FX or DX? That is the Question...

Without getting too controversial, the typical trend toward further development in FX bodies is pressing the above question. So which way do you need to go? It's not likely Nikon will drop the prosumer DX line right away, but eventually DX may not be necessary. What!? Well, how many 6-megapixel DSLRs are there anymore? And how many current 12-megapixel bodies do we have to choose from? Get the point? Older and smaller body models are being phased out faster than ever - and unless Nikon makes a 14-20 megapixel DX body, there's isn't much room left in the AP-C format to grow.

This postulates what the future might be - the rise of FX bodies in the same manner as recent DX models. Instead of a new D60 or D90, we should see the D600 and D900 - FX models created to fill a price point with the continuing feature sets Nikon develops for new cameras. Honestly, I would go bonkers if a D700 base model was developed for under $2000. Would I buy another DX model if it were? Maybe - maybe not...

Our glass collection is the major factor. Obviously. So we need to decide if it's time to reconfigure our kits while these lenses still have any value. Many are problematic. Some are classics. The bottom line of cost over time is more important. Personally, I've spent as much on lesser lenses as I could have on pro glass - and I'm not proud of it. For economic reasons, Nikon isn't overly interested in adding top level performance or extreme focal ranges for DX optics. This presents limitations to the DX lineup as well.

Therefore, I'm moving forward to FX glass - first for the quality and secondly for some longevity as FX rises into the mainstream. The typical DX customer isn't looking for premium glass but will spend an equal amount over time trading up to better versions.

Which one are you? Time will tell...