The Jeff/Gdad's "Terrible" Influence Support Group

[WDWFigment]

Okay, so it's not really a support group, but Jeff is to blame for my dilemma.

I have been thinking about this for a while somewhat jokingly in my head, but after seeing Jeff's new shots in the UWA thread, I now am really considering it: selling all of my gear to fund the purchase of a D700 and 14-24.

My rationale: I think my dominate shooting style is UWA shots. Further, most of my best shots are taken either really early in the morning or way late at night. Despite me being a specimen of physical fitness I will not be young forever, or we will have kids, precluding some of those shots. Alternatively, Disney will change it's policy, preventing or severely restricting after hours photography. My point is that maybe I should make a conceited effort to get the "best" I can now. Leave nothing on the table, so to speak.

Now, I know it's the person not the gear (to an extent), but the combination of full frame and 14mm allows me to go wider than the Tokina, and I think the D700 would open up some opportunities to experiment with the UWA on dark rides.

However, there is the negative of being restricted to just one lens. I would lose the Sigma 30, Nikon 18-200, and Tokina 11-16.

So, what do you think? Is it worth it to be restricted to just two lenses (I'd also keep the Nikkor 50 1.8)? Any other benefits/restrictions I'm not considering?

 

[Chikabowa]

I say do it. Your style is predominantly wide angle and you'd benefit from the full frame at 14mm. Do it, keep your 50mm f1.8 and you are set to go.

 

[Code]

Too bad it's not really a support group.. Jeff is indirectly responsible for a great deal of my spending too.

Wow that would be quite the leap! A quick guess on what you'd get for D90 and those lenses.. even with good resale it wouldn't cover the D700, right? So you'd be sinking ~$2k into it while giving up all but UWA and 50/1.8 (which isn't a great performer on FF). Doubt I'd even consider it, but you certainly rock the UWA!

Don't forget, though, that you exist in the land of eternal NAS.. what of your 70-200 lust? Surely it would worsen with dreams of full frame bokeh. And I know the 24-70/2.8 would be calling your name eventually. And the Sigma 50/1.4 would be a nice replacement for the 30... and.. and... That's an expensive can you'd be opening!

 

[ukcatfan]

I would not do it until I could at least afford a standard zoom to go along with the package.

 

[PhotographyDR]

Do it. Do it. Then you can sell me the Tokina at a large discount. .

I thought about this and wondered if I would do it. I definitely would like a full frame for nothing more than its low light performance. As much as I would want it, I still think I like what I have. Personally, I have an issue of purchasing camera gear and then selling it just to upgrade a short time later. For people that purchase such gear it is nice because you get gear that is less expensive but as sellers you lose money in the long run. For me, being as cheap as I am, this does not work. I like to get as much use out of whatever I buy until it is totally useless.

The other issue is that the D700 has been out there for awhile and I would expect Nikon to do a little more of an update to it soon. Maybe that would get a new model that might be better or drive the price down of the old model. Either way my advice is wait.

I know that doesn't mean much because I am sure, like me, once you get the idea in your head you cannot let it go. I do agree with your theory about getting it sooner than later though. I wish I had these choices when I did not have certain expenses early on in life. If you can afford it, buy it now. Don't know if I just added more confusion but I am sure whatever you choose, there will be great shots coming out of it. (Serious on the Tokina thing though) Good Luck.

 

[YesDear]

First let me say that I have also made purchases in the past two years based upon Jeff's experience and results. While I would like to blame him as an enabler, let's be honest, it is my choice and decision. I appreciate his talent, insight, and taste.

Secondly, I will own a D700 or it's replacement. I was able to take one to China and I am taking one to Disneyland this week. Yes I have a marvelous friend that shares!!!!!!!!!!!!! Once you use one, the desire gets worse.

I agree that you may want to wait and see what Nikon does with the D700 in the next year. But if the NAS is unbearable, then go for it. You know it will shoot those DX lenses until you can change them out!

