So, what's the consensus?

[SRHEdD]

The D850 has rendered my Df and D500 practically useless (to me). There is nothing I wouldn't shoot now that it wouldn't be the best choice of kit (for me). Low light? I used to grab my Df (still specs better, but can't overcome the 16mp vs 46mp). APS-C for reach? Not so much anymore when I can just crop FX to what I need.

So... I'm looking at better glass, or holding out for the mirrorless introduction. Not really a practical choice, the glass is a smarter move, but I'd LOVE a FX mirrorless just to play with.

Think we'll see an FX mirrorless Q4 '17 or Q1 '18? How about a D760?

 

[dburanich]

I think there are a couple of Café members looking to buy a D500.
That would help you get some glass.

 

[polar905]

I think FX mirrorless is going to pop up in 2018 from Nikon, maybe I am being too hopeful. (Mirrorless FX will flood the used market of D7200/Df that means a good deal for me, finally in Canada!)

But as far as your other statement about glass...that is never a bad investment (the 43-86 is not included in that of course).

 

[trenchmonkey]

If it's SO good, I'd spring for some better lenses.

 

[SRHEdD]

Yeah, that's kinda where I am, but none of my clients would see a difference. I would, of course. We have two photographers, one shoots the covers and features (not me), the other writes the editorial and shoots the rest of the stuff like food, head shots, items for articles, buildings, some events, etc. (that's me, and my choice). I'm really fast and portable, the other photog shoots in studio or takes a studio worth of gear with him to set up off-site. It is a great balance. So... if I were in HIS shoes, best glass possible always. For me, more a personal choice when I can get away with what I have. That's why the mirrorless interests me equally.

 

[Naptown]

Yeah, that's kinda where I am, but none of my clients would see a difference. I would, of course. We have two photographers, one shoots the covers and features (not me), the other writes the editorial and shoots the rest of the stuff like food, head shots, items for articles, buildings, some events, etc. (that's me, and my choice). I'm really fast and portable, the other photog shoots in studio or takes a studio worth of gear with him to set up off-site. It is a great balance. So... if I were in HIS shoes, best glass possible always. For me, more a personal choice when I can get away with what I have. That's why the mirrorless interests me equally.

Your gear list doesn't include the 200/2 VR or the 400/2.8 VR so you need to find about $15K.

I would also like to see a mirrorless FX in a rangefinder design with a small fast prime lens. I won't put big glass on it. The big nice glass weighs so much that I don't see much advantage to the smaller body. If you are carrying a load of glass, a DSLR body is hardly noticeable, and I'd rather use dedicated buttons than scroll through menus.