# New Body or New Lens



## exemplaria (Oct 23, 2012)

So I've got the opportunity to buy a new lens or new body, but probably not both.  Currently have a D3100 and DX 35, 50 and 55-300.  I'm looking at either a D7000, fast midrange zoom, or relatively fast wide angle (think Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 or Tokina 11-16 f/2.8).  Right now the 35 lives on the camera 80% of the time, and I like it except that it's often not wide enough.  I'm frequently shooting in low light, so either better low light performance or fast glass is what I'm going for.  I know the adage is to buy lenses because they keep their value and add more to your images, and don't worry so much about the body, but I think there are real reasons the D7000 is enough of a step up to consider.  

Body:

Pros (these are things I think are relevant to me):
Better low light/ISO performance
High FPS (6 vs 3)
Better metering system
Nikon grip available - and we know grip = pro
In camera bracketing

Negs:
DX format - dying? 
D7100 on the way?
Buy FX capable glass and save for full frame?

Lens:
Pros:
Mid-range zoom opens up new shooting flexibility I didn't have before, same for wide
Holds value better

Negs
Don't want to stock up on DX lenses if they're dying, or if I have real aspirations of going full frame
For the Tokina, I need to buy the "version 2" of that lens with internal motor, which adds ~$250 to the price.  If I go D7000 and this lens later, I can get the version 1 and save that money.  

Thoughts?


----------



## Derrel (Oct 23, 2012)

Thought: head over to Thom Hogan's Nikon Camera, DSLR, Lens, Flash, and Book site, where October is "DX Month". Thom has spent most of October writing articles about the state of DX in the NIkon brand. His posts have some truly excellent analysis, and commentary, and facts, about the Nikon DX format situation as it stands today, and as the future MIGHT be.

I will simplify one point he makes: NIkon's DX lens lineup in not complete, and Nikon EXPECTS its customers to buy full-frame capable lenses in multiple categories, because there ARE no DX-specific lenses in several categories.


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 23, 2012)

If you go with glass now, how long before you can upgrade? 
Upgrading to a D7000 is my first gut instinct. There are just so many reasons to get out of that D3000 category, but if you will be able to  upgrade to full frame in 6 months? I wouldn't do it, I'd go for glass. If it's going to be a year or more? I'd upgrade the camera body and sell the D3100 to fund the purchase of a wide lens.


----------



## Patrice (Oct 23, 2012)

You'll have to decide what you want, new camera or new lens.

For the sake of curiosity, why did you buy a bottom tier camera? I see a lot of folks interested in a DLSR buying low end cameras only to want to upgrade a short while later. A better camera as a first DLSR is no harder to use than an entry level stripped down body. Should the interest in photography wane, the better camera can be sold easier and with less loss.


----------



## exemplaria (Oct 23, 2012)

Patrice said:


> You'll have to decide what you want, new camera or new lens.
> 
> For the sake of curiosity, why did you buy a bottom tier camera? I see a lot of folks interested in a DLSR buying low end cameras only to want to upgrade a short while later. A better camera as a first DLSR is no harder to use than an entry level stripped down body. Should the interest in photography wane, the better camera can be sold easier and with less loss.



Well at the time I was under the belief that any DSLR would be an upgrade over my Canon Powershot, and I was working under the mantra of spend less on the camera and more on the lenses.  18 months later I realize that while I was correct, there are still limits to a low end DSLR and (IMHO) I am now able to take advantage of those additional features of a higher end camera.  Also money - a year ago a D7000 kit was what, $1,500?  I got a refurb D3100 kit for like $480.


----------



## fmw (Oct 23, 2012)

If you are changing formats, then the body would make more sense.  If you are not, then the body doesn't matter and the lens would make more sense.


----------



## gryffinwings (Oct 23, 2012)

fmw said:


> If you are changing formats, then the body would make more sense.  If you are not, then the body doesn't matter and the lens would make more sense.



Of course it matters, you should always shoot what your most comfortable shooting and can operate more easily. I can understand getting a different body. I originally was using a D5100, though it's a good camera, I couldn't really use manual settings the easiest, having to use buttons and dials in combinations to make setting changes, or dive in the menu if I wanted to make more specific changes, kind of a pain, personally think this camera was best suited to using auto type settings. So I bought myself a Nikon D200, I love this camera much more, much easier to change settings if I want to, the ergonomics feel a lot better than the smaller D5100. Obviously I could have spend more money on a D300 or D7000 or D90, but I didn't want to.


----------



## jon25 (Oct 23, 2012)

I say get a body that you are happy with before getting lenses. The D7000 is a pretty big step up from the d3100. you mentioned low light and i know the d7000 shoots way better in low light conditions and has better iso sensitivity but im not sure how that compares to the d31000 with f/2.8. It sounds like eventually you will upgrade both bodies and lenses. So if I had to choose which to upgrade first I would choose the body because I think the benefits of having a d7000 outweigh the d3100.


----------



## gryffinwings (Oct 23, 2012)

fmw said:


> If you are changing formats, then the body would make more sense.  If you are not, then the body doesn't matter and the lens would make more sense.



Normally this rule applies - It's not the camera, it's the photographer, so choose the camera your comfortable with. And it's not just the Pixel Count of the sensor you need to take into count, but the metering system and the auto focus system as well.