 

[ELinder]

Your night/low light/uwa shots are great with the kit you have now, so I expect you would have no problem getting the best out of a D700 and 14-24. However, that's a mighty steep and slippery slope to sell everything to upgrade.

Have you considered renting? I know, it wouldn't cure the fever, but think about the numbers involved. You've said before that you do hardly any photography other than during Disney trips. Renting even a few times a year for those trips would get you a few years worth of rental, broken down into more manageable money chunks. By the time you've graduated and get a job, you could afford the fancy new camera that comes out to replace the D900 ( or whatever they're going to call it). And you'd still have your current kit to use until then.

Erich

 

[NLD]

I say do it, too. You're great with a wide-angle lens! And you'd have the fifty for more "normal" shots.

Then again, take my advice with a grain of salt.... I've been tossing and turning nights trying to decide whether to just spring for the D700 and 24-70 with a small one-time windfall that recently came in. It's about $1,000 more than what I'd spend if I just added to my crop gear, but if I don't go full-frame now... when?

That said, I agree with waiting a month or two, to see if Nikon comes out with anything new to drive prices down. (Isn't there some big show in February?)

 

[NateNLogansDad]

The "or we will have kids" part caught my eye. I'd say do it before then.

 

[My2Girls66]

the "or we will have kids" part caught my eye. I'd say do it before then.

oh yeah!

 

[Gdad]

8/24/09

I've never used the 14-24, probably because its cost would require me to pawn all of my possessions just to lay a hand on it. I'm not that big into photography to drop that amount on glass. Yet.

1/18/10 (147 Days Later)

Jeff is to blame for my dilemma.

I have been thinking about this for a while somewhat jokingly in my head, but after seeing Jeff's new shots in the UWA thread, I now am really considering it: selling all of my gear to fund the purchase of a D700 and 14-24.

Is photography the best hobby ever or what?

I saw your comment on Flickr but figured you were joking. By the way- have you seen Mark’s “I have a giant bonus to spend at B&H and need help because I pretty much have everything already” thread? Why exactly is this called the “Jeff/Gdad's "Terrible" Influence Support Group” again? (Hehe- sorry- moving along now…)

My rationale: I think my dominate shooting style is UWA shots. Further, most of my best shots are taken either really early in the morning or way late at night. Despite me being a specimen of physical fitness I will not be young forever, or we will have kids, precluding some of those shots. Alternatively, Disney will change it's policy, preventing or severely restricting after hours photography. My point is that maybe I should make a conceited effort to get the "best" I can now. Leave nothing on the table, so to speak.

Now, I know it's the person not the gear (to an extent), but the combination of full frame and 14mm allows me to go wider than the Tokina, and I think the D700 would open up some opportunities to experiment with the UWA on dark rides.

I can certainly see taking a giant leap like that for something you really want- I have done it in the past and been mostly happy with my decisions- and the few times I was not happy at least I bought smart enough to be able to sell things and not take a hit- in fact I usually made a few bucks along the way.

As for the D700- I am still 100% completely happy with it. Someone may be digging up this quote of mine in 147 days when I am lusting after some new offering from Nikon but as of right now I am not even paying attention to new FX bodies being offered other than to think in the back of my head “If I saw a bargain on a used D700- should I or shouldn’t I? What do I need two of them for?” I absolutely love the camera and expect it to meet my needs for the next several years- I can’t even imagine any new features that would make me spend the money to jump to a D900 or whatever this year. (As long as I say my “I don’t need full frame video…I don’t want full frame video” mantra several times each morning- then I’m good for the whole day.)

As for the 14-24/2.8- Well- I tend to gush over new gear sometimes- but wow. I was going to do a comparison between the Sigma 12-24 before it was gone- but after shooting the 14-24 for the last few days I’m not even going to bother. There is no comparison. To be honest it already has me questioning myself if I even need the 28/1.4 anymore because wide open at 24mm is good- very good in fact for exactly what I used the 28mm for- and then having the UWA at your disposal too- right. I feel like my favorite lens just got 4mm wider (good) and now can zoom to 14mm (even better!) I’m still learning with this lens and have a long way to go- but for flat-out potential to do something fun/interesting/creative with this lens has me fired up.

