So I was thinking this morning about my large gap in the telephoto range, and obviously suppressing my NAS urges for 2010 so my wife won't KILL me (especially given down turn in actual clients this year). . . .
I will have about $2400 to use at the end of the year.
I have a D200 (but have FX thoughts).
2 choices this Dec 2010:
Nikon 70-200 VR II
Nikon D700 (used) or new D800/900 (whatever).
Both will retail for about the same around Xmas 2010. . .obviously if I buy a body, I'll still have a telephoto lens gap (might just buy a 70-300 VR cheap to cover that if I go with the body).
I'm thinking the lens purchase is the smarter idea, DESPITE the 2-stop advantage of the D700 over the D200.
Arguably, the NEW VR2 provides a 2-stop advantage over the older 70-200 VR1.
which is what lead me to think: I could rock a D200 with a 70-200 VR2 and yield similar results to a D700 with a 70-200 VR1!! (minus significant differences in sensor IQ capabilities). .
Have we reached a point with dSLR bodies where the body is the smart purchase over the lens?