Gear Upgrade Help

[jtwaring]

Hello All,

This year I'm getting married which therefore means a Honeymoon! Were heading to Thailand which to me means some great photo opportunities!

However, I still shooting with my Nikon D40 which i've had 10 years, lenses are kit 18-55, a tamron 70-300 which because im an idiot I bought it not realising it wont autofocus on my camera and i've got a 35mm 1.4 prime which I mainly use. Although its been a great camera, its low light abilities are a bit crap and its starting to show its age.

I know that I would like to start shooting full frame and would love a Nikon D750 and a 24-70 2.8 but the wedding seems to be eating money and its not looking like that will happen in time. I don't really want to start buying more DX lenses as I'm sure it wont be long until I can move to full frame.

I probably have about £1,200 to spend at the minute so have been considering maybe buying the Nikon 24-70 2.8 and just using that on the D40 until I can upgrade but it seems a little silly.

Anyone got any advice on what might be be best way forward?

Thanks

JTW

[Simpo Two]

You can certainly warrant new kit, but I'm going to be contentious and ask what you intend to achieve by moving to FX. Have you identified benefits of FX over DX that will make your photography better, or is it a case of 'well it's better isn't it'?.

Both formats have pros and cons so ponder carefully before committing. The lenses you have won't be helping image quality so they need to be replaced whichever way you go

[jtwaring]

Thanks, the only reason I'm leaning towards full frame is that I do quite a bit of low light stuff. I enjoy photographing local bands etc and quite often go for walks later on in the evening when the light is fading

Thoughts so far have been possibly 2nd hand D700 and try and stretch to a used 24-70. Is the D700 still any good?

Thanks

[Simpo Two]

jtwaring said:

Thanks, the only reason I'm leaning towards full frame is that I do quite a bit of low light stuff. I enjoy photographing local bands etc and quite often go for walks later on in the evening when the light is fading

Thoughts so far have been possibly 2nd hand D700 and try and stretch to a used 24-70. Is the D700 still any good?

It's as good as it was when it was launched - surpassed now but several leagues ahead of the D40. It might be a good start to FX to see how you get on with it.

[Gad-Westy]

jtwaring said:

Thanks, the only reason I'm leaning towards full frame is that I do quite a bit of low light stuff. I enjoy photographing local bands etc and quite often go for walks later on in the evening when the light is fading

Thoughts so far have been possibly 2nd hand D700 and try and stretch to a used 24-70. Is the D700 still any good?

Thanks

Low light is certainly a good reason to go full frame though worth bearing in mind that modern DX sensors are leagues ahead of the D40 generation in that department too.

That said, if you could find a 24-70 and D700 within budget, that would be a very nice combination and a huge leap up from your current gear. Assume your 35mm 1.4 is a Sigma art lens? If so, that would work very nicely indeed too.

A couple of big things that you'd notice. The camera and lens combination will be miles bigger and bulkier than your current set up. That isn't all bad, it will feel very comfortable to use once used to it.

The view finder will seem fantastic in comparison.

Will you miss not having a long lens? If so, you could consider a 24-85 and a 70-300 VR. Would make a nice combination if you have the 35mm still for low light stuff.