However, there is the negative of being restricted to just one lens. I would lose the Sigma 30, Nikon 18-200, and Tokina 11-16.

So, what do you think? Is it worth it to be restricted to just two lenses (I'd also keep the Nikkor 50 1.8)? Any other benefits/restrictions I'm not considering?

Well as much as I think Code should be kicked out of the support group for offering up such sensible advice- I pretty much have to agree (except for the 24-70 part- meh!) The lens lust is not going anywhere anytime soon. My advice would be to do it- but with the new 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII being seriously compared (by people who own both) to the $5K 200mm f2.0 VR- and paired with the new 2x TCIII being compared to the even more expensive 200-400mm f4 VR- I doubt you will be happy forever with a two lens kit.

But I expect you will be happy for at least another 147 days- so go for it!

 

[WDWFigment]

Too bad it's not really a support group.. Jeff is indirectly responsible for a great deal of my spending too.

Wow that would be quite the leap! A quick guess on what you'd get for D90 and those lenses.. even with good resale it wouldn't cover the D700, right? So you'd be sinking ~$2k into it while giving up all but UWA and 50/1.8 (which isn't a great performer on FF). Doubt I'd even consider it, but you certainly rock the UWA!

Don't forget, though, that you exist in the land of eternal NAS.. what of your 70-200 lust? Surely it would worsen with dreams of full frame bokeh. And I know the 24-70/2.8 would be calling your name eventually. And the Sigma 50/1.4 would be a nice replacement for the 30... and.. and... That's an expensive can you'd be opening!

I guess I didn't fully elaborate, but this plan requires future events to occur as I plan. The first would be a D700 replacement (or a camera that effectively replaces it) to be released prior to April. Second, it requires someone on eBay to list a D700 and a 14-24 thereafter with buy-it-nows that are below market prices (this may seem like a lot, but this is the manner by which I have purchased all of my current gear). It also requires Bing cashback to be offered then still, in an amount of at least 8%.

To the point, I wouldn't do it if I had to lay out anything more than $1,000.

Do it. Do it. Then you can sell me the Tokina at a large discount. .

I thought about this and wondered if I would do it. I definitely would like a full frame for nothing more than its low light performance. As much as I would want it, I still think I like what I have. Personally, I have an issue of purchasing camera gear and then selling it just to upgrade a short time later. For people that purchase such gear it is nice because you get gear that is less expensive but as sellers you lose money in the long run. For me, being as cheap as I am, this does not work. I like to get as much use out of whatever I buy until it is totally useless.

The other issue is that the D700 has been out there for awhile and I would expect Nikon to do a little more of an update to it soon. Maybe that would get a new model that might be better or drive the price down of the old model. Either way my advice is wait.

I know that doesn't mean much because I am sure, like me, once you get the idea in your head you cannot let it go. I do agree with your theory about getting it sooner than later though. I wish I had these choices when I did not have certain expenses early on in life. If you can afford it, buy it now. Don't know if I just added more confusion but I am sure whatever you choose, there will be great shots coming out of it. (Serious on the Tokina thing though) Good Luck.

The buying and selling thing doesn't much concern me, because I have paid below market prices for everything I have, and I know I could sell each lens and the D90 for more than I paid for them. I got insane deals on each of the items. My only concern would be having to resell on eBay (if I couldn't line up a buyer on CL) as there is the potential for a buyer to scam me, and Paypal claims are way too easy for buyer's to win. Still, such scams are very rare, so it's not a huge concern. Just in the back of my mind.

Your night/low light/uwa shots are great with the kit you have now, so I expect you would have no problem getting the best out of a D700 and 14-24. However, that's a mighty steep and slippery slope to sell everything to upgrade.

Have you considered renting? I know, it wouldn't cure the fever, but think about the numbers involved. You've said before that you do hardly any photography other than during Disney trips. Renting even a few times a year for those trips would get you a few years worth of rental, broken down into more manageable money chunks. By the time you've graduated and get a job, you could afford the fancy new camera that comes out to replace the D900 ( or whatever they're going to call it). And you'd still have your current kit to use until then.

