. As we say in physics, what's a factor of two among friends? And this is only a factor of 1.5.

Actually, alpha does shoot film.

lol nice Jack Handy.

Why don't you just shoot film? It'll do you good to get your hands wet... literally. I thought you were a photography major or something... or soon to be?

Once you get your hands on an FX digital body you won't even have to think about it. You'll figure out instantly what your working distance is as far as DOF goes. I think you're getting way too caught up in the numbers.

Alpha, unless your FF camera is defective in that it has no viewfinder, I think you have nothing to worry about. It's about feedback, and you'll figure out really fast what, if anything, needs to change. How many p&s owners know anything about 35mm equivalent field of view? I've seen some beautiful p&s shots. You might find a lens doesn't work in some situation. My guess is you won't use that lens in that situation the next time.

A related deep thought by Jack Handey for all the birders switching to FF and using that telephoto lens for the first time:

If you lived in the Dark Ages and you were a catapult operator, I
bet the most common question people would ask is, "Can't you make it
shoot farther?" "No, I'm sorry. That's as far as it shoots."

pher said:
Concentrate on school or w/e you're doing.

As if I already don't. Rolling eyes.

Besides, I'm not worried about the DX glass, I'm just worried about the glass in general. I connect a certain field of view to ALL of my lenses. On FX this field of view is going to change, and I'll be very confused. Same goes for DOF.

As always you're overthinking this. Some of your DX glass won't even vignette on an FX body. You're current setup is more than capable of getting paid gigs. Concentrate on school or w/e you're doing.

When I said the "Redraw Your Boundaries" stuff up above, I was just saying I need to remind myself that my boundaries aren't the real boundaries. No, I'm not after new technology. I just want to make sure that I'm aware of the "other-ways" of getting the same photograph. Like I said, I want to be open-minded. I have no idea whatsoever what anything wider than 27mm looks like, for example. So technically anything wider than that doesn't exist in my mind. I know it does. I just can't imagine it. I don't have the ability to look at a scene and put a 14mm lens on it. Or a 16. Or a 18. Or a 24. I simply can't, mentally or physically. And I'm afraid that my wide-angle "creativeness" will be malnutritioned.

Basically I just want to be able to look at things from someone else's shoes. I've seen everything to this point through the same DX frame. Let me look through an FX one for a change. Especially considering that it's more "correct" than DX in focal length and depth of field.

Oh, kanuck, I know exactly how you're feeling. Your scenario has no turning back, does it? I hope you like your new D700 :^)

PS Did I sound ambitious up above to move to FX? I'm not in any rush—I think that's just how I wrote it. No, I think I'll be with DX for many many more years.

I'll let you know alpanikonrex I am switching to FX this friday when I trade in my D300 plus $1000 for a D700 with 15,000 actuations. I'm a little nervous myself but excited too^^

alpha - does it really matter either You go FX or not? it's just a medium, nothing else. if You are happy with Your current set of lenses, than You are in the game. If You don't like it, than change the lenses You don't need. As for using long tele on FF, don't be afraid, You always have the crop mode, so they will act similar.

I've been looking at the 105 and the 70-300 because the 70-300 is relatively cheap and it's good glass. The 105 because I'm interested in macro.

Well pretty much any AF-S FX lens will work on DX, so that's what's so awesome about the F mount.

Other than some crazy old fisheye lenses where you need mirror lockup just to mount it, pretty much anything will work on Nikon DSLRs.

I <3 Nikon. :D

i think it's always smart to try to "get" a DX/FX lens if possible, in case you DO upgrade. . .for me, I still enjoy my N75 (yeah, cheapo POS, but it's a light film camera), so when I got the 50 1.4 and 60 2.8, the compatibility REALLY influenced my decision. . .I didn't have an all around zoom for the N75 either, so I got a used 35-70 that's been amazingly sharp (nearly as sharp as my 17-55 2.8). . .

If I were to switch, the focal length wouldn't throw me as much as the cost of finding awesome lenses like the Tokina 11-16 2.8 (not equivalent in FX that can accept filters) or 35 1.8 G. . .

I'll probably always keep a small DX body for travel uses though. . .or just keep the D200 since it won't sell for much anymore anyhow. . .if it weren't for the high ISO benefit and IQ excellence of the D700, I think I am VERY happy with my lens selection from 11-70mm (or 15-100mm on FX). . .

Yeah, I'm not switching anytime soon. My D40 is still going strong. Then again, I've been looking at FX lenses. 105mm 2.8 and the 70-300 VR.

What's wrong with your current lens selection anyway Alpha? From what I can see, it covers a good bit. Your 80-200 will also cover FX. You should be fine.

I think that you need to find an additional hobby (e.g. computer gaming) and upgrade the gear for that. The satisfaction of new technology will be the same.

Chasing technology isn't very smart and with this mindset you will just continue drooling over new models and features instead of focusing on getting better at what you do with the equipment you have. Remember also that every new model takes getting used to. This seems to be true in your case as even you yourself don't seem to have a clear need or reason to switch to full frame.

You need to wrap your mind around the fact that better technology will not make you a better photographer, just a photographer with expensive equipment.

soap also has a good point ... do you have a proper calibrated (on a monthly basis) screen? I recently made the investment as one of my screens died and it is truly a new world. If you don't have a proper screen yet, then go and get one, and voila, your need for new technology has been satisfied for a while.

Redraw Your Boundaries? Have you touched your current ones yet?

1 - Monitor calibrated yet?

2- Got a handle on off-camera lighting yet? http://strobist.blogspot.com

3 - ?

4 - ?

Give me time and I'll make a list of areas of photographic exploration and leet skillz which don't give a hoot if you're DX or FX.