Im going to buy a D700 within a week or so and have been looking around for a good price. Whilst looking, I saw a shop selling the D700 with the Nikon 50mm f1.4D AF for £1679.99
The body only is £1523 so that makes the lens £166 with this deal. The lens on its own is £178, so thats a small saving. My question is, I have a nikon 50mm f1.8, so do you think getting the 1.4 aswell is worth it, or should I just stick with the 1.8 and put the saved money towards something else, llike the grip or a wide angle lens?
I have also seen the camera in another shop for £1499, so another reason not to go for the 50mm deal, but Im not sure if i'd be making a mistake not taking the lens at that price, but also cant decide if its worth it.
I'd be selling the 18-50 as it wont work full frame only cropped, so thats out. I only ask as it seems loads of people regard it very highly. I didnt know if it was highly enough to warrant buying it and maybe sell the 1.8.
My main use is for live band work, so I need good low light lenses. The 1.8 on my D200 has been fine once I've used some noiseware programs, so I imagine it would be even better on the D700.
Think I might just grab the body and get a proper wide angle to replace the 10-20.
Yeah, i realise that. I meant it was fine as in the quality/noise rather than reach. Have to shoot ISO 800+ most of the time, so on a D200 noise can be an issue with smaller apertures.As most of my stuff is shot from backstage or the pit, 50 on the D200 is a tad short, so I only really use it for candids in the dressing rooms or actually on stage when the band allows. So on the D700 it would be even shorter. I think most of the last tour I did, my Sigma 24-70 f2.8 was on the front of my camera, along with the nikon 85mm 1.8 I had but had to sell