Erich

I don't rent. I won't go into my thoughts on that, but I've made them known here many times...

The "or we will have kids" part caught my eye. I'd say do it before then.

Well, that is not the plan, but you never know.

8/24/09



1/18/10 (147 Days Later)



Is photography the best hobby ever or what?

I saw your comment on Flickr but figured you were joking. By the way- have you seen Mark’s “I have a giant bonus to spend at B&H and need help because I pretty much have everything already” thread? Why exactly is this called the “Jeff/Gdad's "Terrible" Influence Support Group” again? (Hehe- sorry- moving along now…)



I can certainly see taking a giant leap like that for something you really want- I have done it in the past and been mostly happy with my decisions- and the few times I was not happy at least I bought smart enough to be able to sell things and not take a hit- in fact I usually made a few bucks along the way.

As for the D700- I am still 100% completely happy with it. Someone may be digging up this quote of mine in 147 days when I am lusting after some new offering from Nikon but as of right now I am not even paying attention to new FX bodies being offered other than to think in the back of my head “If I saw a bargain on a used D700- should I or shouldn’t I? What do I need two of them for?” I absolutely love the camera and expect it to meet my needs for the next several years- I can’t even imagine any new features that would make me spend the money to jump to a D900 or whatever this year. (As long as I say my “I don’t need full frame video…I don’t want full frame video” mantra several times each morning- then I’m good for the whole day.)

As for the 14-24/2.8- Well- I tend to gush over new gear sometimes- but wow. I was going to do a comparison between the Sigma 12-24 before it was gone- but after shooting the 14-24 for the last few days I’m not even going to bother. There is no comparison. To be honest it already has me questioning myself if I even need the 28/1.4 anymore because wide open at 24mm is good- very good in fact for exactly what I used the 28mm for- and then having the UWA at your disposal too- right. I feel like my favorite lens just got 4mm wider (good) and now can zoom to 14mm (even better!) I’m still learning with this lens and have a long way to go- but for flat-out potential to do something fun/interesting/creative with this lens has me fired up.



Well as much as I think Code should be kicked out of the support group for offering up such sensible advice- I pretty much have to agree (except for the 24-70 part- meh!) The lens lust is not going anywhere anytime soon. My advice would be to do it- but with the new 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII being seriously compared (by people who own both) to the $5K 200mm f2.0 VR- and paired with the new 2x TCIII being compared to the even more expensive 200-400mm f4 VR- I doubt you will be happy forever with a two lens kit.

But I expect you will be happy for at least another 147 days- so go for it!

Jeff - first of all, people don't like when you dig up past quotes of theirs that show how they have quickly developed NAS. It just isn't cool!

You do raise a good point with my first quoted post, though. I still don't know if I'm "into" photography enough to justify spending so much. I still take 75% of my shots (statistically) at WDW, and we're only there 2 weeks per year. Does it make sense to spend that much for devices I'll use so little? I'm really not sure.

I know I wouldn't be happy with just a two lens kit. It's just a starter package. Once I start working in the real world, I plan to buy lenses all of the time! Our plan is to live in an RV so that I can devote 75% of my salary to lenses!!! Okay, that isn't actually the plan, but I would add-on once funds allowed. I just definitely couldn't afford the initial outlay for additional lenses without actually having full time employment.

 

[sdshutterbug]

Wow, this is an interesting thread! I'm always thinking about things like this too and I really want to make the leap to FF some day for so many reasons but I have to agree with Code - that seems like a slippery slope to go down. If you're really determined, though, go for it! Personally, I think in a couple of years FF DSLRs are going to come way down in price, as they already have since their debut. In the mean time, maybe someone will make a 9mm lens for crop DSLRs!

 

[Gdad]

Jeff - first of all, people don't like when you dig up past quotes of theirs that show how they have quickly developed NAS. It just isn't cool!