Of course it matters, you should always shoot what your most comfortable shooting and can operate more easily. I can understand getting a different body. I originally was using a D5100, though it's a good camera, I couldn't really use manual settings the easiest, having to use buttons and dials in combinations to make setting changes, or dive in the menu if I wanted to make more specific changes, kind of a pain, personally think this camera was best suited to using auto type settings. So I bought myself a Nikon D200, I love this camera much more, much easier to change settings if I want to, the ergonomics feel a lot better than the smaller D5100. Obviously I could have spend more money on a D300 or D7000 or D90, but I didn't want to.

Mind you, you don't have to buy a new body brand new, you could buy used, which will allow you to have a better body that gives you more manual control and possibly a lens of your choice.

D90 Body Only - Around $450
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-list...UTF8&qid=1351026963&sr=8-2&keywords=Nikon+d90

D7000 Body Only - Around $800
Amazon.com: Buying Choices: Nikon D7000 16.2MP DX-Format CMOS Digital SLR with 3.0-Inch LCD (Body Only)

D300 Body Only - $600-700
Amazon.com: Buying Choices: Nikon D300 DX 12.3MP Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)


----------



## orb9220 (Oct 23, 2012)

gryffinwings said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> > If you are changing formats, then the body would make more sense.  If you are not, then the body doesn't matter and the lens would make more sense.
> ...



+1 fmw

Makes no sense "Only reason to upgrade body is to change format" ? 

How about more dedicated controls to make changes on the fly without the eye leaving a Bigger,Brighter Viewfinder to go menu digging. Like dual command wheels and dedicated buttons for iso,wb,AF,etc... Or built in motor for support for those older AF or AF-D lenses or built in flash commander mode for operating flashes off shoe. I could go on and on about better AF more FPS,etc... But you get the idea.

Sometimes a body upgrade _*"Has Nothing to Do with the Sensor in the Slightest"*_ tho that is a plus but more to do with day to day using and having the features to make getting the shot in a fast and efficient manner.
.


----------



## austriker (Oct 23, 2012)

Aww the age old debate.. Basically long story short, go with glass over body. That being said do what will make you the happiest. I had the same type of internal debate about 5 years ago, upgrading from a D40 and thinking about other bodies or lenses. I eventually went with the D300 which last me about 4 years and its a beast of a body for sports and other stuff.

In your situation I think its best to upgrade to a decent body that you will not outgrow for many years (ie D7000, or an older D300) and then try and get the best glass for what you want to shoot. unfortunately photography is quite the pricey hobby, but oh so worth it.

I second looking used. I bought both my D300 and D700 used and saved some money. Obviously like all things electronic you just have to be rather careful.

You mentioned the tokina 11-16. I have the first model and absolutely adore it. It stayed on my D300 about 85% of the time and I have heard people call it the best wide angle lens for DX or FX (not counting the King of UWA 14-24), plus its relatively cheap.

EDIT: Oh yea I have a fantastic tokina 11-16 f/2.8 for sale, PM me if interested.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Oct 23, 2012)

Buy both a body and a lens


----------



## exemplaria (Oct 23, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Buy both a body and a lens



"...but Mrs Exemplaria, this guy on the internet said I should get both!"


----------



## markj (Oct 24, 2012)

Buy glass that will accommodate both DX and FX cameras, wait for the prices of say the D800 or D600 to come down next year. I'm sure the D600 will be a bigger bargain next year and you'll
have glass to take advantage of the larger sensor.  I love my D7000, but ultimately it is a transition camera to FX.

I had the same decision to make a couple of weeks ago. I decided to wait on the D600 or D800, and purchased a used but in excellent condition nikkor 24-70mm f2.8 lens. Couldn't be happier
at least until next year. Good luck with your decision.


----------



## fmw (Oct 24, 2012)

orb9220 said:


> gryffinwings said:
> 
> 
> > fmw said:
> ...


----------



## exemplaria (Oct 24, 2012)

fmw said:


> Bodies pretty much provide gimmicks.-<SNIP>   It is hard to imagine how a new body would improve his images, assuming competence at operating the current body.  A new lens almost always will.



I mean, you can call I higher FPS rate, better dynamic range, better ISO performance, in camera bracketing and Nikon's CLS capability "gimmicks" if you would like, but I can think of exact times each of those items would have resulted in materially better images.  That said, currently my widest lens is 18mm cropped, and that's the kit lens, so having a quality lens that can go wider than 18 would result in wholesale changes to what I can shoot.  I will say that I frequently wish to be wider, but rarely have need to be much longer...


----------



## orb9220 (Oct 24, 2012)

fmw said:


> orb9220 said:
> 
> 
> > gryffinwings said:
> ...


----------



## JaronRH (Oct 24, 2012)

Normally I would recommend a lens (the Sigma 17-50 OS you mentioned is a very good lens actually!) but in this case I think you would gain more by upgrading to a D7000 first.


----------



## fmw (Oct 25, 2012)

exemplaria said:


> fmw said:
> 
> 
> > Bodies pretty much provide gimmicks.-<SNIP>   It is hard to imagine how a new body would improve his images, assuming competence at operating the current body.  A new lens almost always will.
> ...




Sorry, but they are gimmicks to me.  I don't do anything that requires a fast motor drive even though I have several of them.   Dynamic range of cameras made 10 years ago is enough for me.  I don't need a computerized function to bracket.  I still use the aperture rings on my lenses.  I don't know what CLS is.  Actually, I think I have cameras with most of that stuff.  I just don't care about it or use it.  I still make pretty good images with a manual 4X5 view camera.  So, they really are gimmicks to me.  Glad you like them, though.  My favorite Nikon was the F3.  I wish they made a digital version of it.


----------