LOL- Not much digging was required by the way- since it was on Page 1 of your phenomenal UWA thread which was on Page 1 of the Photography Board (as usual.) The very same thread, ironically, which inspired me to get the Sigma UWA and then upgrade to the Nikon. Kind of weird how all that worked out.

Anyway- I did not post that to discourage you- I say go for it (again!)

 

[boBQuincy]

Personally, I think in a couple of years FF DSLRs are going to come way down in price, as they already have since their debut. In the mean time, maybe someone will make a 9mm lens for crop DSLRs!

That's my hope too, except for a 6 mm rectilinear lens. It will happen only a few days after Tom springs for the full frame setup, then we will have him to thank.

C'mon Tom, grant our wish! As for Tom's wish, he has visualized a photograph and his equipment is holding him back. Traditionally, this board always thinks that is a good reason to upgrade! Tom, follow your vision instead of one day looking back and wondering why you didn't. And if Sarah doesn't like it, it wasn't my idea!

 

[KCmike]

Your shots are amazing already right now. Is there really that much more to gain from the upgrade? Just curious.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I saw your comment on Flickr but figured you were joking. By the way- have you seen Mark’s “I have a giant bonus to spend at B&H and need help because I pretty much have everything already” thread? Why exactly is this called the “Jeff/Gdad's "Terrible" Influence Support Group” again? (Hehe- sorry- moving along now…)

I thought that we made an effective tag team. You get people all excited about new gear by showing your amazing pictures taken with really high end (albeit Nikon) gear. They think, wow, if I buy expensive gear, I can get pictures like that. Then I come along and show that you can spend tons of money (on Canon gear, no less) and still take mediocre pictures.


As for the topic at hand, the Nikon 14-24 is one of the few lenses universally agreed upon as an almost holy object. I have strongly considered buying an adapter so that I can use one on my Canon gear. It's that darn good. I just can't figure out how to get it into my budget.

 

[Marlton Mom]

Figgy wrote: I still don't know if I'm "into" photography enough to justify spending so much. I still take 75% of my shots (statistically) at WDW, and we're only there 2 weeks per year. Does it make sense to spend that much for devices I'll use so little? I'm really not sure.

Not "into" photography eh??

Just wait till you have kids! They will be the subject of your life!

I'd say, much like a tattoo, sleep on it. Set a date in the future and when that date comes see if your heart is still there. The advantage will be a possible price drop on future acquisitions, but the disadvantage will also be a price drop on what you are selling yourself to raise the cash.

The extra time to think will provide you with more of an opportunity to plan your new path, or decide to refine it based on unseen or un-thought of needs.

I think you are a HECK of a Photographer, so quit being unsure if it's worth it because the strength of your efforts say otherwise!

Just my 2 cents,

Marlton mom

 

[ColleenG]

I agree with NateandLogansDad! If you are going to spend large sums of money definately do it BEFORE kids! Once they come along all money seems to go right out the window! Plus if you get all the great stuff pre-kids then you will have it to take awesome pictures of them when they do arrive. I am sure someday you and Sarah ( I think that's your fiance's name, if not I apologize) will have some beautiful kids that we will all want to see pictures of!

Good luck with your decision Tom!

 

[Daisy14]

I agree with NateandLogansDad! If you are going to spend large sums of money definately do it BEFORE kids! Once they come along all money seems to go right out the window! Plus if you get all the great stuff pre-kids then you will have it to take awesome pictures of them when they do arrive. I am sure someday you and Sarah ( I think that's your fiance's name, if not I apologize) will have some beautiful kids that we will all want to see pictures of!

Good luck with your decision Tom!

Yup, as soon as you have kids you will lose almost all of your residual income! Which in this house means no extra goodies for Daddy! Any extra purchases we make now come from my ebay sales and extra side jobs. But alas I know very little about photography, I can understand perspective and lighting but not how to make it appear on film. Which is why I am here on this thread.

As everyone else has said make all your long term expensive acquisitions before children. That way the missus will appreciate your photographic prowess and you become the next Anne Geddes!